Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai; Department of Gastroenterology, 72th Group Army Hospital, Huzhou University, Huzhou, Zhejiang Province, China.
Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2023 Jan-Feb;29(1):12-20. doi: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_311_22.
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for patients with periampullary diverticulum (PAD) remains a challenge. This study aims to investigate the factors and techniques related to successful and safe ERCP in patients with PAD.
We enrolled patients who underwent ERCP in a large tertiary center. The difficult cannulation rate, technical success rate, clinical success rate, and adverse events (AEs) rate were compared between patients with or without PAD. Three independent logistic regression models were established to identify factors and techniques associated with difficult cannulation, clinical success, and AEs.
Five thousand five hundred and ninety patients were included, of which 705 (12.6%) were diagnosed with PAD. Patients with PAD had a significantly higher difficult cannulation rate compared with patients without PAD (10.6% vs 8.0%, P < 0.0001), but the rates of technical success (clinical success (95.2% vs 95.2%, P = 0.951), and AEs (16.5% vs 14.4%, P = 0.156) were similar. Type I PAD (odds ratio [OR] = 2.114, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.05-5.25) and ERCP indication for pancreatic diseases (OR = 1.196, 95%CI: 1.053-1.261) were independently associated with difficult cannulation. Small endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) with balloon dilatation (OR = 1.581, 95%CI: 1.044-2.393) was independently associated with clinical success. Somatostatin injection showed no preventive effect on post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR = 1.144, 95%CI: 1.044-1.254). Moreover, the auxiliary cannulation techniques were safe for PAD patients.
PAD did not affect ERCP outcomes. However, the choice of techniques and AE prophylactic measures should be more specific, especially for patients with type I PAD.
对于患有壶腹周围憩室(PAD)的患者,内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)仍然是一个挑战。本研究旨在探讨与 PAD 患者 ERCP 成功和安全相关的因素和技术。
我们纳入了在一家大型三级中心接受 ERCP 治疗的患者。比较了 PAD 患者与非 PAD 患者之间的困难插管率、技术成功率、临床成功率和不良事件(AE)发生率。建立了三个独立的逻辑回归模型,以确定与困难插管、临床成功和 AE 相关的因素和技术。
共纳入 5590 名患者,其中 705 名(12.6%)被诊断为 PAD。与非 PAD 患者相比,PAD 患者的困难插管率明显更高(10.6%比 8.0%,P<0.0001),但技术成功率(临床成功率(95.2%比 95.2%,P=0.951)和 AE 发生率(16.5%比 14.4%,P=0.156)相似。I 型 PAD(比值比[OR] = 2.114,95%置信区间[CI]:1.05-5.25)和 ERCP 胰腺疾病适应证(OR = 1.196,95%CI:1.053-1.261)是困难插管的独立相关因素。小的内镜下括约肌切开术(EST)联合球囊扩张(OR = 1.581,95%CI:1.044-2.393)与临床成功独立相关。生长抑素注射对 ERCP 后胰腺炎无预防作用(OR = 1.144,95%CI:1.044-1.254)。此外,辅助插管技术对 PAD 患者是安全的。
PAD 并不影响 ERCP 结果。然而,技术的选择和 AE 预防措施应该更加具体,特别是对于 I 型 PAD 患者。