Influence of pancreatic duct stents of different lengths on the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis
10.3760/cma.j.cn321463-20230811-00228
- VernacularTitle:不同长度胰管支架对内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后胰腺炎发生率的影响分析
- Author:
Xixian LI
1
;
Tiantian ZHANG
;
Hui LUO
;
Gui REN
;
Xiangping WANG
;
Linhui ZHANG
;
Shuhui LIANG
;
Yanglin PAN
Author Information
1. 西安医学院，西安 710068
- Keywords:
Cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde;
Pancreatitis;
Prevention;
Pancreatic duct stent;
Length
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy
2024;41(5):384-390
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the influence of pancreatic stents of different lengths on the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP).Methods:Data of 299 patients with biliary tract diseases who received endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and 5 Fr prophylactic pancreatic stents placement at the First Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Medical University from January 2013 to January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the short-stent group (<5 cm, n=163) and the long-stent group (>5 cm, n=136). Baseline data, intraoperative procedures, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups and propensity score matching (PSM) was used for complementary analysis. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PEP. The risk factors for PEP in patients with prophylactic pancreatic stents placement was explored by logistic regression analysis . Results:The overall PEP incidence was 11.0% (33/299). There was no significant difference in the PEP incidence [11.7% (19/163) VS 10.3% (14/136), χ 2=0.140, P=0.708], moderate-to-severe PEP incidence [1.8% (3/163) VS 2.2% (3/136), χ 2=0.000, P=1.000], or spontaneous stent dislodgement rate within two weeks [81.7% (103/126) VS 78.4% (87/111), χ 2=0.421, P=0.516] between the two groups. After PSM, 123 patients were included in each group, and the overall PEP incidence was 8.9% (22/246). There was no significant difference in PEP incidence [8.9% (11/123) VS 8.9% (11/123), χ 2=0.000, P=1.000], moderate-to-severe PEP incidence [0.8% (1/123) VS 1.6% (2/123), χ 2=0.000, P=1.000], or spontaneous stent dislodgement rate within two weeks [80.6% (75/93) VS 78.6% (77/98), χ 2=0.126, P=0.722] between the two groups. Logistic regression analysis showed that normal liver function ( OR=2.36, 95% CI:1.01-5.51, P=0.046) and failed bile duct cannulation ( OR=7.51, 95% CI:2.18-25.96, P=0.001) were independent risk factors for PEP in patients with biliary tract diseases who received prophylactic pancreatic stents placement. Conclusion:Longer 5 Fr pancreatic stents (>5 cm) do not further reduce the overall risk of PEP or moderate-to-severe PEP compared with 5Fr-5 cm stent. Normal liver function and failure of bile duct intubation were independent risk factors for PEP after prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in patients with biliary diseases.
