Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2008
Can wire-guided cannulation prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective randomized trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Lee Tae Hoon, Park Do Hyun, Park Ji-Young, Kim Eun Ok, Lee Yeon Seon, Park Jeong Hoon, Lee Suck-Ho, Chung Il-Kwun, Kim Hong Soo, Park Sang-Heum, Kim Sun-Joo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Among the procedure-related factors associated with post-ERCP pancreatitis, selective cannulation of the common bile duct by insertion of a guidewire may be associated with fewer complications than conventional methods of cannulation with contrast injection to access the bile duct. However, the results of studies regarding the usefulness of wire-guided cannulation (WGC) are conflicting.
OBJECTIVE: This prospective randomized trial was designed to determine whether WGC reduces the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
DESIGN: A prospective randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center.
PATIENTS: A total of 300 consecutive patients with native papilla and pancreaticobiliary disease who were candidates for therapeutic ERCP were randomized from June 2006 to May 2007.
INTERVENTIONS: WGC without contrast injection or conventional cannulation with contrast injection.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis, risk factors, and procedure-related complications were evaluated prospectively.
RESULTS: A total of 3 patients (2%) in the WGC group and 17 patients (11.3%) in the conventional group had post-ERCP pancreatitis (P = .001). Among the cases of acute pancreatitis in the WGC group, 2 patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) and unintentional main pancreatic duct (PD) guidewire cannulation showed post-ERCP pancreatitis despite the use of WGC. In multivariate analysis, WGC was a protective factor (odds ratio 0.1; 95% CI, 0.024-0.490, P = .004), whereas female sex and SOD were risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis.
LIMITATION: Our study population was a low-risk cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: WGC is associated with a lower rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis. However, WGC may not prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with suspected SOD and unintentional PD guidewire cannulation.
OBJECTIVE: This prospective randomized trial was designed to determine whether WGC reduces the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
DESIGN: A prospective randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center.
PATIENTS: A total of 300 consecutive patients with native papilla and pancreaticobiliary disease who were candidates for therapeutic ERCP were randomized from June 2006 to May 2007.
INTERVENTIONS: WGC without contrast injection or conventional cannulation with contrast injection.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis, risk factors, and procedure-related complications were evaluated prospectively.
RESULTS: A total of 3 patients (2%) in the WGC group and 17 patients (11.3%) in the conventional group had post-ERCP pancreatitis (P = .001). Among the cases of acute pancreatitis in the WGC group, 2 patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) and unintentional main pancreatic duct (PD) guidewire cannulation showed post-ERCP pancreatitis despite the use of WGC. In multivariate analysis, WGC was a protective factor (odds ratio 0.1; 95% CI, 0.024-0.490, P = .004), whereas female sex and SOD were risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis.
LIMITATION: Our study population was a low-risk cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: WGC is associated with a lower rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis. However, WGC may not prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with suspected SOD and unintentional PD guidewire cannulation.