Utilization pattern of prophylactic measures for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a National Survey Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most frequent adverse event of ERCP. Various prophylactic measures are endorsed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy to both lower the incidence of PEP and to decrease its severity. The extent to which these interventions are practiced throughout the United States is unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the utilization pattern of various PEP measures and determine factors that affect utilization of these measures. METHODS: A 27-question electronic survey was distributed using a cloud-based program (Qualtrics). The questions assessed ERCP training, practice setting, experience, practice patterns, and perceptions for PEP prophylaxis interventions. Endoscopists with practices based in the United States listed in the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy member directory received a survey invitation via e-mail. The invitation outlined the study and contained a link with instructions to complete the voluntary survey if they had an active ERCP practice. Data were de-identified for the purposes of analysis. RESULTS: Of survey respondents (N = 319), 46% reported therapeutic endoscopy fellowship training and 37% practiced in teaching programs. Annualized ERCP volume of >100 cases per year were reported by 47%, with pancreatic ERCP comprising ≤5% of procedure volume reported by the majority of respondents (61%). The majority of respondents used prophylactic pancreatic stent (PPS), and 54% reported frequent use during high-risk ERCP. The most common indications for PPS were difficult cannulation, to assist biliary access, and multiple pancreatic duct injections. Most respondents reported frequent use of indomethacin (89%). Of physicians who did not use PPS, use of indomethacin was the most common reason (80%). Variables associated with frequent use of PPS were ERCP fellowship training (P ≤ .001), practice at a teaching program (P ≤ .001), <10 years in practice (P = .005), higher procedure volume (P ≤ .001), and higher proportion of pancreatic cases (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians with higher annual ERCP volume, who teach at hospital-based ERCP practices, and who regularly perform pancreatic ERCP are more likely to use PPS. Therapeutic ERCP fellowship training and recent entry into practice were also associated with PPS utilization. Indomethacin use seems to be more frequent than PPS. Our findings suggest that indomethacin is supplanting PPS as the preferred method of PEP prophylaxis.

Timing of ERCP after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for large main pancreatic duct stones.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is performed to fragment large main pancreatic duct (MPD) stones in symptomatic patients. Subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often performed to clear the stone fragments. Edema of surrounding tissue after ESWL theoretically affects the ability to perform ERCP. However, the optimal timing of ERCP after ESWL is not clearly defined. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of same-day ERCP after ESWL and to determine if the timing of ERCP after ESWL affects outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients from January, 2013 to September, 2019 who received ESWL for MPD stones at our center. Included patients received subsequent same-day ERCP under the same general anesthesia session or later session ERCP (1-30 days after ESWL). Demographics, anatomical findings, history, and outcomes were collected. Success was defined as complete or near complete (> 80%) stone fragmentation with clearance. RESULTS: 218 patients were treated with ESWL and subsequent ERCP. 133 (61.0%) received ERCP on the same day immediately after ESWL, while 85 (39.0%) returned for ERCP at a later day (median 3.0 days after ESWL). Baseline characteristics demonstrated patients who received same-day ERCP had a higher rate of pain at baseline (94.7% vs 87.1%, p = 0.045). Main outcomes demonstrated an overall successful MPD stone clearance rate of 90.4%, with similar rates between same-day ERCP and later session ERCP (91.7% vs 88.2%, p = 0.394). Additionally, successful cannulation at ERCP, adverse events, and post-procedure admission rates were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Delaying ERCP to allow peripancreatic tissue recovery after ESWL does not affect outcomes. Same-day ERCP after ESWL is safe and effective.

Microbiology of bile aspirates obtained at ERCP in patients with suspected acute cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: The cornerstone of treatment for acute cholangitis is source control with biliary drainage and early antibiotics. The primary aim of this study was to describe the microbiology of bile aspirate pathogens obtained at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients suspected of having acute cholangitis. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study, patients were included if a bile aspirate was collected at ERCP for suspicion of acute cholangitis, from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2016. RESULTS: There were 721 ERCP procedures for suspected acute cholangitis with bile culture results, with 662 positive bile cultures (91.8 %). Pathogens included: Enterococcus species (spp.) 448 (67.7 %); Klebsiella spp. 295 (44.6 %); Escherichia coli 269 (40.6 %); Pseudomonas spp. 52 (7.9 %); and anaerobes 64 (9.7 %). Susceptibility of Klebsiella pneumoniae and E.coli isolates to ciprofloxacin was 88 % and 64 %, respectively. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases and carbapenem resistance were found in 7.9 % and 3.6 % of Enterobacteriaceae, respectively. There were 437 concurrent blood cultures, of which 174 were positive (39.8 % of cultures drawn). Prior biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) was evident in 459 ERCP cases (63.7 %), and was associated with increased frequency of Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacter spp., and Enterococcus spp. Prior biliary ES significantly increased the probability of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE). CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of bile cultures (91.8 %) were positive. The susceptibilities of E.coli and K.pneumoniae to ciprofloxacin are lower than historically noted. A notable portion of cultures contained pathogenic drug-resistant organisms. Prior biliary ES is associated with a higher frequency of certain organisms and higher frequency of VRE.

A comparative study between single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of large main pancreatic duct stones.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management of large main pancreatic ductal (MPD) stones often require treatment with lithotripsy. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been the mainstay therapy, and single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal (intracorporeal) lithotripsy (SOPIL) is an emerging technique. However, no comparative studies between these techniques exist. We therefore aimed to compare ESWL to SOPIL for the treatment of large MPD stones. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing patients who were treated with ESWL or SOPIL from September 2013 to September 2019 at a single tertiary center. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with technical success and efficient stone clearance (≤ 2 procedures to clear stones). RESULTS: There were 240 patients who were treated with ESWL and 18 treated with SOPIL. The overall technical success rate of stone clearance was 224/258 (86.8%), which was similar between the ESWL and SOPIL groups (86.7% vs 88.9%, p = 1.000). A SOPIL approach required fewer total procedures (1.6 ± 0.6 vs 3.1 ± 1.5, p < 0.001) and less aggregate procedure time (101.6 ± 68.2 vs 191.8 ± 111.6 min, p = 0.001). Adverse event rates were similar between the groups (6.3% vs 5.6%, p = 1.000). The use of SOPIL was independently associated with greater efficiency compared to ESWL (OR 5.241 [1.348-20.369], p = 0.017). Stone size > 10 mm was associated with less efficient stone clearance (OR 0.484 [0.256-0.912], p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Both ESWL and SOPIL are safe and effective endoscopic adjunct modalities for treating large pancreatic duct stones. SOPIL is an emerging alternative to ESWL that is potentially more efficient for lithotripsy and MPD stone clearance.

Outcomes in Endoscopic and Operative Transgastric Pancreatic Debridement.

OBJECTIVES: Select patients with anatomically favorable walled off pancreatic necrosis may be treated by endoscopic (Endo-TGD) or operative (OR-TGD) transgastric debridement (TGD). We compared our experience with these 2 approaches. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Select necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) patients are suitable for TGD which may be accomplished endoscopically or surgically. Limited experience exists contrasting these techniques exists. METHODS: Patients undergoing Endo-TGD and OR-TGD at a single, high-volume pancreatic center between 2008 and 2019 were identified from a prospective database. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and outcomes of these 2 groups were compared. RESULTS: Among 498 NP patients undergoing necrosis intervention, 160 (32%) had TGD: 59 Endo-TGD and 101 OR-TGD. The groups were statistically similar in age, comorbidity, pancreatitis etiology, necrosis anatomy, pancreatitis severity, and timing of TGD from pancreatitis insult. OR-TGD required 1.1 ±â€Š0.5 and Endo-TGD 3.0 ±â€Š2.0 debridements/patient. Fewer hospital readmissions and repeat necrosis interventions, and shorter total inpatient length of stay were observed in OR-TGD patients. New-onset organ failure [Endo-TGD (13%); OR-TGD (13%); P = 1.0] was similar between groups. Hospital length of stay after TGD was significantly longer in patients undergoing Endo-TGD (13.8 ±â€Š20.8 days) compared to OR-TGD (9.4 ±â€Š6.1 days; P = 0.047). Mortality was 7% in Endo-TGD and 1% in OR-TGD (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Operative and endoscopic transgastric debridement achieve necrosis resolution with different temporal and procedural profiles. Clear multidisciplinary communication is essential to determine appropriate approach to individual necrotizing pancreatitis patients.

Combined Versus Separate Sessions of Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for the Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma with Biliary Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: A single-procedure session combining EUS and ERCP (EUS/ERCP) for tissue diagnosis and biliary decompression for pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is technically feasible. While EUS/ERCP may offer expedience and convenience over an approach of separate procedures sessions, the technical success and risk for complications of a combined approach is unclear. AIMS: Compare the effectiveness and safety of EUS/ERCP versus separate session approaches for PDAC. METHODS: Study patients (2010-2015) were identified within our ERCP database. Patients were analyzed in three groups based on approach: Group A: Single-session EUS-FNA and ERCP (EUS/ERCP), Group B: EUS-FNA followed by separate, subsequent ERCP (EUS then ERCP), and Group C: ERCP with/without separate EUS (ERCP ± EUS). Rates of technical success, number of procedures, complications, and time to initiation of PDAC therapies were compared between groups. RESULTS: Two hundred patients met study criteria. EUS/ERCP approach (Group A) had a longer index procedure duration (median 66 min, p = 0.023). No differences were observed between Group A versus sequential procedure approaches (Groups B and C) for complications (p = 0.109) and success of EUS-FNA (p = 0.711) and ERCP (p = 0.109). Subgroup analysis (> 2 months of follow-up, not referred to hospice, n = 126) was performed. No differences were observed for stent failure (p = 0.307) or need for subsequent procedures (p = 0.220). EUS/ERCP (Group A) was associated with a shorter time to initiation of PDAC therapies (mean, 25.2 vs 42.7 days, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: EUS/ERCP approach has comparable rates of success and complications compared to separate, sequential approaches. An EUS/ERCP approach equates to shorter time interval to initiation of PDAC therapies.

Annular pancreas: endoscopic and pancreatographic findings from a tertiary referral ERCP center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Annular pancreas is a congenital anomaly whereby pancreatic tissue encircles the duodenum. Current knowledge of endoscopic findings of annular pancreas is limited to small case series. The aim of this study was to describe the endoscopic and pancreatographic findings of patients with annular pancreas at a large tertiary care ERCP center. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study. Our Institutional Review Board-approved, prospectively collected ERCP database was queried for cases of annular pancreas. The electronic medical records were searched for patient and procedure-related data. RESULTS: From January 1, 1994, to December 31, 2016, 46 patients with annular pancreas underwent ERCP at our institution. Index ERCP was technically successful in 42 patients (91.3%), and technical success was achieved in all 46 patients (100%) after 2 attempts, when required. A duodenal narrowing or ring was found in most patients (n = 39, 84.8%), yet only 2 (4.3%) had retained gastric contents. Pancreas divisum was found in 21 patients (45.7%), 18 of which were complete divisum. Pancreatobiliary neoplasia was the indication for ERCP in 7 patients (15.2%). Pancreatographic findings consistent with chronic pancreatitis were noted in 15 patients (32.6%) at the index ERCP. CONCLUSION: This is the largest series describing the endoscopic and pancreatographic findings of patients with annular pancreas. We found that 45.7% of patients had concurrent pancreas divisum. Endoscopic therapy was successful in most patients at our institution after 1 ERCP, and in all patients after a second ERCP. Nearly one-third of patients had findings consistent with chronic pancreatitis at the time of index ERCP. It is unclear whether this may be a feature of the natural history of annular pancreas.

Short- and long-term outcomes from percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding the safety and efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension (PEG-J). We evaluated adverse events related to PEG-J and determined the clinical impact of PEG-J in those with chronic pancreatitis (CP). METHODS: This cohort study included all patients who underwent PEG-J placement in a tertiary-care academic medical center between 2010 and 2012. Main outcome measurements were (1) short- and long-term complications related to PEG-J and (2) changes in weight and hospitalizations during the 12-month period before and after PEG-J in the CP subgroup. RESULTS: Of 102 patients undergoing PEG-J placement, the overall technical success rate was 97 %. During a median follow-up period of 22 months (1-46 months, n = 90), at least one tube malfunction occurred in 52/90 (58 %; 177 episodes) after a median of 53 days (3-350 days), requiring a median of two tube replacements. Short-term (<30 days) tube malfunction occurred in 28/90 (31 %) and delayed in 24/90 (27 %); these included dislodgement (29 %), clogging (26 %) and kinking (14 %). In the CP subgroup (n = 58), mean body weight (kg) (70 vs. 71, p = 0.06) and body mass index (kg/m2, 26 vs. 27, p = 0.05) increased post-PEG-J. Mean number of hospitalizations (5 vs. 2, p < 0.0001) and inpatient days per 12 months (22 vs. 12, p = 0.005) decreased. CONCLUSIONS: While we observed no major complications related to PEG-J, half of patients had at least one episode of tube malfunction. In the CP subgroup, jejunal feeding via PEG-J significantly reduced the number of hospitalizations and inpatients days, while improving nutritional parameters.

A randomized trial of rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary research suggests that rectally administered nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may reduce the incidence of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, we assigned patients at elevated risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis to receive a single dose of rectal indomethacin or placebo immediately after ERCP. Patients were determined to be at high risk on the basis of validated patient- and procedure-related risk factors. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis, which was defined as new upper abdominal pain, an elevation in pancreatic enzymes to at least three times the upper limit of the normal range 24 hours after the procedure, and hospitalization for at least 2 nights. RESULTS: A total of 602 patients were enrolled and completed follow-up. The majority of patients (82%) had a clinical suspicion of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in 27 of 295 patients (9.2%) in the indomethacin group and in 52 of 307 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (P=0.005). Moderate-to-severe pancreatitis developed in 13 patients (4.4%) in the indomethacin group and in 27 patients (8.8%) in the placebo group (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, rectal indomethacin significantly reduced the incidence of the condition. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00820612.).

Prevalence and risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries related to endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding work-related injury among endoscopists. OBJECTIVE: To define the prevalence of endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries and their impact on clinical practice and to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with their development. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: Electronic survey of active members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy with registered e-mail addresses. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians who currently or ever performed endoscopy and responded to the survey between February 2013 and November 2013. INTERVENTION: A 25-question, self-administered, electronic survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Prevalence, location, and ramifications of work-related injuries and endoscopist characteristics and workload parameters associated with endoscopy-related injury. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 684 endoscopists. Of those, 362 (53%) experienced a musculoskeletal injury perceived definitely (n = 204) or possibly (n = 158) related to endoscopy. Factors associated with a higher rate of endoscopy-related injury included higher procedure volume (>20 cases/week; P < .001), greater number of hours per week spent performing endoscopy (>16 hours/week; P < .001), and total number of years performing endoscopy (P = .004). The most common sites of injury were neck and/or upper back (29%) and thumb (28%). Only 55% of injured endoscopists used practice modifications in response to injuries. Specific treatments included medications (57%), steroid injection (27%), physiotherapy (45%), rest (34%), splinting (23%), and surgery (13%). LIMITATIONS: Self-reported data of endoscopy-related injury. CONCLUSION: Among endoscopists there is a high prevalence of injuries definitely or potentially related to endoscopy. Higher procedure volume, more time doing endoscopy per week, and cumulative years performing endoscopy are associated with more work-related injuries.

Performance characteristics of EUS for locoregional evaluation of ampullary lesions.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of EUS in the locoregional assessment of ampullary lesions is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare EUS with ERCP and surgical pathology for the evaluation of intraductal extension and local staging of ampullary lesions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent EUS primarily for the evaluation of an ampullary lesion between 1998 and 2012. INTERVENTION: EUS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Comparison of EUS sensitivity/specificity for intraductal and local extension with ERCP and surgical pathology by using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curves and outcomes of the subgroup referred for endoscopic papillectomy. RESULTS: We identified 119 patients who underwent EUS for an ampullary lesion, of whom 99 (83%) had an adenoma or adenocarcinoma. Compared with ERCP (n = 90), the sensitivity/specificity of EUS for any intraductal extension was 56%/97% (AUROC = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.89). However, when using surgical pathology as the reference (n = 102), the sensitivity/specificity of EUS (80%/93%; AUROC = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97) and ERCP (83%/93%; AUROC = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99) were comparable. The overall accuracy of EUS for local staging was 90%. Of 58 patients referred for endoscopic papillectomy, complete resection was achieved in 53 (91%); in those having intraductal extension by EUS or ERCP, complete resection was achieved in 4 of 5 (80%) and 4 of 7 (57%), respectively. LIMITATION: Retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: EUS and ERCP perform similarly in evaluating intraductal extension of ampullary adenomas. Additionally, EUS is accurate in T-staging ampullary adenocarcinomas. Future prospective studies should evaluate whether EUS can identify characteristics of ampullary lesions that appropriately direct patients to endoscopic or surgical resection.

Endoscopic papillectomy: risk factors for incomplete resection and recurrence during long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic papillectomy is increasingly used as an alternative to surgery for ampullary adenomas and other noninvasive ampullary lesions. OBJECTIVE: To measure short-term safety and efficacy of endoscopic papillectomy, define patient and lesion characteristics associated with incomplete endoscopic resection, and measure adenoma recurrence rates during long-term follow-up. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent endoscopic papillectomy for ampullary lesions between July 1995 and June 2012. INTERVENTION: Endoscopic papillectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patient and lesion characteristics associated with incomplete endoscopic resection and ampullary adenoma-free survival analysis. RESULTS: We identified 182 patients who underwent endoscopic papillectomy, 134 (73.6%) having complete resection. Short-term adverse events occurred in 34 (18.7%). Risk factors for incomplete resection were jaundice at presentation (odds ratio [OR] 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.69; P = .009), occult adenocarcinoma (OR 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.36; P = .002), and intraductal involvement (OR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11-0.75; P = .011). The en bloc resection technique was strongly associated with a higher rate of complete resection (OR 4.05; 95% CI, 1.71-9.59; P = .001). Among patients with ampullary adenoma who had complete resection (n = 107), 16 patients (15%) developed recurrence up to 65 months after resection. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis. CONCLUSION: Jaundice at presentation, occult adenocarcinoma in the resected specimen, and intraductal involvement are associated with a lower rate of complete resection, whereas en bloc papillectomy increases the odds of complete endoscopic resection. Despite complete resection, recurrence was observed up to 5 years after papillectomy, confirming the need for long-term surveillance.

Does leaving a main pancreatic duct stent in place reduce the incidence of precut biliary sphincterotomy-associated pancreatitis? A randomized, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatitis is the most common major complication of ERCP and precut endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). Prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement has been shown to reduce the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk settings. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether leaving a main PD stent in place after precut ES would reduce the incidence and severity of PEP. DESIGN: Single-center, randomized, prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary care ERCP referral center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients who underwent ERCP with a clear indication for biliary access and standard biliary ES whereby free cannulation of the bile duct was not possible and precut ES was undertaken. INTERVENTIONS: When free bile duct cannulation for ES was not possible and selective PD cannulation was achieved, a PD stent was placed. Using the PD stent as a guide, we used a needle-knife sphincterotome to perform precut ES. The patients were then randomized to either leaving the PD stent in place for 7 to 10 days (stent group) or immediate removal after the procedure (stent removed group). The remaining patients who did not undergo selective PD cannulation and stent placement were not randomized (no stent group) and had a free-hand needle-knife ES performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patients were prospectively followed for the development of complications. Standardized criteria were used to diagnose and grade the severity of PEP. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were enrolled. The groups were similar with regard to patient demographics and patient and procedure risk factors for PEP. The overall incidence of PEP was 13.2% (20/151). It occurred in 4.3% (2/46), 21.3% (10/47), and 13.8% (8/58) of patients in the stent, stent removed, and no stent groups, respectively. The stent group had a significantly lower frequency and severity of PEP compared with the stent removed group (4.3% vs 21.3%; P = .027 for frequency and 0% vs 12.8%; P = .026 for moderate and severe pancreatitis). LIMITATIONS: Single center. Randomization scheme not optimal. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that placing and maintaining a PD stent for needle-knife precut ES reduces the frequency and severity of postprocedure pancreatitis.

Oral administration of edible oil before ERCP: effect on selective biliary cannulation.

BACKGROUND: A fatty meal before ERCP relaxes the sphincter of Oddi and may facilitate biliary cannulation. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of an oral fatty meal before ERCP on time to and success rate of biliary cannulation. DESIGN: Human clinical study. SETTING: Tertiary ERCP center. PATIENTS: Adult patients with intact papilla undergoing ERCP for presumed biliary pathology. INTERVENTIONS: Patients arriving more than 1 hour before the procedure were given oil by mouth. Patients not receiving oil served as controls. The need for a precut sphincterotomy was considered a failure of initial cannulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Appearance of the papillary orifice, bile flow, cannulation success rate, cannulation and fluoroscopy times. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients received oil (mean age 52.8 years; 40% male), and 103 patients served as controls (mean age 53.3 years; 49% male). The papillary orifice was open in 52 of 86 (61%) and 38 of 103 (37%) patients in the oil and control groups, respectively (P = .002). Bile flow was seen in 59 of 86 (68%) and 50 of 103 (49%) patients, respectively (P = .009). The overall initial biliary cannulation success rate was 80 of 86 (93%) and 97 of 103 (94%), respectively (P = .77). There was no difference in cannulation success rates, cannulation, and fluoroscopy times for fellows or faculty endoscopists in each group. No pulmonary aspiration was seen in either group. LIMITATIONS: Unblinded study. CONCLUSIONS: The biliary orifice appeared more open and bile flow was seen in more patients receiving oil, but there was no difference in successful biliary cannulation rates and cannulation and fluoroscopy times in the 2 groups.

ERCP via gastrostomy vs. double balloon enteroscopy in patients with prior bariatric Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most common bariatric surgery. The performance of ERCP in bariatric RYGB is challenging due to the long Roux limb. We herein compared the indications and technical outcomes of ERCP via percutaneous gastrostomy (GERCP) and double balloon enteroscopy (DBERCP) for patients with prior bariatric RYGB anatomy. METHODS: Between December 2005 and November 2011, consecutive ERCP patients who had undergone RYGB were identified using a prospectively maintained electronic ERCP database. Medical records were abstracted for ERCP indications and outcomes. In most cases, the gastrostomy was done by either laparoscopic or open surgery and allowed to mature at least 1 month before performing ERCP. The choice of route for ERCP was at discretion of managing physician. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (F = 42) with GERCP and 28 patients (F = 26) with DBERCP were identified. The mean age was younger in GERCP than DBERCP (44.8 vs. 56.1, p < 0.001). GERCP patients were more likely to have suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (77 %) as the primary indication whereas DBERCP was suspected CBD stone (57 %). The mean total number of sessions/patient in GERCP and DBERCP was 1.7 ± 1.0 and 1.1 ± 0.4, respectively (p = 0.004). GERCP access to the major papilla was successful in all but two (97 %), whereas duct cannulation and interventions were successful in all. In DBERCP, the success rate of accessing major papilla, cannulation and therapeutic intervention was 78, 63, 56 %, respectively. There was one (3.1 %) post-ERCP pancreatitis in DBERCP. Complications occurred in 11 GERCP procedures (14.5 %) and 10 were related to the gastrostomy. This was significantly higher than that of DBERCP (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: GERCP is more effective than DBERCP in gaining access to the pancreatobiliary tree in patients with RYGB, but it is hindered by the gastrostomy maturation delay and a higher morbidity. Technical improvements in each method are needed.

Use of intravenous secretin during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy to facilitate endoscopic clearance of pancreatic duct stones.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Pancreatic duct calcifications are common in chronic pancreatitis. Secretin (SEC) stimulates pancreas duct cells to secrete bicarbonate-rich fluid. SEC may aid fragmentation and facilitate excretion of pulverized pancreatic stones during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). The aim was to evaluate the effect of SEC administered during ESWL on clearance of main pancreatic stone (MPDS) at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHODS: Between Jan. 2003 and Sept. 2010, patients with MPDS who were treated with ESWL and ERCP were identified retrospectively. The number and diameter of calcifications were assessed at pre-ESWL images. Before 2006, ESWL was performed without SEC stimulation. From 2007, 16 µg of SEC was administered IV near the beginning of ESWL at the discretion of the managing physician. Clearance of the pancreatic duct was assessed with ERCP after ESWL. RESULTS: A total of 233 consecutive cases (SEC group: 71, no SEC group: 162) were tallied. Overall there were 310 ESWLs and 332 ERCPs in the 233 cases. On univariate analysis, the use of SEC showed significantly higher rate of complete MPDS clearance (63% vs. 46%, p = 0.021) after first ESWL/ERCP. The number of repeat sessions of ESWL/ERCP was similar between the two groups (SEC vs. No SEC, ESWL/ERCP: 1.27 vs. 1.36/1.34 vs. 1.46). Independent predictors of complete/nearly complete stone clearance included the use of SEC (p = 0.005), pre-ESWL pancreatic stent (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Secretin during ESWL appears to aid clearance of MPDS in chronic calcific pancreatitis. Further prospective randomized studies would be of interest.

Low yield of significant findings on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with pancreatobiliary pain and no objective findings.

BACKGROUND: Due to the challenging nature of the type III sphincter of the Oddi dysfunction (SOD) patient, the suspected low diagnostic yield from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the high complication rate, and the potential for litigation it is surprising that diagnostic ERCP continues to be performed in this patient population. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of significant findings on ERCP alone in patients with disabling abdominal pain of suspected pancreatobiliary origin and no objective findings. METHODS: Entry criteria of this study included: (1) ERCP with attempt at visualization of both the biliary tree and pancreatic duct, (2) suspected of having abdominal pain of pancreatobiliary origin, (3) biliary or pancreatic type III by the modified Geenen-Hogan classification, (4) never undergone sphincterotomy, (5) attempted manometry of both sphincters. A total of 265 patients met entry criteria. RESULTS: Significant findings were found in seven patients (2.6 %): choledococoele (1), anomalous pancreatobiliary ductal union (2), mild-moderate chronic pancreatitis (2), and pancreatic duct filling defect suspicious for IPMN (2). Potentially significant in 25 patients (9.4 %) were: equivocal chronic pancreatitis (1), incomplete (4) and complete pancreas divisum (20). SOD was diagnosed in 77.7 %. 11.3 % had undergone a previous diagnostic ERCP. CONCLUSION: ERCP in this high-risk population requires detailed informed consent, availability of SOM to increase the diagnostic yield, and skills in placing prophylactic pancreatic stents. It is our belief that patients without objective findings of pancreatobiliary disease that would explain their subjective complaints should not undergo diagnostic ERCP.

Risk factors for ERCP-related complications in patients with pancreas divisum: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on complication rates of ERCP in patients with pancreas divisum (PD), and it is unclear whether traditional risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) apply. OBJECTIVES: To describe the rates of ERCP complications in patients with PD and assess patient and procedure-related risk factors for PEP. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care referral center. PATIENTS: A total of 2753 ERCPs performed in 1476 patients with PD from 1997 to 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rates of PEP, hemorrhage, perforation, cholecystitis, and hospitalization directly attributable to ERCP. RESULTS: Early complications occurred after 7.8% of procedures, with PEP, hemorrhage, perforation, cholecystitis, and cardiorespiratory complications in 6.8%, 0.7%, 0.2%, 0.1%, and 0.1% of procedures, respectively. PEP was uncommon in patients who did not undergo attempted dorsal duct cannulation, occurring in 1.2% of procedures. With dorsal duct cannulation and cannulation with minor papilla sphincterotomy (MiS), the rates of PEP increased significantly to 8.2% and 10.6%, respectively (P<.01 for each comparison). Significant predictors of PEP after multivariate logistic regression included age younger than 40 (odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% CI, 1.27-2.59), female sex (OR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.25-3.01), previous PEP (OR 2.02; 95% CI, 1.32-3.1), attempted dorsal duct cannulation (OR 7.45; 95% CI, 3.25-17.07), and MiS (OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.05-2.48). Presence of severe chronic pancreatitis was a protective factor (OR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.98). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with PD, the rate of PEP is low (1.2%) if dorsal duct cannulation is not attempted. However, patients with PD undergoing dorsal duct cannulation with or without MiS are at high risk of PEP (8.2% without and 10.6% with). Traditional PEP risk factors apply to patients with PD.

Acute pancreatitis after removal of retained prophylactic pancreatic stents.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic pancreatic stents (PPSs) are used to decrease the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk patients. The risk associated with PPS removal is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe the rate of PEP in patients undergoing PPS removal without pancreatogram or other manipulation of the major or minor papilla. DESIGN: Retrospective, cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic center. PATIENTS: This study involved 230 patients undergoing removal of PPSs from 1997 to 2010. INTERVENTION: PPS removal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rate of acute pancreatitis associated with removal of PPS alone. RESULTS: Acute pancreatitis occurred after PPS removal in 7 of 230 (3.0%) cases. PEP was graded as mild, moderate, and severe in 2, 5, and 0 cases, respectively. Statistically significant risk factors of PEP after PPS removal include use of a 5F stent (P=.001), use of a stent with an internal flange (P<.01), and occurrence of PEP after the initial ERCP (P<.01). Longer duration of stent within the pancreatic duct before removal was of borderline significance (P=.06). Patient age; sex; indication for initial procedure; the presence of pancreas divisum, ansa loop, or chronic pancreatitis; and history of pancreatic or biliary sphincterotomy or orifice dilation were not significant risk factors for pancreatitis after PPS removal. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Small number of events. CONCLUSION: Removal of retained PPSs may cause mild or moderate acute pancreatitis. This risk of acute pancreatitis may diminish the overall efficacy of PPS use by delaying the occurrence of PEP rather than eliminating it. This implies that PPSs should be used only in patients at high risk for PEP.

Role of EUS for preoperative evaluation of cholangiocarcinoma: a large single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Accurate preoperative diagnosis and staging of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) remain difficult. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of EUS in the diagnosis and preoperative evaluation of CCA. DESIGN: Observational study of prospectively collected data. SETTING: Single tertiary referral hospital in Indianapolis, Indiana. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with CCA from January 2003 through October 2009. INTERVENTIONS: EUS and EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity of EUS for the detection of a tumor and prediction of unresectability compared with CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); sensitivity of EUS-FNA to provide tissue diagnosis, by using surgical pathology as a reference standard. RESULTS: A total of 228 patients with biliary strictures undergoing EUS were identified. Of these, 81 (mean age 70 years, 45 men) had CCA. Fifty-one patients (63%) had distal and 30 (37%) had proximal CCA. For those with available imaging, tumor detection was superior with EUS compared with triphasic CT (76 of 81 [94%] vs 23 of 75 [30%], respectively; P < .001). MRI identified the tumor in 11 of 26 patients (42%; P = .07 vs EUS). EUS identified CCA in all 51 (100%) distal and 25 (83%) of 30 proximal tumors (P < .01). EUS-FNA (median, 5 passes; range, 1-12 passes) was performed in 74 patients (91%). The overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of CCA was 73% (95% confidence interval, 62%-82%) and was significantly higher in distal compared with proximal CCA (81% vs 59%, respectively; P = .04). Fifteen tumors were definitely unresectable. EUS correctly identified unresectability in 8 of 15 and correctly identified the 38 of 39 patients with resectable tumors (53% sensitivity and 97% specificity for unresectability). CT and/or MRI failed to detect unresectability in 6 of these 8 patients. LIMITATION: Single-center study. CONCLUSION: EUS and EUS-FNA are sensitive for the diagnosis of CCA and very specific in predicting unresectability. The sensitivity of EUS-FNA is significantly higher in distal than in proximal CCA.