BACKGROUND/AIMS: There is no consensus for using endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) in patients without dilatation of the lower part of the bile duct (DLBD). We evaluated the feasibility and safety of EPLBD for the removal of difficult bile duct stones (diameter ≥10 mm) in patients without DLBD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 209 patients who underwent EPLBD for the removal of bile duct stones from October 2009 to July 2014. Primary outcomes were the clearance rate and additional mechanical lithotripsy. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications and recurrence rate. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients had DLBD (27.3%), and 152 did not have DLBD (72.7%). There were no significant differences in the overall success rate or the use of mechanical lithotripsy. Success rate during the first session and procedure time were better in the DLBD than the without-DLBD group (75.7% vs 66.7%, 48.1±23.0 minutes vs 58.4±31.7 minutes, respectively). As for complications, there were no significant differences in the incidence of pancreatitis, perforation or bleeding after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: EPLBD is a useful and safe method for common bile duct stone removal in patients without DLBD.
Bile Ducts* ; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Bile* ; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde ; Common Bile Duct ; Consensus ; Dilatation* ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Incidence ; Lithotripsy ; Methods ; Pancreatitis ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.