Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31215401›Full record

ArticleBMC gastroenterology2019

The efficacy of limited endoscopic sphincterotomy plus endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for removal of large bile duct stones.

Chung-Mou Kuo, Yi-Chun Chiu, Chih-Ming Liang, Cheng-Kun Wu, Lung-Sheng Lu, Wei-Chen Tai, Yuan-Hung Kuo, Keng-Liang Wu, Seng-Kee Chuah, Chung-Huang Kuo

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Complete Endoscopic Clearance of Common Bile Duct Stones].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Advances in Risk Factors for Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones.International journal of medical sciences · 2021
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chung-Mou KuoDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Yi-Chun ChiuDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chih-Ming LiangDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Cheng-Kun WuDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Lung-Sheng LuDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Wei-Chen TaiDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Yuan-Hung KuoDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Keng-Liang WuDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Seng-Kee ChuahDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chung-Huang KuoDivision of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, 123 Ta Pei Road, Niao-Sung Dist, 833, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. grantkuo1107@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1456-2819
Chang Gung University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe removal of large bile duct stones (> 15 mm) by conventional endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) can be challenging, requiring mechanical lithotripsy (ML) in addition to EST or EPBD. The primary complication of ML is basket and stone impaction, which can lead to complications such as pancreatitis and cholangitis. The present study aims to investigate the efficacy of limited EST plus endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EST-EPLBD) for large bile duct stone extraction with an extent of cutting < 1/2 the length of the papillary mound.

methodsWe enrolled 185 patients with ≥15 mm bile duct stones who received EST, EPLBD and limited EST-EPLBD treatment from January 1, 2010 to February 28, 2018, at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (Kaohsiung, Taiwan). All patients were categorized into three groups: EST group (n = 31), EPLBD group (n = 96), and limited EST-EPLBD group (n = 58). The primary outcome variables were the success rate of complete stone removal and complications.

resultsThe limited EST-EPLBD group exhibited a higher success rate of the first-session treatment compared with the EST and EPLBD groups (98.3% vs. 83.9% vs. 86.5%; P = 0.032) but required a longer procedure time (32 (12-61) min vs. 23.5 (17-68) min vs. 25.0 (14-60) min; P = 0.001). The need for ML during the procedure was 4 (12.9%) in the EST group, 10 (10.4%) in the EPLBD group and 2 (3.4%) in the limited EST-EPLBD group. Post-procedure bleeding in the EST group was more common than that in the limited EST-EPLBD group (9.7% vs. 0%; P = 0.038). Furthermore, dilated bile duct was the only risk factor for bile duct stone recurrence in the limited EST-EPLBD group.

conclusionsLimited EST-EPLBD exhibits a higher success rate but requires marginally longer procedure time for the first-session treatment. Furthermore, dilated bile duct is the only risk factor for bile duct stone recurrence in patients undergoing limited EST-EPLBD.

Indexed as

AdultAmpulla of VaterCatheterizationCholedocholithiasisDilatationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSingle-Balloon EnteroscopySphincterotomy, EndoscopicTreatment OutcomeComplicationsEndoscopic papillary balloon dilationEndoscopic sphincterotomyLarge bile duct stone extractionLimited endoscopic sphincterotomy plus endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation

Identifiers

PMID31215401
PMCPMC6582576
OpenAlexW2953331662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.