Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2009
Post-ERCP pancreatitis rates do not differ between needle-knife and pull-type pancreatic sphincterotomy techniques: a multiendoscopist 13-year experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Lawrence Christopher, Romagnuolo Joseph, Cotton Peter B, Payne K Mark, Hawes Robert H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic sphincterotomy is one of several factors associated with an increased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The needle-knife pancreatic sphincterotomy technique (NKS) is purported to result in less-frequent post-ERCP pancreatitis compared with a standard pull-type sphincterotomy (PTS).
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to analyze the experience with both endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy (EPS) techniques with respect to post-ERCP pancreatitis at a single tertiary-level referral center.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis.
SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center (Charleston, South Carolina).
PATIENTS: Patients without chronic pancreatitis and with normal retrograde pancreatogram who underwent EPS between 1994 and 2007 were identified. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: pancreatic stent not placed, both sphincterotomy techniques used, any balloon dilation of the ampullary orifice, precut or access papillotomy, pancreas divisum.
RESULTS: A total of 481 patients were identified and underwent 510 ERCPs. Indications for ERCP were recurrent pancreatic-type pain (n = 353) or pancreatitis (n = 157). NKS was used for 395 of 510 (77.5%) cases versus 115 of 510 (22.5%) in which PTS was used. The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was no different between NKS (25/395, 6.4%) and PTS (9/115, 7.8%). Most cases were mild pancreatitis; a single episode of severe PEP occurred in each group.
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis does not differ between EPS techniques when performed at a high-volume pancreaticobiliary referral center when using routine prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement.
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to analyze the experience with both endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy (EPS) techniques with respect to post-ERCP pancreatitis at a single tertiary-level referral center.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis.
SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center (Charleston, South Carolina).
PATIENTS: Patients without chronic pancreatitis and with normal retrograde pancreatogram who underwent EPS between 1994 and 2007 were identified. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: pancreatic stent not placed, both sphincterotomy techniques used, any balloon dilation of the ampullary orifice, precut or access papillotomy, pancreas divisum.
RESULTS: A total of 481 patients were identified and underwent 510 ERCPs. Indications for ERCP were recurrent pancreatic-type pain (n = 353) or pancreatitis (n = 157). NKS was used for 395 of 510 (77.5%) cases versus 115 of 510 (22.5%) in which PTS was used. The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was no different between NKS (25/395, 6.4%) and PTS (9/115, 7.8%). Most cases were mild pancreatitis; a single episode of severe PEP occurred in each group.
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis does not differ between EPS techniques when performed at a high-volume pancreaticobiliary referral center when using routine prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement.