Search

Background and study aims Complete stone removal from the main pancreatic duct might not be achieved in all patients with obstructive chronic calcific pancreatitis. We report our results for endoscopic dorsal pancreatic duct (DPD) bypass of obstructing stones in the ventral pancreatic duct (VPD). Patients and methods 16 patients with obstructive chronic calcific pancreatitis were treated with a DPD bypass. Clinical success was defined as significant pain relief and no hospital admissions for pain management during the ongoing treatment period. Results Among 16 patients meeting entry criteria, 10 (62.5 %) had a history of unsuccessful endoscopic therapy, and 8 had failed extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). Clinical success was achieved in 12 patients (75 %). Among these responders, 10 patients (83.3 %) had markedly improved or complete pain relief after the first stent placement, which persisted throughout the follow-up period; 11 patients (91.7 %) were able to discontinue their daily analgesics. Conclusions In selected patients with obstructive chronic calcific pancreatitis, the DPD bypass may be considered as a rescue endoscopic therapy, potentially obviating the need for surgery when standard endoscopic methods and ESWL fail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Multiple factors can affect the occlusion of plastic stents. Previous data demonstrate that side holes may induce more biofilm formation probably via microturbulence and bile flow disturbances that could lead to occlusion. These results, however, have not been replicated in subsequent clinical studies with different methods. The objective of this study is to evaluate the physical characteristics of plastic stent occlusion over time.Methods: This is a plastic stent sequential analysis study. Biliary stents removed via ERCP from February 24, 2015, to June 2, 2015, were included. One hundred and forty-eight retrieved straight-type plastic stents were longitudinally cut by a custom-made cutting device. These dissected stents were then evaluated in detail with regard to the location of stent occlusion and the stent patency period. Location of stent occlusive debris was the primary outcome in this study.Results: Biofilm formations and occlusions by debris were sequentially but separately tallied. Biofilm formations were initially seen around the side hole areas within 30 days and spread to the entire stent by 60 days. Then, occlusion process by debris was mainly initiated by 80 days and progressed to full occlusion by median of 90 days. Although some occlusions were also observed around the side hole areas within 30 days, affected areas were more widely observed after biofilm formation.Conclusions: This study is the first to attempt to describe the distribution of stent occlusions over time. These observations may help guide future stent development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Study Aim: Pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a significant and potentially life-threatening adverse event and is common in patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). Here we aimed to identify predictors of the risk in this population.Patients and Methods: The Evaluating Predictors and Interventions in SOD (EPISOD) study prospectively enrolled 214 post-cholecystectomy patients with SOD type III in seven US centers. Patients were randomized, using a 2:1 allocation, to sphincterotomy or sham procedure, irrespective of the results of sphincter of Oddi manometry. Patients in the sphincterotomy arm who had elevated pancreatic sphincter pressure were randomized to biliary only or to dual (biliary and pancreatic) sphincterotomy. All but one patient received prophylactic pancreatic stents, but none received pharmacological prophylaxis. Post ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) was defined as acute pancreatitis within the subsequent 7 days. Blinded research coordinators at each site called patients at 1 week post-procedure.Results: PEP occurred in 26 patients, in 10.6 % (15/141) in the sphincterotomy arm and 15.1 % (11/73) in the sham arm; unadjusted relative risk 0.71 (95 % confidence interval [95 %CI] 0.34 - 1.46). PEP rate was not significantly different in patients who received sphincterotomy compared with those undergoing sham treatment. In addition, the proportion was not statistically different in those who received biliary sphincterotomy alone (12/94; 12.8 % [95 %CI 6.0 % - 19.5 %]) compared with dual sphincterotomy (3/47; 6.4 % [95 %CI 0.0 % - 13.4 %]). Multivariate analysis identified an interaction between duration of ERCP and sedation type (P < 0.02).Conclusion: The performance of biliary or dual sphincterotomy does not increase the risk of PEP in patients suspected of SOD. However, the high rate of PEP in patients with suspected SOD, despite pancreatic stenting in expert centers, is confirmed in this prospective study. The combined effect of duration of ERCP and sedation type on the development of PEP should be further explored.Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT00688662. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES:A recent large-scale randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that rectal indomethacin administration is effective in addition to pancreatic stent placement (PSP) for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk cases. We performed a post hoc analysis of this RCT to explore whether rectal indomethacin can replace PSP in the prevention of PEP and to estimate the potential cost savings of such an approach.METHODS:We retrospectively classified RCT subjects into four prevention groups: (1) no prophylaxis, (2) PSP alone, (3) rectal indomethacin alone, and (4) the combination of PSP and indomethacin. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for imbalances in the prevalence of risk factors for PEP between the groups. Based on these adjusted PEP rates, we conducted an economic analysis comparing the costs associated with PEP prevention strategies employing rectal indomethacin alone, PSP alone, or the combination of both.RESULTS:After adjusting for risk using two different logistic regression models, rectal indomethacin alone appeared to be more effective for preventing PEP than no prophylaxis, PSP alone, and the combination of indomethacin and PSP. Economic analysis revealed that indomethacin alone was a cost-saving strategy in 96% of Monte Carlo trials. A prevention strategy employing rectal indomethacin alone could save approximately $150 million annually in the United States compared with a strategy of PSP alone, and $85 million compared with a strategy of indomethacin and PSP.CONCLUSIONS:This hypothesis-generating study suggests that prophylactic rectal indomethacin could replace PSP in patients undergoing high-risk ERCP, potentially improving clinical outcomes and reducing healthcare costs. A RCT comparing rectal indomethacin alone vs. indomethacin plus PSP is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. There is little prospective data on whether bigger plastic stents are better for patients with malignant biliary obstruction with jaundice. Goals. Multicenter prospective study to compare technical success, clinical response, stent occlusion, and patient survival in patients with malignant biliary obstruction randomized to 10-French or 11.5-French plastic stent. Study. Patients with malignant biliary obstruction were randomized to 10-French or 11.5-French biliary stents. Patients were prospectively assessed for stent occlusion, stent-related interventions, hospital stay, and change in bilirubin. Main outcome measurements included technical success, clinical response, rates of stent occlusion, and survival. Results. 234 patients (47 hilar and 187 common bile duct strictures) were randomized. Outcomes were similar for the 10-French and 11.5-French groups (technical success 99.1% versus 97.4%, p = 0.37). Overall, median stent survival was 213 days, but there was no statistically significant difference in stent survival between 10-French and 11.5-French stents (149 versus 258 days, p = 0.16). Stent survival was significantly longer when placed for common bile duct versus hilar strictures (231 versus 115 days, p = 0.049). Conclusions. The theoretical advantage of improved bile flow for the 11.5-French stent does not translate into more prolonged patency, better clinical response, and longer patient survival than the 10-French stent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]