Stent-induced pancreatic ductal and parenchymal changes: correlation of endoscopic ultrasound with ERCP

Efficacy of nafamostat mesylate in the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of nafamostat on the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). PubMed, Web of Science, and Ichushi Web were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using nafamostat to prevent PEP. In subgroup analyses, we studied the preventive effects of nafamostat according to the severity of PEP, risk category, and dose. A random-effects model was adopted; heterogeneity between studies was examined using the chi-squared test and I2 statistics. This analysis uses the PRISMA statement as general guidance. 9 RCTs involving 3321 patients were included. The risk of PEP was lower in the nafamostat group than in the control group [4.4% vs. 8.3%, risk ratio (RR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.68]. In subgroup analyses, the protective effects were evident in low-risk patients for PEP before ERCP (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.21-0.55). The association between PEP and nafamostat was significant only in patients who developed mild PEP (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.36-0.69). The benefits were independent of the dose. The prophylactic use of nafamostat resulted in a lower risk of PEP. The subgroup analyses suggested uncertain benefits for severe PEP or high-risk patients for PEP. This warrants further investigation through additional RCTs.

Changing trends in the minimally invasive surgery for chronic pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis is a debilitating pancreatic inflammatory disease characterized by intractable pain resulting in poor quality of life. Conventional management of pancreatic pain consists of a step-up approach with medications and lifestyle modifications followed by endoscopic intervention. Traditionally surgery is reserved for patients who do not improve with other interventions. However, recent studies suggest that early surgical intervention is more beneficial as it can mitigate the progression of the pathological process and prevent loss of pancreatic function. Despite the widespread adoption of minimally invasive approaches in various gastrointestinal surgical disorders, minimally invasive surgery for chronic pancreatitis is slow to evolve. Technical difficulty due to severe inflammatory changes has been the major impediment to the widespread usage of minimally invasive surgery in chronic pancreatitis. With this background, the present review aimed to critically analyze the available evidence on the minimally invasive treatment of chronic pancreatitis. A Pub Med search of all relevant articles was performed using the appropriate keywords, parentheses, and Boolean operators. Most initial laparoscopic series have reported the feasibility of lateral pancreaticojejunostomy, considered an adequate procedure only in a small proportion of patients. The pancreatic head is the pacemaker of pain, so adequate decompression is critical for long-term pain relief. Recent studies have documented the feasibility of minimally invasive duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection. With improvements in laparoscopic instrumentation and technological advances, minimally invasive surgery for chronic pancreatitis is gaining momentum. However, more high-quality evidence is required to document the superiority of minimally invasive surgery for chronic pancreatitis.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collections with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome

Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is an important and common complication of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Endoscopic approach has been established as the first-line treatment for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) with less invasion and satisfactory outcome. However, the presence of DPDS significantly complicates the management of PFC; besides, there is no standardized treatment for DPDS. The diagnosis of DPDS presents the first step of management, which can be preliminarily established by imaging methods including contrast-enhanced computed tomography, ERCP, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), and EUS. Historically, ERCP is considered as the gold standard for the diagnosis of DPDS, and secretin-enhanced MRCP is recommended as an appropriate diagnostic method in existing guidelines. With the development of endoscopic techniques and accessories, the endoscopic approach, mainly including transpapillary and transmural drainage, has been developed as the preferred treatment over percutaneous drainage and surgery for the management of PFC with DPDS. Many studies concerning various endoscopic treatment strategies have been published, especially in the recent 5 years. Nonetheless, existing current literature has reported inconsistent and confusing results. In this article, the latest evidence is summarized to explore the optimal endoscopic management of PFC with DPDS.

Endoscopic Management of Complications in Chronic Pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of complications in patients with chronic pancreatitis is often suboptimal. This review discusses detailed endoscopic approaches for managing complications in CP.

LITERATURE FINDINGS

CP is characterized by progressive and irreversible destruction of pancreatic parenchyma and ductal system resulting in fibrosis, scarring, and loss of glandular function. Abdominal pain remains is the most common symptom of the disease and the main aim of medical, endoscopic, and surgical therapy is to help relieve symptoms, prevent disease progression, and manage complications related to CP. In fact, advances in our understanding of CP have improved medical care and quality of life in these patients. With significant sequela, morbidity and a progressive nature, a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology, natural course, diagnostic approaches, and optimal management strategies for this disease is warranted. The existing modalities and new innovations in this field are safe, effective, and likely to have a positive impact on management of complication in CP whenever used in the right context.

The feasibility of pancreatic duct stenting using a novel 4-Fr plastic stent with a 0.025-in. guidewire

Pancreatic duct stenting is a well-established method for reducing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. However, there is no consensus on the optimal type of plastic stent. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new 4-Fr plastic stent for pancreatic duct stenting. Forty-nine consecutive patients who placed the 4-Fr stent into the pancreatic duct (4Fr group) were compared with 187 consecutive patients who placed a conventional 5-Fr stent (control group). The primary outcome was technical success. Complications rate, including post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were the secondary outcomes. Propensity score matching was introduced to reduce selection bias. The technical success rate was 100% in the 4Fr group and 97.9% in the control group (p = 0.315). Post-ERCP amylase level was significantly lower in the 4-Fr group than the control group before propensity score matching (p = 0.006), though without statistical significance after propensity score matching (p = 0.298). The rate of PEP in the 4Fr group (6.1%) was lower than the control group (15.5%), though without statistical significance before (p = 0.088) and after (p = 1.00) propensity score matching. Pancreatic duct stenting using a novel 4-Fr plastic stent would be at least similar or more feasible and safe compared to the conventional plastic stent.

Morphological advantages of endoscopic treatment in obstructive chronic pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

and study aims: Chronic pancreatitis is associated with recurrent or persistent abdominal pain over the course of the disease. Ductal hypertension showing obstructed and dilated pancreatic duct has been suggested as a major factor in the mechanism of pain in chronic pancreatitis. Many studies investigating pain relief after endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct (PD) are available, but the number of studies regarding the morphological changes to pancreas such as changes in PD caliber, pancreatic parenchyma, and especially pancreatic volume is far fewer. As such, we analyzed the changes of ductal caliber and parenchymal volume after endoscopic treatment of PD in patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, we compared two groups of patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis that either received endoscopic management of PD or conservative treatment without such endoscopic management. After we obtained age, sex, etiology of chronic pancreatitis, diabetic status, smoking and alcohol abuse status from the database, we compared the incidence for changes in pancreatic parenchymal volume and PD caliber between two groups.

RESULT

In our study population, total of 480 patients was diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis between January 2006 and December 2016, and 166 (34.5%) of these patients were diagnosed with obstructive chronic pancreatitis with obstructed and dilated PD. After reviewing the population with the exclusion criteria, 71 patients were available for the final analysis. 28 of those patient received endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct and 43 received conservative treatment without any endoscopic treatment of PD. Statistical analysis with Cox proportional hazards models showed that diabetes and endoscopic PD management were significant predictors for progression of PD caliber and in pancreatic parenchyma, and that only PD management influenced the pancreatic volume loss.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic management of PD in obstructive chronic pancreatitis have advantages on morphologic change such as pancreatic volume loss and progression of PD caliber in long follow-up period.

Multiple stents are not superior to single stent insertion for pain relief in patients with chronic pancreatitis: a retrospective comparative study

Background and study aims  Patients with painful chronic pancreatitis (CP) and distal main pancreatic duct (MPD) stricture are considered candidates for treatment using a single plastic stent insertion. Multiple side-by-side stents have been proposed as an alternative treatment but comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess differences in characteristics and treatment outcomes in patients with CP and MPD strictures treated with a different number of stents during the stenting period. Patients and methods  Patients with painful CP and distal MPD obstruction requiring endoscopic treatment (01.2004 - 12.2012) were considered. The study population was divided in three groups: Patients treated with (A) exclusively one stent; (B) one or two stents; and (C) exclusively two stents during the stenting period. Patient characteristics and treatment outcomes were retrospectively assessed. Results  Among 284 patients, 85 were selected according to inclusion criteria (Group A: 18, Group B: 35, Group C: 32). Median follow-up duration was 84 months. The median number of endoscopic procedures needed was higher for group B [3 (A) vs. 3 (C) vs. 4 (B), P  = 0.001]. Regarding outcome, successful endoscopic treatment was lower in Group C (50 % vs. 88.2 % and 74.2 % for groups A and B, respectively; P  = 0.02). This difference was attributed to better clinical outcome in Group A compared to Group C patients [OR(95%CI): 7.50 (1.46 - 38.70); P  = 0.04]. Moreover, group C patients experienced higher levels of pain at the end of follow-up period [median Izbicki Score 0 (group A) vs. 0 (group B) vs. 6 (group C), P  = 0.03]. Conclusions  In patients with painful CP and distal MPD obstruction, treatment with a single stent is associated with better clinical outcome compared to treatment with exclusively two stents during the stenting period.

Identification and management of pancreas divisum

Introduction: Pancreas divisum is the most common congenital malformation of the pancreas with the majority asymptomatic. The etiological role, pathogenesis, clinical significance and management of pancreas divisum in pancreatic disease has not been clearly defined and our understanding is yet to be fully elucidated.Areas covered: This review describes the role of pancreas divisum in the development of pancreatic disease and the ambiguity related to it. In our attempt to offer clarity, a comprehensive search on PubMed, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to May 2019 was undertaken using key words "pancreas divisum", "idiopathic recurrent acute pancreatitis" and "chronic pancreatitis".Expert opinion: Current research fails to define a clear association between pancreas divisum and pancreatic disease. Though debatable, several studies do suggest a pathological role of pancreas divisum in pancreatic disease and a benefit of minor papilla therapy in the setting of acute recurrent pancreatitis. Surgical and endoscopic therapeutic modalities have not been directly compared. With the current data available, it would be imprudent to advise a definitive line of management for pancreatic disease associated with pancreas divisum and should involve a comprehensive discussion with the individual patient to define expectations before embarking on any medical and/or interventional therapy.

A randomized-controlled trial of early endotherapy versus wait-and-see policy for mild symptomatic pancreatic stones in chronic pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Although surgical or endoscopic treatment is effective for pain control in symptomatic calcified chronic pancreatitis, it is still unknown whether early intervention in mild symptomatic pancreatic stones would reduce the frequency of acute exacerbation and improve long-term outcomes. The aim of this randomized-controlled trial was to explore the efficacy of early endotherapy for mild symptomatic pancreatic stones in comparison with the wait-and-see policy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with mild symptoms because of pancreatic stones were assigned randomly to the endotherapy or the wait-and-see group. The wait-and-see group received endotherapy only when they developed refractory exacerbation or intractable pain. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of intolerable pain attacks and acute exacerbation. The secondary outcomes were the development of pancreatic insufficiency and the progression of pancreatic atrophy.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients were enrolled between March 2008 and March 2011. The study was terminated prematurely because of the poor patient enrollment. Early endotherapy tended to reduce the cumulative incidence of pain attacks and exacerbation, (P=0.17) with the composite incidence of pain attacks and exacerbation of 30% in the endotherapy group and 60% in the wait-and-see group. There were no significant differences in terms of diabetic status and the presence of steatorrhea. The thickness of the pancreas decreased significantly in the wait-and-see group (9.2-6.8 mm, P=0.041), but not in the endotherapy group (8.7-9.0 mm, P=0.60).

CONCLUSION

In a small group of patients, early endotherapy in mild symptomatic chronic pancreatitis was associated with a trend toward a minor number of acute attacks and atrophy progression of the pancreas.

Pancreatic parenchymal calcification induced by permanent indwelling transmural stent

Long-term transmural stent placement is a safe and effective strategy for the prevention of recurrence of pancreatic fluid collection in patients with walled-off necrosis and disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. The presence of a stent for an indefinite period has been shown to be safe without any serious adverse effects. We report a rare case of pancreatic parenchymal calcification induced by long-term transmural stent.

Stent-induced symptomatic pancreatic duct stricture after endoscopic prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement for the normal pancreas

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Stent-induced pancreatic duct stricture (SI-PDS) is a complication associated with pancreatic stent placement. However, symptomatic SI-PDS associated with prophylactic pancreatic duct stents has not been sufficiently investigated.

METHODS

We examined the incidence and characteristics of symptomatic SI-PDS in patients who underwent pancreatic duct stent placement to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) between April 2007 and March 2017.

RESULTS

We examined 124 patients with normal pancreases consisting of 75 men and 49 women with a median age of 67.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 61-74 years]. The median main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter was 3.3 mm (IQR: 2.6-4.1 mm). The median duration of stent placement was 7 days (IQR: 3-14 days). Spontaneous dislodgment stents were placed in 43.5% of cases (54/124). The diameter of the stent was 5 Fr in 93.5% of cases (116/124) and 7 Fr in 6.5% of cases (8/124). Symptomatic SI-PDS was observed in 2.4% (3/124) of patients overall: 6.5% of patients with an MPD diameter of <3 mm and 0% of patients with an MPD diameter of ≥3 mm. Univariate analysis revealed that an MPD diameter <3 mm was a significant factor for symptomatic SI-PDS (p = 0.048). All cases of symptomatic SI-PDS improved with endoscopic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic SI-PDS occurred in 2.4% of patients who underwent prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement for normal pancreases. Patients with an MPD diameter of <3 mm may be susceptible to symptomatic SI-PDS.

Prophylactic efficacy of a novel method against postendoscopic papillary balloon dilation pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether a novel method including prophylactic pancreatic stent (PS) placement prevents postendoscopic papillary balloon dilation pancreatitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study enrolled 200 consecutive patients with bile duct stones measuring up to 8 mm in diameter and retrospectively recruited 113 patients undergoing ordinary endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) without PS placement from our previous study. In the novel method, EPBD and PS placement was attempted with a guidewire left in the main pancreatic duct for patients in whom stable guidewire placement in the main pancreatic duct was possible. EST was performed for patients in whom stable guidewire placement was impossible. The incidence rate of pancreatitis was compared between the novel method and ordinary EPBD, and risk factors for pancreatitis were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 194 patients undergoing the novel method, EPBD and EST were performed in 180 and 14 patients, respectively. Following EPBD, PS placement was successful in 177/180 (98.3%) of patients. Pancreatitis occurred in 7/194 (3.6%) of patients after the novel method and 9/113 (8.0%) of patients after ordinary EPBD. There was a trend toward lower incidence rate of pancreatitis in the novel method. Stent dislodgement by the first postoperative morning and no previous endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) were identified as risk factors for pancreatitis after EPBD with PS placement. No previous ENBD was also identified as a risk factor for pancreatitis after ordinary EPBD.

CONCLUSION

Our novel method is likely to be superior to ordinary EPBD in preventing pancreatitis. Previous ENBD may prevent post-EPBD pancreatitis regardless of PS placement.

Pancreatic Duct Changes in Patients With Chronic Pancreatitis Treated With Polyethylene and Sof-Flex Material Stents: A Blinded Comparison

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic stenting is used to improve painful, obstructive chronic pancreatitis. Data suggest that polyethylene stents (PESs) cause stent-associated changes (SACs). Whether a stent composed of more flexible material (Sof-Flex stent [SFS]) is associated with less SAC is unknown.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective study of patients who underwent pancreatic duct stenting of at least 1 PES and 1 SFS on separate examinations and had a follow-up pancreatogram at the time of stent removal. The main outcome measurements were assessed for SAC on follow-up pancreatogram and interpreted by 2 radiologists blinded to the clinical data.

RESULTS

Stent-associated changes were noted with 28% (13/47) of SFS and with 25% (13/52) of PES (P = 0.65). For 10F stent subgroups, SACs were seen with 25% (6/24) of the SFS compared with 50% (2/4) in the PES. Thirty percent (7/23) of the 8.5F SFS subgroup had SACs versus 29% (2/7) in the PES group (P = 0.887) for 8.5F + 10F combined comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who have had polyethylene or SFSs of varying sizes, approximately 1 in 4 have SACs. Despite the use of a softer stent material for therapeutic stenting, the rate of SACs in the 8.5F and 10F subgroups seems similar between the 2 materials and design.

Surgery remains the best option for the management of pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Controversy related to endoscopic or surgical management of pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis remains. Despite improvement in endoscopic treatments, surgery remains the best option for pain management in these patients.

Disconnected Pancreatic Duct Syndrome: Endoscopic Stent or Surgeon's Knife?

Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome is a sequela of necrotizing pancreatitis or pancreatic trauma in which necrosis of a segment of the pancreas leads to lack of continuity between viable secreting pancreatic tissue (eg, body or tail) and the gastrointestinal tract. The endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography showing total cutoff of the pancreatic duct along with an enhancing distal pancreas on contrast-enhanced computed tomography remains the criterion standard for diagnosis. Recently, the evolving literature supports a role for magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography, especially with secretin stimulation. A multidisciplinary approach is extremely important in the management of this condition. Conservative measures are usually not helpful, and interventional radiology, endoscopic, or surgical intervention is almost always needed for management of these patients. Recently, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage procedures in conjunction with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-assisted pancreatic duct stenting have emerged as a novel technique to manage this condition. The aim of this review was to give a detailed overview about the diagnosis and management of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome with emphasis on the changing paradigm in endoscopic and surgical management.

Endoscopic therapy in chronic pancreatitis: current perspectives

Endoscopic therapy in chronic pancreatitis (CP) aims to provide pain relief and to treat local complications, by using the decompression of the pancreatic duct and the drainage of pseudocysts and biliary strictures, respectively. This is the reason for using it as first-line therapy for painful uncomplicated CP. The clinical response has to be evaluated at 6-8 weeks, when surgery may be chosen. This article reviews the main possibilities of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) therapies. Endotherapy for pancreatic ductal stones uses ultrasound wave lithotripsy and sometimes additional stone extractions. The treatment of pancreatic duct strictures consists of a single large stenting for 1 year. If the stricture persists, simultaneous multiple stents are applied. In case of unsuccessful ERCP, the EUS-guided drainage of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) or a rendezvous technique can solve the ductal strictures. EUS-guided celiac plexus block has limited efficiency in CP. The drainage of symptomatic or complicated pancreatic pseudocysts can be performed transpapillarily or transgastrically/transduodenally, preferably by EUS guidance. When the biliary stricture is symptomatic or progressive, multiple plastic stents are indicated. In conclusion, as in many fields of symptomatic treatment, endoscopy remains the first choice, either by using ERCP or EUS-guided procedures, after consideration of a multidisciplinary team with endoscopists, surgeons, and radiologists. However, what is crucial is establishing the right timing for surgery.

Endoscopic transpapillary stenting for pancreatic fistulas after necrosectomy with necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Data concerning the incidence and treatment of pancreatic fistula after necrosectomy in severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis (SAP) are scarce. Our aim was to assess the incidence of pancreatic fistula, and the feasibility and results of endoscopic transpapillary stenting (ETS) in patients with SAP after necrosectomy.

METHODS

From January 2009 to December 2012 twenty-nine consecutive patients with SAP and necrosectomy in Oulu University Hospital were enrolled into this study. Five patients died before ETS because of the rapid progress of the disease and were, therefore, excluded.

RESULTS

ERP was performed for the remaining 24 patients demonstrating fistula in 22/24 patients (92 %). ETS was successful in 23 patients and the fistula closed in all of them after a median of 82 (2-210) days with acceptable morbidity and no procedure-related mortality.

CONCLUSION

All patients after necrosectomy for SAP seem to have internal or external pancreatic fistula. EST aimed at internal drainage of the necrosectomy cavity is a feasible and effective therapy in these patients.

UK wide survey on the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

In 2010, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy delivered guidelines on the prophylaxis of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). These included Grade A recommendations advising the use of prophylactic pancreatic stent (PPS) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in high-risk cases. Our study aim was to capture the current practice of UK biliary endoscopists in the prevention of PEP.

DESIGN

In summer 2012, an anonymous online 15-item survey was emailed to 373 UK consultant gastroenterologists, gastrointestinal surgeons and radiologists identified to perform ERCP.

RESULTS

The response rate was 59.5% (222/373). Of the respondents, 52.5% considered ever using PPS for the prevention of PEP. PPS users always attempted insertion for the following procedural risk factors: pancreatic sphincterotomy (48.9%), suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (46.5%), pancreatic duct instrumentation (35.9%), previous PEP (25.2%), precut sphincterotomy (8.5%) and pancreatic duct injection (7.8%). Prophylactic NSAID use was significantly associated with attempts at PPS placement (p<0.001). 64.1% of non-PPS users cited a lack of conviction in their benefit as the main reason for their decision. Self-reported pharmacological use rates for PEP prevention were: NSAIDs (34.6%), antibiotics (20.6%), rapid intravenous fluids (13.2%) and octreotide (1.6%). 6% routinely measured amylase post-ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite strong evidence-based guidelines for prevention of PEP, less than 53% of ERCP practitioners use pancreatic stenting or NSAIDs. This suggests a need for the development of British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines to increase awareness in the UK. Even among stent users, PPS are being underused for most high-risk cases. Prophylactic pharmacological measures were rarely used as was routine post-ERCP serum amylase measurement.

Endoscopic therapy for pancreatic duct leaks and disruptions

Pancreatitis, whether acute or chronic, can lead to a plethora of complications, such as fluid collections, pseudocysts, fistulas, and necrosis, all of which are secondary to leakage of secretions from the pancreatic ductal system. Partial and side branch duct disruptions can be managed successfully by transpapillary pancreatic duct stent placement, whereas patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome require more complex endoscopic interventions or multidisciplinary care for optimal treatment outcomes. This review discusses the current status of endoscopic management of pancreatic duct leaks and emerging concepts for the treatment of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome.

Defining the accuracy of secretin pancreatic function testing in patients with suspected early chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

The diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis in patients with characteristic symptoms but normal pancreatic imaging is challenging. Assessment of pancreatic function through secretin pancreatic function testing (SPFT) has been advocated in this setting, but its diagnostic accuracy is not fully known.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients who received SPFT at our tertiary care institution between January 1995 and December 2008 for suspected chronic pancreatitis. For all patients, medical records were reviewed for evidence of subsequent development of chronic pancreatitis by imaging and/or pathology. Patients were then categorized as "true positive" or "true negative" for chronic pancreatitis based on follow-up imaging or histologic evidence.

RESULTS

In all, 116 patients underwent SPFT. Of the 27 patients who tested positive, 7 were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 20 SPFT-positive patients, 9 (45%) developed radiologic or histologic evidence of chronic pancreatitis after a median of 4 years (1-11 years). Of the 89 patients who had negative SPFT testing, 19 were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 70 patients, 2 were eventually diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis based on subsequent imaging/histology after a median follow-up period of 7 years (3-11 years). The sensitivity of the SPFT in diagnosing chronic pancreatitis was 82% with a specificity of 86%. The positive predictive value (PPV) of chronic pancreatitis was 45% with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with suspected early chronic pancreatitis and normal pancreatic imaging, SPFT is highly accurate at ruling out early chronic pancreatitis with a NPV of 97%.

Multiple pancreatic pseudocysts treated with endoscopic transpapillary drainage

Management of a solitary pancreatic pseudocyst with endoscopic transpapillary stent drainage is a well recognized treatment modality. Endoscopic options are however limited in the presence of multiple pancreatic pseudocysts. Conventionally surgery has been the mainstay of treatment in this situation. In this case report, we present a patient with multiple pancreatic pseudocysts who was successfully treated via transpapillary placement of pancreatic duct stent.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for stone burden in the bile and pancreatic ducts

Stones in biliary and pancreatic ducts are entities that plague hundreds of thousands of patients worldwide every year. Symptoms can be mild (pain) to life threatening (cholangitis, severe acute pancreatitis). In the last few decades, management of these stones has transitioned from exclusively surgical to now predominantly endoscopic techniques. This article reviews the evolution of endoscopic techniques used in the management of stones in the common bile duct and pancreatic duct.

Randomized controlled trial of pancreatic stenting to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

AIM: To determine the effectiveness of pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement for the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high risk patients.

METHODS: Authors conducted a single-blind, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent against post-ERCP pancreatitis, including rates of spontaneous dislodgement and complications. Authors defined high risk patients as having any of the following: sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, difficult cannulation, prior history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, pre-cut sphincterotomy, pancreatic ductal biopsy, pancreatic sphincterotomy, intraductal ultrasonography, or a procedure time of more than 30 min. Patients were randomized to a stent group (n = 60) or to a non-stent group (n = 60). An abdominal radiograph was obtained daily to assess spontaneous stent dislodgement. Post-ERCP pancreatitis was diagnosed according to consensus criteria.

RESULTS: The mean age (± standard deviation) was 67.4 ± 13.8 years and the male: female ratio was 68:52. In the stent group, the mean age was 66 ± 13 years and the male: female ratio was 33:27, and in the non-stent group, the mean age was 68 ± 14 years and the male: female ratio was 35:25. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to age, gender, final diagnosis, or type of endoscopic intervention. The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in PD stent and non-stent groups was 1.7% (1/60) and 13.3% (8/60), respectively. The severity of pancreatitis was mild in all cases. The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the stent group was significantly lower than in the non-stent group (P = 0.032, Fisher’s exact test). The rate of hyperamylasemia were 30% (18/60) and 38.3% (23 of 60) in the stent and non-stent groups, respectively (P = 0.05, χ² test). The placement of a PD stent was successful in all 60 patients. The rate of spontaneous dislodgement by the third day was 96.7% (58/60), and the median (range) time to dislodgement was 2.1 (2-3) d. The rates of stent migration, hemorrhage, perforation, infection (cholangitis or cholecystitis) or other complicationss were 0% (0/60), 0% (0/60), 0% (0/60), 0% (0/60), 0% (0/60), respectively, in the stent group. Univariate analysis revealed no significant differences in high risk factors between the two groups. The pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent safely prevented post-ERCP pancreatitis in high risk patients.

CONCLUSION: Pancreatic stent placement is a safe and effective technique to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. Therefore authors recommend pancreatic stent placement after ERCP in high risk patients.

Update on endoscopic management of main pancreatic duct stones in chronic calcific pancreatitis

Pancreatic duct stones are a common complication during the natural course of chronic pancreatitis and often contribute to additional pain and pancreatitis. Abdominal pain, one of the major symptoms of chronic pancreatitis, is believed to be caused in part by obstruction of the pancreatic duct system (by stones or strictures) resulting in increasing intraductal pressure and parenchymal ischemia. Pancreatic stones can be managed by surgery, endoscopy, or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. In this review, updated management of pancreatic duct stones is discussed.

The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with pancreatic disease

Given the significant risk of pancreatitis and the advent of high-fidelity diagnostic techniques, ERCP is now reserved as a therapeutic procedure for those with pancreatic disease. Early ERCP benefits those with gallstone pancreatitis who present with or develop cholangitis or biliary obstruction. Among those with idiopathic pancreatitis, ERCP may be used to confirm and treat SOD, microlithiasis, and structural anomalies, including pancreas divisum. Pancreatic endotherapy is a consideration to decrease pain in those with pancreatic duct obstruction, although surgical decompression may be more durable, particularly in those with severe disease. Pancreatic duct leaks may respond to endoscopic drainage, but optimal therapy is achieved if a bridging stent can be placed. Finally, using a wire-guided technique and pancreatic duct stents in high-risk patients, particularly in cases of suspected SOD, may minimize the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Prophylactic pancreatic stents: does size matter? A comparison of 4-Fr and 5-Fr stents in reference to post-ERCP pancreatitis and migration rate

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The ideal pancreatic stent to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) has yet to be determined. The aim of our study was to assess the relative benefit of 4-Fr versus 5-Fr stents in a population at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, and the relative frequency of spontaneous migration.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with prophylactic pancreatic stent (PPS) from 2002 to 2009 were reviewed. Patients were classified into two groups according to stent size and compared based on outcome; spontaneous migration or endoscopic removal.

RESULTS

A total of 346 PPS were placed in 308 patients (224 women, 84 men). The average age was 48.9 years. The most common indication for PPS was sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Needle knife papillotomy was the most common procedure performed. Forty-seven patients had PEP, 4 Fr (14.6%) and 5 Fr (12.9%), with only one case of severe pancreatitis. Factors associated with higher rates PEP were younger age and pancreatic sphincterotomy. Complete follow-up was not available in 37 patients. Spontaneous migration was demonstrated in 115 of the 4 Fr (95.8%) and 134 of the 5 Fr (68.7%). The remaining 66 (five from the 4 Fr and 61 from the 5 Fr), were removed by endoscopy. The mean delay to demonstrate spontaneous migration was 34.2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

PPS in high-risk patients reduced the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and nearly eliminated severe pancreatitis. No significant difference between the 4 Fr and 5 Fr in reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis was observed. However, spontaneous migration was more frequent with the 4-Fr stent.

Acute pancreatitis after removal of retained prophylactic pancreatic stents

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic pancreatic stents (PPSs) are used to decrease the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk patients. The risk associated with PPS removal is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the rate of PEP in patients undergoing PPS removal without pancreatogram or other manipulation of the major or minor papilla.

DESIGN

Retrospective, cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care academic center.

PATIENTS

This study involved 230 patients undergoing removal of PPSs from 1997 to 2010.

INTERVENTION

PPS removal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Rate of acute pancreatitis associated with removal of PPS alone.

RESULTS

Acute pancreatitis occurred after PPS removal in 7 of 230 (3.0%) cases. PEP was graded as mild, moderate, and severe in 2, 5, and 0 cases, respectively. Statistically significant risk factors of PEP after PPS removal include use of a 5F stent (P=.001), use of a stent with an internal flange (P<.01), and occurrence of PEP after the initial ERCP (P<.01). Longer duration of stent within the pancreatic duct before removal was of borderline significance (P=.06). Patient age; sex; indication for initial procedure; the presence of pancreas divisum, ansa loop, or chronic pancreatitis; and history of pancreatic or biliary sphincterotomy or orifice dilation were not significant risk factors for pancreatitis after PPS removal.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Small number of events.

CONCLUSION

Removal of retained PPSs may cause mild or moderate acute pancreatitis. This risk of acute pancreatitis may diminish the overall efficacy of PPS use by delaying the occurrence of PEP rather than eliminating it. This implies that PPSs should be used only in patients at high risk for PEP.

Endoscopic transpapillary drainage for external fistulas developing after surgical or radiological pancreatic interventions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

External pancreatic fistulas (EPFs) are a therapeutic challenge. The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary nasopancreatic drainage (NPD) in patients with EPF.

METHODS

Over 12 years, 23 patients (19 males) with EPF underwent attempted endoscopic transpapillary NPD. The end points were fistula closure with healing of pancreatic duct disruption on nasopancreatogram, or need for surgery.

RESULTS

All 23 patients had persistent drain output (>50 mL/day) for >6 weeks. The mean output volume of the fistula was 223 mL (range: 60 mL to 750 mL). Sixteen patients had partial and seven patients had complete pancreatic duct disruption. The NPD could be successfully placed in 21/23 (91.3%) patients. Disruption was bridged in 15 of 16 patients with partial duct disruption. EPF healed in 2-8 weeks of placement of NPD in all of the patients with partial duct disruption that was bridged and there was no recurrence at a mean follow-up of 38 months. The EPF resolved in only 2/6 (33%) patients with complete duct disruption.

CONCLUSIONS

External pancreatic fistulas developing following percutaneous drainage of pancreatic fluid collections or surgical necrosectomy can be effectively treated by transpapillary nasopancreatic drain placement especially when there is partial ductal disruption and the disruption can be bridged.

Endoscopic treatment in chronic pancreatitis, timing, duration and type of intervention

Endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP) aims to relieve pain by draining the main pancreatic duct (MPD) and to treat loco-regional complications. Half of patients have complete pain relief five years after treatment, with best results obtained if treatment is performed early after the first pain attack. If MPD obstruction is caused by calcifications, ambulatory extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy has become a first-line treatment (9-30% of patients require ERCP during follow-up). If MPD obstruction is caused by stricture(s), insertion of single plastic stent is effective but it requires multiple ERCPs for stent exchanges; other protocols are being investigated. Pseudocysts represent an excellent indication for endoscopic treatment with long-term results similar to those of surgery; endosonography-guided techniques allow treatment of almost any pancreatic pseudocyst. Biliary strictures related to CP are challenging due to a high relapse rate and requirement for multiple ERCP sessions. Significant progress has recently been made with new protocols of temporary biliary stenting (multiple simultaneous plastic stents or covered metallic stents).

Endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts at atypical locations

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is paucity of data on endoscopic management of pseudocysts at atypical locations. We evaluated the efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary nasopancreatic drain (NPD) placement in the management of pseudocysts of pancreas at atypical locations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eleven patients with pseudocysts at atypical locations were treated with attempted endoscopic transpapillary nasopancreatic drainage. On endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP), a 5-F NPD was placed across/near the site of duct disruption.

RESULTS

Three patients each had mediastinal, intrahepatic, and intra/perisplenic pseudocysts and one patient each had renal and pelvic pseudocyst. Nine patients had chronic pancreatitis whereas two patients had acute pancreatitis. The size of the pseudocysts ranged from 2 to 15 cm. On ERP, the site of ductal disruption was in the body of pancreas in five patients (45.4%), and tail of pancreas in six patients (54.6%). All the patients had partial disruption of pancreatic duct. The NPD was successfully placed across the disruption in 10 of the 11 patients (90.9%) and pseudocysts resolved in 4-8 weeks. One of the patients developed fever, 5 days after the procedure, which was successfully treated by intravenous antibiotics. In another patient, NPD became blocked 12 days after the procedure and was successfully opened by aspiration. The NPD slipped out in one of the patient with splenic pseudocyst and was replaced with a stent. There was no recurrence of symptoms or pseudocysts during follow-up of 3-70 months.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic pseudocysts at atypical locations with ductal communication and partial ductal disruption that is bridged by NPD can also be effectively treated with endoscopic transpapillary NPD placement.

Update on endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis

Endoscopic therapy has been increasingly recognized as the effective therapy in selected patients with chronic pancreatitis. Utility of endotherapy in various conditions occurring in chronic pancreatitis is discussed. Its efficacy, limitations, and alternatives are addressed. For the best management of these complex entities, a multidisciplinary approach involving expertise in all pancreatic specialties is essential to achieve the goal.

Endotherapy for pain in chronic pancreatitis

Pain is the most distressing symptom of chronic pancreatitis. Although the pathogenesis of pain is still poorly understood, an increase in intraductal pressure may be the dominant factor. The management of pain can involve medical, endoscopic, neurolytic, and surgical therapies. Endotherapy includes pancreatic sphincterotomy, extraction of stones, placement of stent, and dilatation of strictures, sometimes preceded or followed by extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. Several studies have now shown that endotherapy provides partial or complete relief of pancreatic pain in a majority of patients with an acceptable frequency of early and late complications. Endotherapy should now graduate from an experimental form of treatment to a realistic treatment option in patients with chronic or relapsing pain, particularly in the setting of calcific chronic pancreatitis.

Allopurinol to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with a risk of pancreatitis (PEP). Animal studies suggest that (single-dose) allopurinol (xanthine oxidase inhibitor with high oral bioavailability and long-lasting active metabolites) may reduce this risk; human study results are conflicting. The aim of this study was to determine if allopurinol decreases the rate of PEP.

METHODS

Patients referred for ERCP to 9 endoscopists at 2 tertiary centers were randomized to receive either allopurinol 300 mg or identical placebo orally 60 minutes before ERCP, stratified according to high-risk ERCP (manometry or pancreatic therapy). The primary outcome (PEP) was adjudicated blindly; pancreatitis was defined according to the Cotton consensus, and evaluated at 48 hours and 30 days. Secondary outcomes included severe PEP, length of stay, and mortality (nil). The trial was terminated after the blinded (midpoint) interim analysis, as recommended by the independent data and safety monitoring committee.

RESULTS

We randomized 586 subjects, 293 to each arm. The crude PEP rates were 5.5% (allopurinol) and 4.1% (placebo), (P = .44; difference = 1.4%; 95% confidence interval, -2.1% to 4.8%). The Mantel-Haenszel combined risk ratio for PEP with allopurinol, considering stratification, was 1.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-2.86). Subgroup analyses suggested nonsignificant trends toward possible benefit in the high-risk group, and possible harm for the remaining subjects. Logistic regression found pancreatic therapy, pancreatic injection, and prior PEP to be the only independent predictors of PEP.

CONCLUSIONS

Allopurinol does not appear to reduce the overall risk of PEP; however, its potential benefit in the high-risk group (but potential harm for non-high-risk patients) means further study is required.

Review of idiopathic pancreatitis

Recent advances in understanding of pancreatitis and advances in technology have uncovered the veils of idiopathic pancreatitis to a point where a thorough history and judicious use of diagnostic techniques elucidate the cause in over 80% of cases. This review examines the multitude of etiologies of what were once labeled idiopathic pancreatitis and provides the current evidence on each. This review begins with a background review of the current epidemiology of idiopathic pancreatitis prior to discussion of various etiologies. Etiologies of medications, infections, toxins, autoimmune disorders, vascular causes, and anatomic and functional causes are explored in detail. We conclude with management of true idiopathic pancreatitis and a summary of the various etiologic agents. Throughout this review, areas of controversies are highlighted.

Endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis

Treatment of chronic pancreatitis has been exclusively surgical for a long time. Recently, endoscopic therapy has become widely used as a primary therapeutic option. Initially performed for drainage of pancreatic cysts and pseudocysts, endoscopic treatments were adapted to biliary and pancreatic ducts stenosis. Pancreatic sphincterotomy which allows access to pancreatic ducts was firstly reported. Secondly, endoscopic methods of stenting, dilatation, and stones extraction of the bile ducts were applied to pancreatic ducts. Nevertheless, new improvements were necessary: failures of pancreatic stone extraction justified the development of extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy; dilatation of pancreatic stenosis was improved by forage with a new device; moreover endosonography allowed guidance for celiac block, gastro-cystostomy, duodeno-cystostomy and pancreatico-gastrostomy. Although endoscopic treatments are more and more frequently accepted, indications are still debated.

Prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis by an endoscopic pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most common and potentially serious complication of ERCP. The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis generally is reported to be between 1% and 9%. One cause of pancreatitis is retention of pancreatic juice resulting from papilledema after the procedure. We conducted a randomized controlled multicenter study to evaluate whether placement of a temporary pancreatic stent designed for spontaneous dislodgement prevents post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

The subjects were 201 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP. The patients were randomized into the stent placement group (S group = 98) or the nonstent placement group (nS group = 103). The stent used was 5F in diameter, 3 cm in length, straight, and unflanged inside.

RESULTS

Stents were placed successfully in 96% of the S group, and spontaneous stent dislodgment was recognized in 95.7% of those. The mean duration to dislodgment was 2 days, and there were no severe complications. The overall frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 8.5%. The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the S and nS groups was 3.2% and 13.6%, respectively, showing a significantly lower frequency in the S group (P = .019). The mean increase in amylase level in the pancreatitis patients was significantly higher in the nS group (P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

The randomized controlled multicenter trial showed that placement of a pancreatic spontaneous dislodgment stent significantly reduces post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Pancreatic stents for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Placement of pancreatic stents is a relatively new and increasingly adopted approach to reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Evidence for the efficacy of pancreatic stents in reducing post-ERCP pancreatitis continues to accumulate. Routine use of pancreatic stents in high-risk cases at advanced centers has changed the complexion of ERCP, reducing the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis to a more acceptable level, and eliminating some of the fear factor surrounding previously prohibitively risky settings, such as treatment of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). On the other hand, the adoption of prophylactic pancreatic stenting into some practices has been sporadic. Problems with pancreatic stent placement include technical difficulty with placement, need for follow-up evaluation to ensure passage or removal, and potential for inducing pancreatic ductal injury. There remain many challenges and unanswered questions which will be addressed in this review, including which patients are at risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, how might pancreatic stents reduce risk, what is the evidence supporting efficacy of pancreatic stenting in reducing risk; and based on those data, which ERCPs are at sufficiently high risk to warrant a stent; at what point in an ERCP should a pancreatic stent be placed; how long pancreatic stents need to remain in place to be effective, the risk of inducing pancreatic duct injury by placement of a stent; the frequency and consequences of failure at attempted stent placement, and effectiveness of pancreatic stent placement in the hands of those with limited experience. Current recommendations for use of pancreatic stents and areas requiring further investigation are discussed.

Early successes and late failures in the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The only way to prevent this complication is to avoid an ERCP all together. Because of the risks involved, a careful consideration should be given to the indication for ERCP and the potential risk/benefit ratio of the test. Once a decision to perform an ERCP is made, the procedure should be carried out with meticulous care by an experienced endoscopist, and with a minimum of pancreatic duct opacification. Several pharmacologic agents have been tested, but to date the most important method of reducing post ERCP pancreatitis is the placement of pancreatic stent. Pancreatic stents should be placed in all patients at high risk of this complication such as those undergoing pancreatic sphincterotomy, pancreatic duct manipulation and intervention, and patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Pancreatic stents should be also considered in patients requiring precut sphincterotomy to gain biliary access.

Temporary pancreatic stent to prevent post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a preliminary, single-center, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis is the most common complication of ERCP, which can occasionally become serious or fatal. This preliminary study was to prospectively evaluate the efficacy of a temporary unflanged pancreatic duct stent (PS) to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

A total of 64 patients were randomly divided into a control group, which did not undergo stenting, and a stent group. The stent used was a 5-Fr pigtail PS without an inner flange.

RESULTS

Placement of an unflanged PS was successful and without complications in all 32 patients. The rates of hyperamylasemia were 50.0% and 34.4% in the control and stent groups, respectively (P > 0.05), and the mean serum amylase levels were 456.2 and 257.9 IU/l, respectively (P = 0.035). The overall rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis diagnosed according to Cotton's criteria were 12.5% and 3.1% in the control and stent groups, respectively (P > 0.05). The severity of pancreatitis was severe in one patient, moderate in one, and mild in two in the control group, whereas in the stent group, the single case of pancreatitis was mild.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of an unflanged 5-Fr PS may be useful in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Outcomes after clearance of pancreatic stones with or without pancreatic stenting

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and endoscopic lithotripsy are useful for the fragmentation and extraction of pancreatic stones. However, pancreatic stones often recur, for which an adequate strategy is needed. Treatment for stricture of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) with a pancreatic stent after clearance of pancreatic stones may reduce the recurrence of pancreatic symptoms and stones.

METHODS

Forty patients with chronic pancreatitis with MPD stones were treated with ESWL in combination with endoscopic stone extraction. After clearance of the stones, a pancreatic stent was inserted when a stricture of MPD was observed on pancreatography. The stent was exchanged every 3 months and removed after a total of 1 year. We examined episodes of recurrent pain and pancreatitis in patients with and without stenting, as well as the MPD diameter, during follow-up.

RESULTS

MPD stricture was seen in 27 patients, and a stent was successfully inserted in 24 of them. Pancreatic symptoms recurred in five patients (21%) in the stenting group and in three patients (23%) in the control group during a mean follow-up period of 1.5 and 1.2 years, respectively. The diameter of the MPD, before, just after, and 1 year after treatment, was 7.6, 5.4, and 5.8 mm, respectively. It was significantly decreased after 1 year of follow-up, as well as just after stent removal, compared with before treatment (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional stenting for MPD after extraction of pancreatic stones may reduce the risk of recurrence of pancreatic symptoms.

Management of multiple and large pancreatic pseudocysts by endoscopic transpapillary nasopancreatic drainage alone

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic drainage of a single pseudocyst is a well-known treatment modality. Its role in the management of multiple pseudocysts is not well established. We evaluated the role of endoscopic transpapillary nasopancreatic drain (NPD) placement in the management of multiple and large pseudocysts.

METHODS

Over 3 yr (2001-2004), endoscopic transpapillary NPD placement was attempted in 11 patients (age range 12-50 yr, 10 men) with symptomatic communicating multiple pseudocysts of pancreas (three in two and two in nine cases). A 5Fr/7Fr NPD was placed across the most distal duct disruption or into one of the pseudocysts.

RESULTS

Eight patients had an underlying chronic pancreatitis and three patients had pseudocysts as sequelae of acute pancreatitis. The size of pseudocysts ranged from 2 to 14 cm (mean 7.5 cm). Eight patients (72.7%) had at least one pseudocyst more than 6 cm in size. Nine patients had a partial disruption and two patients had complete disruption of the pancreatic duct. The NPD was successfully placed in 10 of 11 (90.9%) patients. Postprocedure acute febrile illness in one patient was the only complication noted, which responded to intravenous antibiotics. All pseudocysts resolved in 4-8 wk in 7 of 7 patients with successful bridging of the most distal ductal disruption. There was no recurrence of the pseudocysts in a mean follow-up of 19.4 months. Two patients, in whom there was a complete disruption and the NPD could not bridge the disruption, required surgery for the nonresolution of pseudocysts. In one patient with partial ductal disruption that could not be bridged, there was complete resolution of one pseudocyst and a decrease in the size of the other pseudocyst from 12 to 4 cm. The NPD was replaced by a stent and both the pseudocysts resolved in 20 wk.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic transpapillary NPD placement is a safe and effective modality for the treatment of multiple and large pseudocysts, especially when there is partial ductal disruption, and the disruption can be bridged.

A survey of physician practices on prophylactic pancreatic stents

BACKGROUND

Several prospective studies confirm that prophylactic stent placement in the pancreatic duct (PD) during high-risk ERCP procedures decreases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Inconsistencies exist regarding the indications for prophylactic PD stent placement, the type of stent used, and stent follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current practice patterns of expert biliary endoscopists regarding prophylactic pancreatic duct stents.

DESIGN

An anonymous survey was mailed to 54 expert biliary endoscopists, assessing volume of procedures, stent indications, method of placement, and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 91% (49/54) of surveys were returned and analyzed. Prophylactic PD stents were used by 96% of respondents. Stent use was universal during ampullectomy and pancreatic sphincterotomy. Most also used stents for minor papillotomy (93%) and sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) confirmed by manometry (82%). Endoscopists disagreed on the following: pre-cut sphincterotomy (71%), prior post-ERCP pancreatitis (64%), suspected SOD (58-69%), and traumatic sphincterotomy (44%). Endoscopists used straight stents (33%), pigtail stents (30%), or a combination (33%). Internal flanges were always used by 14%, never used by 54%, and sometimes used by 32%. Stent size and length varied widely, as did the time stents were left in place, and the retrieval method.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert biliary endoscopists agree that prophylactic PD stenting is indicated during ERCP in high-risk patients. Wide variation exists in patient selection and stent placement technique.

Efficacy of s-type stents for the treatment of the main pancreatic duct stricture in patients with chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

Stents have been used to relieve pancreatic duct stricture and upstream dilatation. However, many of these stents are straight-type stents originally manufactured for biliary use. A plastic stent that was developed for use in the pancreatic duct was used in this study and its usefulness investigated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The stent (s-type stent: 10 Fr in diameter) has two alternate flexions and the shape resembles the tilde mark " approximately " in appearance. After obtaining informed consent, stents were placed in 20 patients with abdominal pain caused by chronic pancreatitis and stricture of the distal main pancreatic duct. The stents were removed according to the clinical manifestations and replaced with new ones if the stricture persisted.

RESULTS

In total, 33 stents were placed in 20 patients. Pain relief was attained in 19 patients (95%). The stricture improved after one stenting in 8 patients (40%). Owing to persistent stricture, the stenting was repeated in 11 patients. The 50% stent indwelling period was 369.0 days. No proximal or distal migration of the stent occurred and there were no serious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In view of its long durability as a stent and no migration, the s-stent is safe and useful for the management of pancreatic ductal strictures in patients with chronic pancreatitis.