Bile Duct Stone Size May Influence the Efficacy of Endoscopic Sphincterotomy With or Without Large-Balloon Dilation: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EPT) combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPBD) are used to remove large common bile duct (CBD) stones. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of EPT+EPBD versus EPT alone in the removal of stones based on stone size. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two studies (11 randomized control trials [RCTs] and 11 non-RCTs) were identified and reviewed based on searches of Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science. CBD stone's size was measured with reference to diameter of the duodenoscope (13 mm) and size of the large dilatation balloon (17 mm) seen on cholangiogram. The stone clearance rate, required mechanical lithotripsy (ML), procedure time, and pancreatitis were compared according to the mean stone size, and further divided into Groups A (small) 10-13 mm, B (medium) 13-17 mm, and C (large) >17 mm. Results: Subgroup analysis according to CBD stone size showed EPT + EPBD had a significantly better initial stone clearance rate than EPT in Groups B (odds ratio [OR] = 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-4.77) and C (OR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.86-5.03), but not for Group A (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.90-2.21). EPT+EPBD also required significantly less ML than EPT in Groups B (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15-0.77) and C (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.13-0.73). EPT+EPBD had significantly shorter procedure time than EPT in Group B (standardized mean difference = -1.20, 95% CI: -2.08 to 0.32). In meta-regression analysis, Group B had a better OR in initial stone clearance rate and less ML usage rate correlation with the size of CBD stone, but not for Group C with larger stones. Conclusions: EPT+EPBD had a significantly better initial stone clearance rate, and required less ML with shorter procedure time than EPT for removing medium-sized CBD stones, but the efficacy was limited to large CBD stones. The study protocol and trial registration had been registered in PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42020171689).