OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) has been reported to increase the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (4%-11%). Based on the hypothesis that performing endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) could prevent this complication, we performed EPBD combined with ENBD (EPBD/ENBD) and analyzed the risk of pancreatitis. METHODS: Thirty-four patients underwent EPBD followed by ENBD for common bile duct stone(s). Serum amylase levels the following morning and incidence of pancreatitis were compared with those previously reported and with complications of simple diagnostic ERCP performed in our institution. RESULTS: After EPBD/ENBD, amylase levels the following morning were 214.5 +/- 152.9 U/L, and no cases developed pancreatitis or hyperamylasemia (>3 times normal). These outcomes were favorable compared with previous EPBD reports. Furthermore, despite the stress of EPBD/ENBD after ERCP, these outcomes were better, even compared with simple ERCP performed at our institution [amylase levels: 318.7 +/- 475.2 U/L; hyperamylasemia: 16.5% (P = 0.006); pancreatitis: 7.1%]. CONCLUSION: Although EPBD has been regarded as a risk factor for post-ERCP pancreatitis, our results suggest the possibility that application of ENBD after EPBD decreases the incidence of pancreatitis and should be studied further. We speculate that ENBD itself prevents pancreatic duct obstruction by residual stones or papillary edema.
OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) has been reported to increase the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (4%-11%). Based on the hypothesis that performing endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) could prevent this complication, we performed EPBD combined with ENBD (EPBD/ENBD) and analyzed the risk of pancreatitis. METHODS: Thirty-four patients underwent EPBD followed by ENBD for common bile duct stone(s). Serum amylase levels the following morning and incidence of pancreatitis were compared with those previously reported and with complications of simple diagnostic ERCP performed in our institution. RESULTS: After EPBD/ENBD, amylase levels the following morning were 214.5 +/- 152.9 U/L, and no cases developed pancreatitis or hyperamylasemia (>3 times normal). These outcomes were favorable compared with previous EPBD reports. Furthermore, despite the stress of EPBD/ENBD after ERCP, these outcomes were better, even compared with simple ERCP performed at our institution [amylase levels: 318.7 +/- 475.2 U/L; hyperamylasemia: 16.5% (P = 0.006); pancreatitis: 7.1%]. CONCLUSION: Although EPBD has been regarded as a risk factor for post-ERCP pancreatitis, our results suggest the possibility that application of ENBD after EPBD decreases the incidence of pancreatitis and should be studied further. We speculate that ENBD itself prevents pancreatic duct obstruction by residual stones or papillary edema.