Reducing the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis using 4-Fr pancreatic plastic stents placed with common-type guidewires: Results from a prospective multinational registry

Pancreatic duct stents

Pancreatic duct stenting using endoscopy or surgery is widely used for the management of benign and malignant pancreatic diseases. Endoscopic pancreatic stents are mainly used to relieve pain caused by chronic pancreatitis and pancreas divisum, and to treat pancreatic duct disruption and stenotic pancreaticointestinal anastomosis after surgery. They are also used to prevent postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and postoperative pancreatic fistula, treat pancreatic cancer, and locate radiolucent stones. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasonography and balloon enteroscopy, and newly designed stents have broadened the indications for pancreatic duct stenting. In this review we outlined the types, insertion procedures, efficacy, and complications of endoscopic pancreatic duct stent placement, and summarized the applications of pancreatic duct stents in surgery.

Chronic use of statins and acetylsalicylic acid and incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography acute pancreatitis: A multicenter, prospective, cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) acute pancreatitis (PEP) is a frequent complication of this endoscopic procedure. Chronic statin intake has been linked to lower incidence and severity of acute pancreatitis (AP). Periprocedural rectal administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is protective against PEP, but the role of chronic acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) treatment is unclear. We aimed to investigate whether statins and chronic ASA intake are associated with lower risk of PEP.

METHODS

An international, multicenter, prospective cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing ERCP in seven European centers were included. Patients were followed-up to detect those with PEP. Multivariate analysis by means of binary logistic regression was performed, and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 1150 patients were included, and 70 (6.1%) patients developed PEP. Among statins users, 8.1% developed PEP vs. 5.4% among non-users (P = 0.09). Multivariate analysis showed no association between statin use and PEP incidence (aOR 1.68 (95% CI 0.94-2.99, P = 0.08)). Statin use had no effect on severity of PEP, being mild in 92.0% of statin users vs. 82.2% in non-statin users (P = 0.31). Chronic ASA use was not associated with PEP either (aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.49-2.13), P = 0.96). Abuse of alcohol and previous endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy were protective factors against PEP, while >1 pancreatic guidewire passage, normal bilirubin values, and duration of the procedure >20 minutes, were risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of statins or ASA is not associated with a lower risk or a milder course of PEP.

Pancreatic stents to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) plays a major role in the investigation and treatment of pancreaticobiliary diseases. However, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is a severe adverse effect. Prior meta-analyses have shown that prophylactic PS was useful for preventing PEP. However, abstract reports and patients who underwent endoscopic ampullectomy were included in the previous analyses. In addition, two meta-analyses involved non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The efficacy of PS for preventing severe PEP was different in each meta-analysis. Therefore, we performed the current meta-analysis, which included only full-text articles, and added new findings.

AIM

To reveal the efficacy of prophylactic pancreatic stent (PS) placement for preventing PEP.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases for related RCTs. Among the reports retrieved, 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis. All full-text articles were published between 1993 and 2016. A total of 1475 patients were enrolled in the included studies; of these patients, 734 had a PS inserted, and 741 did not have a PS inserted. PEP and severe PEP occurrence were evaluated in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

PEP was observed in all studies and occurred in 39 (5.3%) patients who received a PS. On the other hand, PEP occurred in 141 (19%) patients who did not receive a PS. The occurrence of PEP was significantly lower in the patients who underwent PS placement than in the patients who did not receive a PS (OR = 0.32; 95%CI: 0.23-0.45; P < 0.001). In addition, the occurrence of severe PEP was evaluated. Notably, the occurrence of severe PEP was not observed in the stent group; however, the occurrence of severe PEP was observed in 8 (1.3%) patients who did not have a PS inserted. Severe PEP occurred significantly less often in the stent group than in the no stent group (OR = 0.24; 95%CI: 0.06-0.94; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, prophylactic PS placement is useful for preventing PEP and severe PEP.