Indomethacin for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis: Is it the magic bullet?

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: Risk factors and predictors of severity

AIM

To detect risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and investigate the predictors of its severity.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent ERCP. Pre-ERCP data, intraoperative data, and post-ERCP data were collected.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 996 patients. Their mean age at presentation was 58.42 (± 14.72) years, and there were 454 male and 442 female patients. Overall, PEP occurred in 102 (10.2%) patients of the study population; eighty (78.4%) cases were of mild to moderate degree, while severe pancreatitis occurred in 22 (21.6%) patients. No hospital mortality was reported for any of PEP patients during the study duration. Age less than 35 years (P = 0.001, OR = 0.035), narrower common bile duct (CBD) diameter (P = 0.0001) and increased number of pancreatic cannulations (P = 0.0001) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP.

CONCLUSION

PEP is the most frequent and devastating complication after ERCP. Age less than 35 years, narrower median CBD diameter and increased number of pancreatic cannulations are independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP. Patients with these risk factors are candidates for prophylactic and preventive measures against PEP.

Management and Outcome of Borderline Common Bile Duct with Stones: A Prospective Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

Management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) in patients with borderline CBD presents a surgical challenge. The aim of this study was to compare conservative treatment with endoscopic stone extraction for the treatment of borderline CBD with stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial includes patients with CBDS in borderline CBD (CBD <10 mm) associated with gallbladder stones who were treated with conservative treatment or endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC). The primary outcome was successful CBD clearance. The secondary outcomes were the overall complications, cost, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

LC and IOC revealed complete clearance of CBDS in 48 (96%) cases in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) group (52% of patients by ERCP, and 44% of patient passed the stone spontaneously), and in the remaining two patients, the CBDS was removed by transcystic exploration. In the conservative group, LC and IOC revealed complete clearance of CBDS in 90% of cases, and in the remaining 10% of patients, the CBDS was removed by transcystic exploration. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is noticed significantly in the ERCP group (2 [4%] versus 8 [16%]; P = .04). The average net cost was significantly higher in the ERCP group. Recurrent biliary symptoms developed significantly in the ERCP group after 1 year (10% versus 0%; P = .02) in the form of recurrent cholangititis and recurrent CBDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of CBDS in patients with borderline CBD represents a surgical challenge. Borderline CBD increases the technical difficulty of ERCP and increases the risk of PEP. Conservative management of CBDS in borderline CBD not only avoids the risks inherent in ERCP and unnecessary preoperative ERCP, but it is also effective in clearing CBDS. The hepatobiliary surgeon should consider a conservative line of treatment in CBDS in borderline CBD in order to decrease the cost and avoid unnecessary ERCP.