Endoscopic Sphincterotomy With Balloon Dilatation Versus Sphincterotomy Alone For Common Bile Duct Stones Removal

November 25, 2022 updated by: OOI JIE SOANG, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia
Gallstone is a worldwide clinical problem which affecting most of the populations with incidence of 15 to 20% in west and 10% in Asians. About 5 to 15% of patient with gallstone will go on to develop bile duct calculi. There are several endoscopic strategies developed for treatment of common bile duct stone such as endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) and combination of EST plus EPLBD. Our aim of this study is to compare efficacy, and safety of EST alone group versus EST plus EPLBD group in removing CBD stone.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is most widely used during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to remove common bile duct (CBD) stone and considered as standard therapy for treatment of choledocholithiasis. However, in view of EST requires an adequate incision on major duodenal papilla to achieve biliary cannulation, it can potentially cause damage to biliary sphincter during the procedure and potentially increased risk of some complications such as bleeding and biliary reflux. This procedure carries risk of complications such as haemorrhage, perforation, and long-term effect like sphincter dysfunction.

Staritz introduced a method called endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) in 1983 as an alternative to EST in clearing CBD stone. EPLBD can reduced the risk of bleeding and perforation post procedure, but it carries higher risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

About 10 to 15% of CBD stone are unable to be extracted by both EST or EPLBD alone, especially in those patients with big and difficult stone (size bigger than 10 to 15mm, numerous, barrel-shaped, and impacted stones). Besides that, other factors that can contribute to failure of stone extraction are periampullary diverticulum or post operative variation, tortuosity and tightening of distal common bile duct.

In 2003, Ersoz introduced combination of EST plus EPLBD as an alternative method. It can reduce the risk of complications through avoiding a complete sphincterotomy, shortening procedural time, and reducing the need of usage of mechanical lithotripsy.

In a study on 2007, it showed that EST plus EPLBD had comparable efficacy and safety when compared to conventional EST alone and both groups have similar complication rate. Besides that, in a recent study in 2020, it also showed that EST plus EPLBD had a comparable efficacy when compared with EST alone in clearing CBD stone and EST plus EPLBD required shorter procedural time when compared with EST alone. There is no significant increased risk in pancreatitis for EST plus EPLBD. While, in a randomized controlled study in 2017, it showed that EST plus EPLBD is more effective than EST alone in clearing large CBD stone and is equally safe compared to EST alone. In another randomized controlled trial in 2013, the study showed that the success rate for complete CBD stone removal in first session is higher in EST plus EPLBD group when compared to EST alone and it is statistically significant. But the overall stone clearance rate and complication rate was similar in both groups. Apart from that, there are many other studies have suggested EST plus EPBD as a safe and promising alternative to conventional EST or EPLBD. In a published meta-analysis, accumulated data showed that EST plus EPLBD is a safe and effective procedure in removing large or difficult CBD stone without any additional risk of complications.

There is still no definite conclusion in evaluating superiority of EST plus EPLBD vs EST alone in term of efficacy in removing CBD stone.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

66

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Kelantan
      • Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia, 16150
        • Department of Surgery School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Patient's age 18 and above
  2. Patient with CBD stone documented on imaging studies

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. CBD stone size more than 15mm
  2. CBD stone number more than 3
  3. Concurrent hepatobiliary tumour
  4. Intrahepatic stone
  5. Bleeding tendencies: coagulopathy, thrombocytopenia, patient on anticoagulant medication
  6. Patient in sepsis/ Cholangitis patient
  7. Patient with acute pancreatitis
  8. Prior history of Bilroth II or Roux-en-y surgery

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: EST alone
EST alone vs EST plus EPLBD in removing common bile duct stone
Active Comparator: EST + EPLBD
EST alone vs EST plus EPLBD in removing common bile duct stone

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Rate of complete common bile stone clearance of EST alone versus EST plus EPLBD
Time Frame: 12 months
to compare the rate of overall complete stone clearance in EST alone arm vs EST plus EPLBD arm
12 months
Complication rate of EST alone versus EST plus EPLBD in removing CBD stone
Time Frame: 12 months
to compare complication rate which are post ERCP bleeding, post-ERCP pancreatitis, perforation and cholangitis rate of EST alone arm versus EST plus EPLBD arm in removing CBD stone
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

June 28, 2021

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 27, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

June 27, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 24, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 25, 2022

First Posted (Estimate)

December 6, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

December 6, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 25, 2022

Last Verified

November 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Undecided

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe