DOI 10.1136/flgastro-2019-101380
Outcomes of precut sphincterotomy techniques in cases of difficult biliary access.
Аннотация
GOALS: Our study aims to define success and complication rates of precut sphincterotomy with the needle-knife and transpancreatic papillary septotomy (TPS) techniques as experienced at a single, high-volume endoscopy centre.
BACKGROUND
Complication rates rise with increasing number of failed attempts at biliary cannulation; therefore, early precut sphincterotomy (PS) has been recommended. Selecting the ideal method for PS can be challenging and there is a paucity of data to help guide this decision.
STUDY: We performed a retrospective analysis over 37 months of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) experience at a single institution. We identified all ERCPs performed and stratified based on the presence of PS; if PS occurred, a thorough chart review was performed to identify success and complication rates. Patients received guideline-driven management for post-ERCP pancreatitis including rectal indomethacin and pancreatic duct stenting when appropriate.
RESULTS
We identified 1808 ERCP procedures performed during this time. Successful biliary cannulation was achieved in 1748 cases, yielding a success rate of 96.7% (Grades I-IV ERCP difficulty/complexity). PS was required in 232 cases (12.8%); we identified 88 TPS cases and 114 needle-knife precut sphincterotomy (NKPS) cases. Complications following PS procedures occurred in 9.1% of TPS patients and 11.4% of NKPS patients. Success rates for TPS and NKPS were 97.7% and 81.6%, respectively-a statistically significant difference (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
This data supports TPS as a safe and effective option for biliary access in difficult cannulation settings when performed by experienced advanced endoscopists.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.