Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation vs. endoscopic sphincteropapillotomy for common bile duct stones: a meta analysis

To evaluate the safety and efficacy between endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) and endoscopic sphincteropapillotomy ( EST) for common bile duct stones using meta-analysis method. Randomizd controlled trials comparing EPBD with EST for common bile duct stones and published from January 19...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inChung-hua wai kʿo tsa chih Vol. 51; no. 6; p. 556
Main Authors He, Liang, Geng, Xiao-ping, Zhao, Hong-chuan, Zhou, Da-chen, Liu, Fu-bao, Zhao, Yi-jun, Wang, Guo-bin, Zhang, Zhi-gong, Huang, Fan
Format Journal Article
LanguageChinese
Published China 01.06.2013
Subjects
Dilatation
Gallstones - surgery
Humans
Postoperative Complications - epidemiology
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic
Treatment Outcome
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

More Information
Summary:To evaluate the safety and efficacy between endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) and endoscopic sphincteropapillotomy ( EST) for common bile duct stones using meta-analysis method. Randomizd controlled trials comparing EPBD with EST for common bile duct stones and published from January 1990 to July 2012 were recruited. This meta-analysis was conducted to estimate short-term and long-term complications. Fixed random effect model or random effect model was established to analyze the data. Twelve randomizd controlled trials were included in this analysis. These studies included 1865 patients, 925 of them were treated with EPBD and 940 were treated with EST. The analysis of basic characteristics of these included studies showed that: compared to EST, patients in the EPBD group were younger (OR = -1.16, 95% CI: -1.49 to -0.84, P = 0.00), while in two groups, there were no significant difference (P > 0.05) in gender proportion, average size of stones, number of gallstones, previous cholecystectomy, the n
ISSN:0529-5815