Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, 170 Hyeonchung-ro, Nam-gu, Daegu, 42415, Korea.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2023 Apr 6;23(1):115. doi: 10.1186/s12876-023-02701-x.
There have been no previous studies that directly compared outcomes between cap-fitted forward-viewing and side viewing endoscopes (SE). This study aimed to compare the technical success rate and occurrence of adverse events between the side viewing and cap-fitted forward-viewing endoscope (CE) groups among patients with Billroth II anatomy who underwent ERCP.
The medical records of patients with a previous history of subtotal gastrectomy using Billroth II reconstruction who underwent ERCP at Yeungnam University Hospital between January 2004 and December 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into CE and SE group. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to minimize selection bias.
Propensity score matching resulted in 55 matched pairs for further analysis. Patients' characteristics were comparable in the matched cohorts. Final success rate of selective bile duct cannulation was not significantly different between the SE and CE groups (98.2% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.308). The complete CBD stone removal rate in CBD stone and successful biliary drainage rate in malignant biliary obstruction were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of total ERCP-related adverse events was higher in the CE group than in the SE group, but the difference was not statistically significant (10.9% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.507). Among adverse events, the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis showed higher tendency in the CE group than in the SE group (10.9% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.297).
In conclusion, CE seems to be equally effective as SE for ERCP in patients with Billroth II anatomy. However, attention should be paid to development of post ERCP complications, especially pancreatitis, when performed by CE.
之前没有研究直接比较带帽前视和侧视内镜(SE)在结局方面的差异。本研究旨在比较 Billroth II 解剖患者接受 ERCP 时侧视与带帽前视内镜(CE)组之间的技术成功率和不良事件的发生情况。
回顾性分析 2004 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月期间在延世大学医院接受 ERCP 的既往行胃大部切除术后采用 Billroth II 重建的患者的病历。患者分为 CE 和 SE 组。采用倾向评分匹配分析以尽量减少选择偏倚。
倾向评分匹配后,有 55 对患者进行了进一步分析。匹配队列中患者的特征具有可比性。选择性胆管插管的最终成功率在 SE 和 CE 组之间无显著差异(98.2% vs. 94.5%,p=0.308)。CE 组和 SE 组在胆总管结石患者中完全清除胆总管结石的比例和恶性胆道梗阻患者中成功胆道引流的比例无显著差异。CE 组的总 ERCP 相关不良事件发生率高于 SE 组,但差异无统计学意义(10.9% vs. 7.3%,p=0.507)。在不良事件中,CE 组的 ERCP 后胰腺炎发生率高于 SE 组,但差异无统计学意义(10.9% vs. 5.5%,p=0.297)。
总之,在 Billroth II 解剖患者中,CE 似乎与 SE 一样适用于 ERCP。然而,在使用 CE 进行操作时,应注意 ERCP 后并发症的发生,尤其是胰腺炎。