Rise in First-Time ERCP For Benign Indications >1 Year After Cholecystectomy Is Associated With Worse Outcomes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Greater availability of less invasive biliary imaging to rule out choledocholithiasis should reduce the need for diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients who have a remote history of cholecystectomy. The primary aims were to determine the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of individuals who undergo first-time ERCP >1 year after cholecystectomy (late-ERCP). METHODS: Data from a commercial insurance claim database (Optum Clinformatics) identified 583,712 adults who underwent cholecystectomy, 4274 of whom underwent late-ERCP, defined as first-time ERCP for nonmalignant indications >1 year after cholecystectomy. Outcomes were exposure and temporal trends in late-ERCP, biliary imaging utilization, and post-ERCP outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine patient characteristics associated with undergoing late-ERCP. RESULTS: Despite a temporal increase in the use of noninvasive biliary imaging (35.9% in 2004 to 65.6% in 2021; P < .001), the rate of late-ERCP increased 8-fold (0.5-4.2/1000 person-years from 2005 to 2021; P < .001). Although only 44% of patients who underwent late-ERCP had gallstone removal, there were high rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis (7.1%), hospitalization (13.1%), and new chronic opioid use (9.7%). Factors associated with late-ERCP included concomitant disorder of gut-brain interaction (odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.88-6.91) and metabolic dysfunction steatotic liver disease (OR, 3.27; 95% CI, 2.79-3.55) along with use of anxiolytic (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 3.19-3.58), antispasmodic (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.72), and chronic opioids (OR, 6.24; 95% CI, 5.79-6.52). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of late-ERCP postcholecystectomy is increasing significantly, particularly in patients with comorbidities associated with disorder of gut-brain interaction and mimickers of choledocholithiasis. Late-ERCPs are associated with disproportionately higher rates of adverse events, including initiation of chronic opioid use.

Characteristics of Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Sphincter of Oddi Disorders.

The concept that sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) can cause attacks of biliary-type pain in postcholecystectomy patients and those with unexplained recurrent acute pancreatitis, and that endoscopic sphincterotomy can ameliorate symptoms, remains unproven. The Evaluating Predictors and Interventions in Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction (EPISOD) study of patients without objective evidence for biliary obstruction showed no difference in outcomes between those who underwent sphincterotomy or sham treatment.1 To date, there have been no studies examining the characteristics of patients who still are being offered endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for SOD since the EPISOD publication, although the absolute number appears to have declined.2.

Comparison of Urologist- vs Gastroenterologist-Directed Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Pancreaticolithiasis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for pancreaticolithiasis is most commonly performed by urologists. We investigated the effects of transitioning from urologist- to gastroenterologist-directed ESWL on case complexity, process measures, and duct clearance. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent ESWL for pancreaticolithiasis from 2014 through 2019 at a single center. We collected demographic, clinical, radiographic, and procedural data in duplicate and compared case complexity and process measures between the periods the procedure was performed by urologists (January 2014 through February 2017; 18 patients, 0.47 patients/month) vs gastroenterologists (March 2017 through December 2019; 61 patients; 1.79 patients/month). We also compared data on pancreatic duct stone characteristics and technical success (duct clearance, determined by imaging analysis). RESULTS: There were no differences in patient demographics, comorbidities, pancreatic stone morphology, or time from referral to ESWL during the period the procedure was performed by urologists vs gastroenterologists. Patients received a higher mean number of ESWL shocks per session during the gastroenterology period (4341) than during the urology period (3117) (P < .001). A higher proportion of patients underwent same-session endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during the gastroenterology time period (66%) than the urology time period (6%) (P < .001). A higher proportion of patients had partial or complete duct clearance during the gastroenterology period (71%) than during the urology period (44%) (P = .04). During the urology period, a higher proportion of patients were hospitalized following ESWL, although there was no difference in captured adverse events between the periods. CONCLUSIONS: Transition from urologist- to gastroenterologist-directed ESWL did not affect case complexity or wait times for ESWL. However, the transition did result in increased procedure volume, more shocks per ESWL session, and improved duct clearance.

Development and initial validation of an instrument for video-based assessment of technical skill in ERCP.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The accurate measurement of technical skill in ERCP is essential for endoscopic training, quality assurance, and coaching of this procedure. Hypothesizing that technical skill can be measured by analysis of ERCP videos, we aimed to develop and validate a video-based ERCP skill assessment tool. METHODS: Based on review of procedural videos, the task of ERCP was deconstructed into its basic components by an expert panel that developed an initial version of the Bethesda ERCP Skill Assessment Tool (BESAT). Subsequently, 2 modified Delphi panels and 3 validation exercises were conducted with the goal of iteratively refining the tool. Fully crossed generalizability studies investigated the contributions of assessors, ERCP performance, and technical elements to reliability. RESULTS: Twenty-nine technical elements were initially generated from task deconstruction. Ultimately, after iterative refinement, the tool comprised 6 technical elements and 11 subelements. The developmental process achieved consistent improvements in the performance characteristics of the tool with every iteration. For the most recent version of the tool, BESAT-v4, the generalizability coefficient (a reliability index) was .67. Most variance in BESAT scores (43.55%) was attributed to differences in endoscopists' skill, indicating that the tool can reliably differentiate between endoscopists based on video analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Video-based assessment of ERCP skill appears to be feasible with a novel instrument that demonstrates favorable validity evidence. Future steps include determining whether the tool can discriminate between endoscopists of varying experience levels and predict important outcomes in clinical practice.

The EPISOD study: long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The EPISOD (Evaluating Predictors and Interventions in Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction) study randomized patients with post-cholecystectomy pain, and little or no objective evidence for biliary obstruction, to sphincterotomy or sham intervention. Results at 1 year showed no benefit for the active treatment. We now report the outcomes at up to 5 years. METHODS: One hundred three patients completing 1 year, and still blinded to treatment allocation, were enrolled and followed by phone every 6 months for a median of 58 months (range, 17-71 months). Their success was assessed at the final visit by 2 criteria: (1) a low pain score (Recurrent Abdominal Pain and Disability instrument [RAPID] <6) and (2) much or very much improved on the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) questionnaire (both with no repeat intervention and not taking narcotics). RESULTS: By the RAPID criteria, success rates for the patients in the sphincterotomy and sham arms were similar: 26/65 (40%) versus 16/38 (42%), respectively. However, by the PGIC criteria, actively treated patients fared worse: 16/43 (37%) versus 16/22 (73%). A total of 75 patients underwent active treatment during the entire study. Their success rate by the RAPID criteria was 31 (41%) compared with 16 (62%) who had no active treatment at any time. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm our initial report that endoscopic sphincterotomy is no better than sham intervention in these patients (and, by some criteria, worse), and that ERCP can no longer be recommended. The patients have genuine and often severe symptoms, and further research is needed to establish effective management. (Clinical trial registration number: 00688662 05/3/2008.).

Trends in the timing of inpatient ERCP relative to cholecystectomy: a nationwide database studied longitudinally.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: ERCP has largely replaced common bile duct exploration for therapy of common bile duct pathology, yet its use as a purely diagnostic test has declined. Among inpatients, we hypothesized that timing between ERCP and cholecystectomy (CCY) has changed. The objectives were to measure temporal trends in the timing between inpatient ERCP and CCY and to examine factors associated with delays. METHODS: We used the National Inpatient Sample between 1998 and 2013 to classify admissions for gallstone-related diagnoses undergoing inpatient CCY and ERCP by timing relative to CCY: within (±) 1 day, ≥2 days before, and ≥2 days after. Logistic regression and Poisson regression were used to determine pattern utilization and association of ERCP timing on hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2013, the proportion of admissions for CCY associated with same-stay ERCP increased (14.5% in 1998 to 17.3% in 2013, P < .001), and approximately two-thirds of ERCPs were performed within 1 day of CCY. After adjusting for covariates, the mean adjusted length of stay remained significantly shorter for patients who underwent CCY within 1 day of ERCP (5.13 vs 7.48 days for ERCP ≥2 days before and vs 7.41 days for ERCP ≥2 days after, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of inpatient ERCP in conjunction with CCY has increased minimally between 1998 and 2013, whereas length of stay has decreased. ERCPs performed within 1 day of CCY were associated with shorter hospital length of stay, suggesting delays between inpatient procedures should be minimized unless medical comorbidities preclude it.

How much pain relief do patients expect after cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy is a common operation, increasingly performed, in the USA, for "functional gall bladder disorder" (FGBD). Outcomes of these surgeries are uncertain. In planning a study of FGBD, we needed to define the best outcome measures. METHODS: We sought the opinions of patients (52 with FGBD and 100 with stones for comparison) coming to cholecystectomy. They were asked to respond in four ways about the minimum benefit they would count as "success." RESULTS: We found that most patients do not expect cholecystectomy to relieve their pain-related disability completely, regardless of the presence or absence of stones. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies of the success of surgery should use patient-centered outcome assessments, such as PGIC (patient's global impression of change), in addition to objective measures of the impact of treatment on key symptoms, such as pain.

A survey of credentialing for ERCP in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There are limited data measuring the variability in standards used by hospitals for credentialing physicians to ERCP in the United States. METHODS: We performed an electronic survey of U.S. gastroenterologists. RESULTS: Among 1126 respondents, 21% reported that their hospitals had no written guidelines for initial credentialing, and 59% reported that their hospitals had no written guidelines for repeat credentialing. Among those with guidelines, less than half had any of the criteria recommended by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to improve the credentialing process to enhance practice and to protect patients. An easy-to-use national system for recording and reporting ERCP quality data, like that of the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, is needed.

An assessment of existing risk stratification guidelines for the evaluation of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated that existing risk stratification guidelines for the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis lack accuracy, leading to the overutilization of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance characteristics of published guidelines in predicting choledocholithiasis and to determine the impact of laboratory trends on diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: We identified patients with suspected choledocholithiasis hospitalized over a 5-year period (2009-2014) at a tertiary care academic medical center. Among eligible patients, we assessed the performance characteristics of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines predicting the presence of choledocholithiasis, confirmed by endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance cholangiography, ERCP, or intra-operative cholangiography. We also evaluated whether a second set of liver function tests improved the accuracy of the guidelines. RESULTS: On presentation, 71 of the 173 eligible patients (41.4 %) met ASGE high-probability criteria for choledocholithiasis. Of these, only 39 (54.9 %) were found to have a choledocholithiasis on confirmatory testing. Conversely, of the 102 patients (58.6 %) who were classified as low or intermediate probability, 32 (31.4 %) had choledocholithiasis. Overall, the accuracy of the guidelines was 63 % (sensitivity 54.9 %; specificity 68.6 %). Incorporating a second set of laboratory tests did not improve accuracy (62.7 %), and a significant decline in liver function tests did not reliably predict spontaneous stone passage. CONCLUSIONS: Existing guidelines performed suboptimally for predicting choledocholithiasis in our patient population, similar to other validation studies. These findings further underscore the importance of developing alternate risk stratification tools for choledocholithiasis, aiming to minimize unnecessary diagnostic ERCP.

Duloxetine for the Treatment of Patients with Suspected Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the tolerability and efficacy of duloxetine in patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). METHODS: An open-label, single-center, 12-week trial of duloxetine 60 mg once daily was conducted in 20 patients with suspected SOD. All patients were evaluated by expert pancreato-biliary specialists. The primary outcome measure was a Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale. Secondary measures included the pain burden, assessed by the Recurrent Abdominal Pain Intensity and Disability scale, the Short-Form Health Survey, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. A positive clinical response was defined as a PGIC score of much or very much improved at 3 months and was estimated using a two-sided 90 % confidence interval. The primary outcome was analyzed using a one-sample binomial test at a significance level of 0.10. RESULTS: Of the 20 screened patients, 18 were enrolled; 14 completed at least one post-baseline evaluation; and 10 patients completed the third month endpoint visit. Patients missing the third month visit were considered non-responders for the primary outcome. Response rates were 90 % for study completers (n = 10; 90 % CI 74-100; p = 0.02) and 64 % for patients who completed at least one post-baseline evaluation (n = 14; 90 % CI 43-85; p = 0.42). Seven patients did not complete the study due to adverse events (mostly fatigue and nausea). CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine showed an indication of efficacy in the treatment of pain in patients with suspected SOD, but adverse events limited its use. These preliminary, open-label results justify definitive placebo-controlled trials.

Evaluation of Pharmacologic Prevention of Pancreatitis After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is controversy over the efficacy of pharmacologic agents for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (PEP). We performed a systematic review of PEP pharmacoprevention to evaluate safety and efficacy. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the literature for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of PEP pharmacoprevention through February 2014. After identifying relevant studies, 2 reviewers each extracted information on study characteristics, clinical outcomes, and risk of bias. A research classification scale was developed to identify pharmacologic agents ready for clinical use, agents for which a confirmatory RCT should be considered a high priority, agents for which exploratory studies are still necessary, and agents for which additional research should be of low priority. Clinical and research recommendations for each agent were made by consensus after considering research classification results and other important factors such as magnitude of benefit, safety, availability, and cost. RESULTS: After screening 851 citations and 263 potentially relevant articles, 2 reviewers identified 85 RCTs and 28 meta-analyses that were eligible. On the basis of these studies, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were found to be appropriate for clinical use, especially for high-risk cases. Sublingual nitroglycerin, bolus-administered somatostatin, and nafamostat were found to be promising agents for which confirmatory research is warranted. Additional research was found to be required to justify confirmatory RCTs for topical epinephrine, aggressive intravenous fluids, gabexate, ulinastatin, secretin, and antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of a systematic review, NSAIDs are appropriate for use in prevention of PEP, especially for high-risk cases. Additional research is necessary to clarify the role of other pharmacologic agents. These findings could inform future research and guide clinical decision-making and policy.

Incidence and predictors of post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction undergoing biliary or dual sphincterotomy: results from the EPISOD prospective multicenter randomized sham-controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a significant and potentially life-threatening adverse event and is common in patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). Here we aimed to identify predictors of the risk in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Evaluating Predictors and Interventions in SOD (EPISOD) study prospectively enrolled 214 post-cholecystectomy patients with SOD type III in seven US centers. Patients were randomized, using a 2:1 allocation, to sphincterotomy or sham procedure, irrespective of the results of sphincter of Oddi manometry. Patients in the sphincterotomy arm who had elevated pancreatic sphincter pressure were randomized to biliary only or to dual (biliary and pancreatic) sphincterotomy. All but one patient received prophylactic pancreatic stents, but none received pharmacological prophylaxis. Post ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) was defined as acute pancreatitis within the subsequent 7 days. Blinded research coordinators at each site called patients at 1 week post-procedure. RESULTS: PEP occurred in 26 patients, in 10.6 % (15/141) in the sphincterotomy arm and 15.1 % (11/73) in the sham arm; unadjusted relative risk 0.71 (95 % confidence interval [95 %CI] 0.34 - 1.46). PEP rate was not significantly different in patients who received sphincterotomy compared with those undergoing sham treatment. In addition, the proportion was not statistically different in those who received biliary sphincterotomy alone (12/94; 12.8 % [95 %CI 6.0 % - 19.5 %]) compared with dual sphincterotomy (3/47; 6.4 % [95 %CI 0.0 % - 13.4 %]). Multivariate analysis identified an interaction between duration of ERCP and sedation type (P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: The performance of biliary or dual sphincterotomy does not increase the risk of PEP in patients suspected of SOD. However, the high rate of PEP in patients with suspected SOD, despite pancreatic stenting in expert centers, is confirmed in this prospective study. The combined effect of duration of ERCP and sedation type on the development of PEP should be further explored.Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT00688662.

Have you had an ERCP lawsuit yet?

Endoscopic Retrograde CholangioPancreatography (ERCP) is the most dangerous procedure performed regularly by gastroenterologists. While serious adverse events cannot all be avoided, there are many ways to reduce the risk of their resulting in a lawsuit. The most important is for the endoscopist to communicate carefully and fully with patients and family members before the procedure-providing truly informed consent-and afterwards, especially when there is a poor outcome.

Can patient and pain characteristics predict manometric sphincter of Oddi dysfunction in patients with clinically suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction?

BACKGROUND: Biliopancreatic-type postcholecystectomy pain, without significant abnormalities on imaging and laboratory test results, has been categorized as "suspected" sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) type III. Clinical predictors of "manometric" SOD are important to avoid unnecessary ERCP, but are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess which clinical factors are associated with abnormal sphincter of Oddi manometry (SOM). DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional. SETTING: Tertiary. PATIENTS: A total of 214 patients with suspected SOD type III underwent ERCP and pancreatic SOM (pSOM; 85% dual SOM), at 7 U.S. centers (from August 2008 to March 2012) as part of a randomized trial. INTERVENTIONS: Pain and gallbladder descriptors, psychosocial/functional disorder questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Abnormal SOM findings. Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed associations between clinical characteristics and outcome. RESULTS: The cohort was 92% female with a mean age of 38 years. Baseline pancreatic enzymes were increased in 5%; 9% had minor liver enzyme abnormalities. Pain was in the right upper quadrant (RUQ) in 90% (48% also epigastric); 51% reported daily abdominal discomfort. Fifty-six took narcotics an average of 33 days (of the past 90 days). Less than 10% experienced depression or anxiety. Functional disorders were common. At ERCP, 64% had abnormal pSOM findings (34% both sphincters, 21% biliary normal), 36% had normal pSOM findings, and 75% had at least abnormal 1 sphincter. Demographic factors, gallbladder pathology, increased pancreatobiliary enzymes, functional disorders, and pain patterns did not predict abnormal SOM findings. Anxiety, depression, and poorer coping were more common in patients with normal SOM findings (not significant on multivariate analysis). LIMITATIONS: Generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Patient and pain factors and psychological comorbidity do not predict SOM results at ERCP in suspected type III SOD. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00688662.).

Standardized endoscopic reporting.

The need for standardized language is increasingly obvious, also within gastrointestinal endoscopy. A systematic approach to the description of endoscopic findings is vital for the development of a universal language, but systematic also means structured, and structure is inherently a challenge when presented as an alternative to the normal spoken word. The efforts leading to the "Minimal Standard Terminology" (MST) of gastrointestinal endoscopy offer a standardized model for description of endoscopic findings. With a combination of lesion descriptors and descriptor attributes, this system gives guidance to appropriate descriptions of lesions and also has a normative effect on endoscopists in training. The endoscopic report includes a number of items not related to findings per se, but to other aspects of the procedure, formal, technical, and medical. While the MST sought to formulate minimal lists for some of these aspects (e.g. indications), they are not all well suited for the inherent structure of the MST, and many are missing. Thus, the present paper offers a recommended standardization also of the administrative, technical, and other "peri-endoscopic" elements of the endoscopic report; important also are the numerous quality assurance initiatives presently emerging. Finally, the image documentation of endoscopic findings is becoming more obvious-and accessible. Thus, recommendations for normal procedures as well as for focal and diffuse pathology are presented. The recommendations are "minimal," meaning that expansions and subcategories will likely be needed in most centers. Still, with a stronger common grounds, communication within endoscopy will still benefit.

Effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy for suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction on pain-related disability following cholecystectomy: the EPISOD randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Abdominal pain after cholecystectomy is common and may be attributed to sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Management often involves endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with manometry and sphincterotomy. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether endoscopic sphincterotomy reduces pain and whether sphincter manometric pressure is predictive of pain relief. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, sham-controlled, randomized trial involving 214 patients with pain after cholecystectomy without significant abnormalities on imaging or laboratory studies, and no prior sphincter treatment or pancreatitis randomly assigned (August 6, 2008-March 23, 2012) to undergo sphincterotomy or sham therapy at 7 referral medical centers. One-year follow-up was blinded. The final follow-up visit was March 21, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: After ERCP, patients were randomized 2:1 to sphincterotomy (n = 141) or sham (n = 73) irrespective of manometry findings. Those randomized to sphincterotomy with elevated pancreatic sphincter pressures were randomized again (1:1) to biliary or to both biliary and pancreatic sphincterotomies. Seventy-two were entered into an observational study with conventional ERCP managemeny. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Success of treatment was defined as less than 6 days of disability due to pain in the prior 90 days both at months 9 and 12 after randomization, with no narcotic use and no further sphincter intervention. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (37%; 95% CI, 25.9%-48.1%) in the sham treatment group vs 32 (23%; 95% CI, 15.8%-29.6%) in the sphincterotomy group experienced successful treatment (adjusted risk difference, -15.6%; 95% CI, -28.0% to -3.3%; P = .01). Of the patients with pancreatic sphincter hypertension, 14 (30%; 95% CI, 16.7%-42.9%) who underwent dual sphincterotomy and 10 (20%; 95% CI, 8.7%-30.5%) who underwent biliary sphincterotomy alone experienced successful treatment. Thirty-seven treated patients (26%; 95% CI,19%-34%) and 25 patients (34%; 95% CI, 23%-45%) in the sham group underwent repeat ERCP interventions (P = .22). Manometry results were not associated with the outcome. No clinical subgroups appeared to benefit from sphincterotomy more than others. Pancreatitis occurred in 15 patients (11%) after primary sphincterotomies and in 11 patients (15%) in the sham group. Of the nonrandomized patients in the observational study group, 5 (24%; 95% CI, 6%-42%) who underwent biliary sphincterotomy, 12 (31%; 95% CI, 16%-45%) who underwent dual sphincterotomy, and 2 (17%; 95% CI, 0%-38%) who did not undergo sphincterotomy had successful treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients with abdominal pain after cholecystectomy undergoing ERCP with manometry, sphincterotomy vs sham did not reduce disability due to pain. These findings do not support ERCP and sphincterotomy for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00688662.