4.7 Article

Endoscopic Pancreatic Duct Stents Reduce the Incidence of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients

期刊

CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 851-858

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.06.033

关键词

Inflammation; Pancreas; Clinical Trial; Drainage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pancreatitis is the most common and potentially serious complication of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is caused mostly by postprocedural papillary edema and retention of pancreatic juice. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to determine whether placement of a temporary-type, pancreatic duct stent prevents PEP and to identify risk factors for PEP. METHODS: We analyzed data from 426 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP-related procedures at 37 endoscopic units. The patients were assigned randomly to groups that received stents (S group, n = 213) or did not (nS group, n = 213). The stent used was temporary, 5F in diameter, 3 cm long, and straight with an unflanged inner end. RESULTS: The overall frequency of PEP was 11.3%. The frequencies of PEP in the S and nS groups were 7.9% and 15.2%, respectively; the lower incidence of PEP in the S group was statistically significant based on the full analysis set (P = .021), although there was no statistically significant differences in an intention-to-treat analysis (P = .076). There were significant differences in PEP incidence between groups in multivariate analysis for the following risk factors: pancreatography first, nonplacement of a pancreatic duct stent after ERCP, procedure time of 30 minutes or more, sampling of pancreatic tissue by any method, intraductal ultrasonography, and difficulty of cannulation (>= 15 min). Patients with more than 3 risk factors had a significantly greater incidence of pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a pancreatic duct stent reduces the incidence of PEP. Several risk factors are associated with PEP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据