Download PDF
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
1   Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, United States
,
Vikram Sharma
1   Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, United States
,
Umang Singhal
2   Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
,
Madhusudhan Sanaka
3   Digestive Disease Institute, Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

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.

Supplementary material



Publication History

Received: 28 February 2022

Accepted after revision: 18 July 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
20 July 2022

Article published online:
15 November 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 McCune WS, Shorb PE, Moscovitz H. Endoscopic cannulation of the ampulla of vater: a preliminary report. Ann Surg 1968; 167: 752-756
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Kawai K, Akasaka Y, Murakami K. et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy of the ampulla of Vater. Gastrointest Endosc 1974; 20: 148-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Angsuwatcharakon P, Rerknimitr R. Cracking difficult biliary stones. Clin Endosc 2021; 54: 660-668
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Itoi T, Wang HP. Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. Dig Endosc 2010; 22: S69-S75
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Chandrasekhara V, Khashab MA. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Adverse events associated with ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 32-47
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Yasuda I. Novel retrieval basket for small bile duct stones. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 712
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Binmoeller KF, Schafer TW. Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. J Clin Gastroenterol 2001; 32: 106-118
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar