Outcomes of balloon vs basket catheter for clearance of choledocholithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ruchi Sharma; Vikram Sharma; Umang Singhal; Madhusudhan Sanaka

doi:10.1055/a-1905-0251

Endoscopy International Open, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2022; 10(11): E1447-E1453
DOI: 10.1055/a-1905-0251

Original article

Outcomes of balloon vs basket catheter for clearance of choledocholithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ruchi Sharma

¹Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, United States

,

Vikram Sharma

¹Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, United States

,

Umang Singhal

²Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, United States

,

Madhusudhan Sanaka

³Digestive Disease Institute, Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the mainstay for treatment of choledocholithiasis. It is unclear whether balloon or basket catheters are better for extraction of stones ≤ 10 mm in size. We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing rates of complete stone extraction and adverse events after ERCP using balloon vs basket catheters for bile duct stones ≤ 10 mm in size.

Methods Cochrane database, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched from inception to October 2021. Randomized control trials comparing outcomes of balloon vs basket catheter were included. Data extraction of articles was carried out by two authors using predefined inclusion criteria. Metanalysis was carried out using the Revman 5.4.1. software using a random-effects model.

Results Three studies with a total of 508 patients were included in the final analysis. For common bile duct stones ≤ 10 mm, balloon catheters had higher complete stone clearance rates than basket catheters (relative risk 1.1, confidence interval 1.03, 1.18, P = 0.006). Heterogeneity among studies was low (Tau² = 0.0; P = 0.47, I² = 0 %). There was no difference in the rate of complications.

Conclusions Meta-analysis of three studies indicates that balloon catheters have a higher success rate compared to basket catheters for complete stone extraction for choledocholithiasis ≤ 10 mm with no significant difference in the rate of complications.

Full Text

References

References
1 Seitz U, Bapaye A, Bohnacker S. et al. Advances in therapeutic endoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones. World J Surg 1998; 22: 1133-1144
2 Maple JT, Ikenberry SO. et al. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. The role of endoscopy in the management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 731-744
3 McCune WS, Shorb PE, Moscovitz H. Endoscopic cannulation of the ampulla of vater: a preliminary report. Ann Surg 1968; 167: 752-756
4 Classen M, Demling L. [Endoscopic sphincterotomy of the papilla of vater and extraction of stones from the choledochal duct (author's transl)]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1974; 99: 496-497
5 Kawai K, Akasaka Y, Murakami K. et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy of the ampulla of Vater. Gastrointest Endosc 1974; 20: 148-151
6 Kröner PT, Bilal M, Samuel R. et al. Use of ERCP in the United States over the past decade. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E761-E769
7 Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L. et al. Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 472-491
8 Angsuwatcharakon P, Rerknimitr R. Cracking difficult biliary stones. Clin Endosc 2021; 54: 660-668
9 Ekmektzoglou K, Apostolopoulos P, Dimopoulos K. et al. Basket versus balloon extraction for choledocholithiasis: a single center prospective single-blind randomized study. Acta Gastroenterol Belg 2020; 83: 577-584
10 Ozawa N, Yasuda I, Doi S. et al. Prospective randomized study of endoscopic biliary stone extraction using either a basket or a balloon catheter: the BasketBall study. J Gastroenterol 2017; 52: 623-630
11 Itoi T, Wang HP. Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. Dig Endosc 2010; 22: S69-S75
12 Takeshita K, Asai S, Fujimoto N. et al. Comparison of the effects of retrieval balloons and basket catheters for bile duct stone removal on the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2021; 20: 203-204
13 Choo L, Cho SS, Bell CJ. et al. Extraction balloon is superior to wire basket technique in the management of CBD stones less than or equal to 10 mm – Preliminary results of a prospective, randomised trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2011; 73: AB357
14 Ishiwatari H, Kawakami H, Hisai H. et al. Balloon catheter versus basket catheter for endoscopic bile duct stone extraction: a multicenter randomized trial. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 350-357
15 Chandrasekhara V, Khashab MA. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Adverse events associated with ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 32-47
16 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
17 Yasuda I. Novel retrieval basket for small bile duct stones. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 712
18 Binmoeller KF, Schafer TW. Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. J Clin Gastroenterol 2001; 32: 106-118
19 Mutignani M, Shah SK, Foschia F. et al. Transnasal extraction of residual biliary stones by Seldinger technique and nasobiliary drain. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 233-238
20 Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F. et al. Evaluation of residual bile duct stones by peroral cholangioscopy in comparison with balloon-cholangiography. Dig Endosc 2010; 22: S85-S89
21 Kadayifci A, Cemil Savas M. Do we overestimate the performance of the basket catheter for stone removal if the bile duct is swept with a balloon?. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 867

Supplementary Material

Supplementary material