Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Children of Pancreaticobiliary Maljunction Without Obvious Biliary Dilatation.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: There is no standard surgical approach for pancreaticobiliary maljunction (PBM) without congenital biliary dilatation (CBD). This study aimed to compare outcomes between therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy (LH) for pediatric patients of PBM without obvious biliary dilatation (PBM-nonOBD). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed demographic and clinical data of pediatric patients with PBM-nonOBD from 2015 to 2021. There were 33 patients in ERCP group and 35 patients in LH group. Primary outcomes included treatment efficiency, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications. Univariate analysis was further used to explore prognostic factors for ERCP. RESULTS: The mean diameter of the common bile duct in LH group was larger than that in ERCP group (8.6 ± 1.3 mm vs. 6.9 ± 2.1 mm, p = 0.003), while there were no significant differences between the two groups in age, gender, clinical manifestations, complications, and other imaging findings. Compared with LH group, ERCP group had a shorter operation time and postoperative recovery time. The treatment effective rate of ERCP was inferior to that of LH (45.4 % vs. 85.7 %, p＜0.001). For postoperative adverse events, post-ERCP pancreatitis (15.1 %) was most common in the ERCP group. 30.3 % of patients eventually required LH. Intestinal obstruction (5.7 %), recurrent cholangitis (5.7 %), gastrointestinal bleeding (2.8 %), and anastomotic stenosis (2.8 %) were observed in LH group and 8.6 % of patients required a reoperation. A long common channel may be associated with poor prognosis after ERCP. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP is associated with less surgical trauma, shorter recovery time, and fewer serious complications than LH, while the treatment effective rate of ERCP is inferior to LH. The indications for endoscopic sphincterotomy and the timing of radical surgery need to be further explored. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Ⅲ STUDY TYPE Retrospective Comparative Study.