Search

Background and aims: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is performed to fragment large main pancreatic duct (MPD) stones in symptomatic patients. Subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often performed to clear the stone fragments. Edema of surrounding tissue after ESWL theoretically affects the ability to perform ERCP. However, the optimal timing of ERCP after ESWL is not clearly defined. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of same-day ERCP after ESWL and to determine if the timing of ERCP after ESWL affects outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients from January, 2013 to September, 2019 who received ESWL for MPD stones at our center. Included patients received subsequent same-day ERCP under the same general anesthesia session or later session ERCP (1–30 days after ESWL). Demographics, anatomical findings, history, and outcomes were collected. Success was defined as complete or near complete (> 80%) stone fragmentation with clearance. Results: 218 patients were treated with ESWL and subsequent ERCP. 133 (61.0%) received ERCP on the same day immediately after ESWL, while 85 (39.0%) returned for ERCP at a later day (median 3.0 days after ESWL). Baseline characteristics demonstrated patients who received same-day ERCP had a higher rate of pain at baseline (94.7% vs 87.1%, p = 0.045). Main outcomes demonstrated an overall successful MPD stone clearance rate of 90.4%, with similar rates between same-day ERCP and later session ERCP (91.7% vs 88.2%, p = 0.394). Additionally, successful cannulation at ERCP, adverse events, and post-procedure admission rates were similar. Conclusions: Delaying ERCP to allow peripancreatic tissue recovery after ESWL does not affect outcomes. Same-day ERCP after ESWL is safe and effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Endoscopic management of large main pancreatic ductal (MPD) stones often require treatment with lithotripsy. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been the mainstay therapy, and single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal (intracorporeal) lithotripsy (SOPIL) is an emerging technique. However, no comparative studies between these techniques exist. We therefore aimed to compare ESWL to SOPIL for the treatment of large MPD stones. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing patients who were treated with ESWL or SOPIL from September 2013 to September 2019 at a single tertiary center. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with technical success and efficient stone clearance (≤ 2 procedures to clear stones). Results: There were 240 patients who were treated with ESWL and 18 treated with SOPIL. The overall technical success rate of stone clearance was 224/258 (86.8%), which was similar between the ESWL and SOPIL groups (86.7% vs 88.9%, p = 1.000). A SOPIL approach required fewer total procedures (1.6 ± 0.6 vs 3.1 ± 1.5, p < 0.001) and less aggregate procedure time (101.6 ± 68.2 vs 191.8 ± 111.6 min, p = 0.001). Adverse event rates were similar between the groups (6.3% vs 5.6%, p = 1.000). The use of SOPIL was independently associated with greater efficiency compared to ESWL (OR 5.241 [1.348–20.369], p = 0.017). Stone size > 10 mm was associated with less efficient stone clearance (OR 0.484 [0.256–0.912], p = 0.025). Conclusion: Both ESWL and SOPIL are safe and effective endoscopic adjunct modalities for treating large pancreatic duct stones. SOPIL is an emerging alternative to ESWL that is potentially more efficient for lithotripsy and MPD stone clearance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]