ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery
The therapeutic effect of balloon dilatation with different duration for biliary duct calculi: A network meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy of balloon dilatation duration on patients with choledocholithiasis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Minimal Endoscopic Sphincterotomy with Papillary Balloon Dilation Using a Novel Non-slip Balloon Catheter for the Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones: A Prospective Pilot Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Evolving Strategies for the Optimal Management of Common Bile Duct Stones.Gut and liver · 2025Review
- Clinical efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation in treatment of gallbladder stones with common bile duct stones: A retrospective study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Comprehensive review on small common bile duct stones.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Efficacy of Endoscopic Isolated Papillary Small Balloon Dilation for Treating Choledocholithiasis.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the application effect of endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) with different balloon dilatation duration for biliary duct calculi, and find the most appropriate dilatation duration for EPBD using a network meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published up to August 2020. Node split, consistency and inconsistency models analysis were all conducted in network meta-analysis. Results: Eighteen RCTs with 2256 participants were finally analysed. EPBD was divided into four categories based on balloon dilatation duration, including EPBD (P0.5), EPBD (>0.5, ≤1), EPBD (1, ≤2) and EPBD (>2, ≤5). Compared with EPBD (>0.5, ≤1), EPBD (>2, ≤5) had a lower risk of early complications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.23, 95% credible interval [CI] = 0.05-0.96) and post-endoscopic procedure pancreatitis (PEP) (OR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.03-0.72). Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) tended to have less need for mechanical lithotripsy (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.16-0.88) and PEP (OR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.08-0.71) than EPBD (>0.5, ≤1). EPBD (>2, ≤5) was the safest endoscopic procedure with respect to early complications (surface area under cumulative ranking curves [SUCRA] = 79.0) and PEP (SUCRA = 85.3). In addition, EPBD (>2, ≤5) and EST had the highest probability of being the best (SUCRA = 82.6) and the worst (SUCRA = 10.8), respectively, regarding late complications. Conclusion: EPBD and EST are two methods used to treat uncomplicated choledocholithiasis (stone diameter <10 mm and stone number <3). The extension of balloon dilatation duration has no significant influence on successful stone removal in the first endoscopic session or preventing the need for mechanical lithotripsy. However, it can reduce the risk of early complications, especially PEP. What's more, EPBD seems to have less late complications compared with EST, and the effect of prolonged balloon dilatation duration on late complications still needs to be further explored. Therefore, 2-5 min is the recommended dilatation duration range for EPBD using balloon with ≤10 mm diameter. Further research based on a specific population and with a longer follow-up time are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.