Prophylactic 5-Fr pancreatic duct stents are superior to 3-Fr stents: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Temporary prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting effectively reduces post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk patients, but the optimal stent remains unclear. We compared rate of spontaneous passage, and technical difficulty of placement for 3-Fr and 5-Fr stents. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial at a single academic medical center. Patients deemed high risk for PEP randomly received 5-Fr or 3-Fr pancreatic duct stents. Primary outcome was spontaneous stent passage by 2 weeks. Secondary outcomes were ease and time for stent placement, and number of guide wires required for the entire procedure. RESULTS: Patients (69 female [89 %]; mean age 44.9 years, standard deviation [SD] 16.8) were randomly assigned to receive 5-Fr (n = 38) and 3-Fr (n = 40) stents. Indications for stenting were similar. Seven patients in the 3-Fr group actually received a 5-Fr stent, and two in the 5-Fr group had a 3-Fr stent. Spontaneous passage or non-passage was confirmed in 64 (83 %). No statistically significant difference in spontaneous passage rates was seen (5-Fr group, 68.4 %; 3-Fr group 75.0 %; P = 0.617). Non-passage rates were 10.5 % (5-Fr group) and 10.0 % (3-Fr group) ( P = 1.00). The study was stopped after a futility analysis for the primary end point. Placement of 5-Fr stents was rated easier, at a mean score of 1.8 (5-Fr) vs. 3.4 (3-Fr), P < 0.001, with a trend towards being faster, 9.2 vs. 11.1 minutes ( P = 0.355). Fewer guide wires were required for 5-Fr stent placement, 1.5 vs. 1.9 ( P = 0.002). PEP rates did not differ ( P = 0.519). CONCLUSION: Placement of 5-Fr compared to 3-Fr pancreatic duct stents for PEP prophylaxis is easier, faster, and requires fewer wires. No statistically significant difference in spontaneous passage was found between the two sizes.

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in screening and treatment of pancreatic endocrine tumours in asymptomatic patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN) type 1 risk premature death from pancreatic endocrine tumours (PETs). Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most sensitive imaging modality for small PETs. A screening and therapeutic approach for asymptomatic patients is delineated in which EUS plays a pivotal role. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 15 patients with MEN-1 but with no symptoms of a PET. All patients underwent serum hormone measurement, including gastrin, and EUS. The findings were used to facilitate operative treatment. RESULTS: Six of 15 patients had a normal basal gastrin level and nine had a raised level. EUS demonstrated PETs in 14 patients and identified multiple lesions in 12. There was no predictive relationship between age or gastrin level and the number or size of PETs discovered. Thirteen patients have undergone enucleation or resection of PETs and two remain under observation. Nine of the 13 patients underwent transduodenal exploration to excise gastrinoma(s). One patient had lymph node metastases found at operation. There was no death. Self-limiting pancreatic fistula in five patients and biliary fistula in one. CONCLUSION: Early and aggressive screening using EUS identifies PETs in asymptomatic patients with MEN-1. Detection of tumours at an early stage, before the development of symptoms, lymph node metastases or liver metastases, may facilitate prompt surgical intervention and improve prognosis.