Review
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 14, 2013; 19(46): 8580-8594
Published online Dec 14, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i46.8580
Table 9 Comparison among endoscopic sphincterotomy, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation, and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation with endoscopic sphincterotomy n (%)
EST1EPBD1No. of studiesEPLBD with ESTNo. of studiesP value
No. of procedures89087815251130
Mean age, range, yr47-7149-751540-8229
Mean stone size, range, mm7.3-16.97-15.6155-4525
Initial success322 (80.9)285 (73.5)71745 (84.0)24< 0.001
Use of EML121 (13.3)162 (19.6)13353 (14.1)30< 0.001
Overall success776 (95.3)733 (90.1)132407 (96.5)30< 0.001
Overall adverse events113 (12.7)106 (12.1)15209(8.3)30< 0.001
Pancreatitis36 (4.3)71 (8.6)1461 (2.4)30< 0.001
Bleeding33 (4.8)1 (0.1)1291 (3.6)30< 0.001
Perforation3 (0.5)2 (0.3)915 (0.6)300.941
AE-related death2 (0.3)4 (0.7)76 (0.24)300.152