| Literature DB >> 20969779 |
Evangelos Kalaitzakis1, Tim Ambrose, Jane Phillips-Hughes, Jane Collier, Roger W Chapman.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The paucity of controlled data for the treatment of most biliary sphincter of Oddi disorder (SOD) types and the incomplete response to therapy seen in clinical practice and several trials has generated controversy as to the best course of management of these patients. In this observational study we aimed to assess the outcome of patients with biliary SOD managed without sphincter of Oddi manometry.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20969779 PMCID: PMC2975654 DOI: 10.1186/1471-230X-10-124
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Figure 1Flow chart of the management of the current cohort of patients with a clinical diagnosis of SOD (n = 59)
Basic characteristics of patients with biliary sphincter of Oddi disorder (n = 59)
| Age at diagnosis (years) | 46 (37-59) |
| Women/Men | 53/6 (90%/10%) |
| Follow-up (months) | 15 (6-35) |
| Previous cholecystectomy | 26 (44%) |
| Biliary SOD type | |
| Type I | 8 (14%) |
| Type II | 30 (51%) |
| Dilated CBD | 25 (42%) |
| Raised LFTs | 5 (8%) |
| Type III | 21 (35%) |
| Comorbiditya | 39 (66%) |
| Other functional gastrointestinal disorder | 16 (27%) |
| Psychiatric diseaseb | 11 (19%) |
| Chronic liver diseasec | 10 (17%) |
| Analgesics upon initial assessment | 23 (39%) |
| Opiates upon initial assessmentd | 21 (36%) |
Data are presented as median and IQR or n and % as appropriate
aPatients who had other types of disease apart from the sphincter of Oddi disorder
bEight patients out of 11 had depression and 3/11 anxiety
cFive patients out of 10 had non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, 2/10 primary biliary cirrhosis, 1/10 non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, 1/10 chronic hepatitis B, and 1/10 chronic hepatitis C
dEleven out of 21 patients were receiving codeine, 5/21 tramadol, 3/21 morphine, 1/21 morphine and tramadol, and 1/21 codeine and tramadol
Management and outcome of all patients with a clinical diagnosis of biliary SOD (n = 59)
| Follow-up (months) | Medical therapy | Endoscopic sphincterotomy | Symptom status at last follow-up | Recurrence | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deterioration | Unchanged | Improvement | Resolution | |||||
| SOD I (n = 8) | 12.5 (7-30) | 7 (87.5%) | 6 (75%) | 1 (12.5%) | 2 (25%) | 3 (37.5%) | 2 (25%) | 2 (25%) |
| SOD II (n = 30) | 24 (5-41) | 28 (93%) | 16 (53%) | 0 | 7 (23%) | 20 (67%) | 3 (10%) | 8 (27%) |
| dilated CBD (n = 25) | 24 (13-40) | 23 (92%) | 16 (64%) | 0 | 7 (28%) | 15 (60%) | 3 (12%) | 7 (28%) |
| non-dilated CBD (n = 5) | 28 (13-92) | 5 (100%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 (100%) | 0 | 1 (20%) |
| SOD III (n = 21) | 12 (8-26) | 21 (100%) | 1 (5%) | 1 (5%) | 4 (19%) | 12 (57%) | 4 (19%) | 2 (10%) |
| All patients (n = 59) | 15 (6-35) | 56 (95%) | 23 (39%) | 2 (3.4%) | 13 (22%) | 35 (59.3%) | 9 (15.3%) | 12 (20%) |
Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis and outcome of patients undergoing endoscopic sphincterotomy (n = 23).
| Patient | Gender | Age at presentation | SOD type | Follow-up (months) | No of ERCPs | Pancreatic duct injection at 1st ERCP | Pre-cut sphincterotomy at 1st ERCP | Outcome of 1st ERCP | Recurrence after 1st ERCP | Complication |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Female | 49 | I | 50 | 4a | Yes | No | No effect | No | |
| 2 | Female | 66 | II | 89 | 1 | Yes | Yes | No effect | pancreatitis | |
| 3 | Male | 34 | III | 0 | 1 | Yes | No | No effect | pancreatitis | |
| 4 | Female | 29 | II | 37 | 2b | No | No | Improvement | Yes | No |
| 5 | Female | 36 | I | 16 | 2 | Yes | Yes | Resolution | No | pancreatitis (1st ERCP) |
| 6 | Female | 27 | I | 10 | 1 | No | No | Improvement | No | No |
| 7 | Female | 44 | II | 27 | 1 | Yes | Yes | No effect | retroperitoneal perforation | |
| 8 | Female | 47 | II | 39 | 2c | Yes | No | No effect | pancreatitis (2nd ERCP) | |
| 9 | Female | 49 | II | 24 | 1 | No | Yes | Resolution | No | No |
| 10 | Female | 44 | II | 22 | 1 | No | No | Improvement | No | No |
| 11 | Female | 46 | II | 56 | 2d | No | No | No effect | No | |
| 12 | Female | 49 | II | 43 | 2e | No | No | No effect | No | |
| 13 | Female | 47 | II | 60 | 4f | No | No | No effect | No | |
| 14 | Female | 26 | I | 13 | 1 | No | No | Resolution | No | No |
| 15 | Female | 46 | II | 15 | 1 | No | No | No effect | No | |
| 16 | Female | 52 | II | 34 | 2g | Yes | No | Improvement | Yes | No |
| 17 | Female | 57 | II | 28 | 1 | No | No | Improvement | Yes | pancreatitis |
| 18 | Female | 67 | II | 35 | 1 | No | No | Resolution | Yes | No |
| 19 | Female | 55 | II | 49 | 4h | Yes | No | Resolution | Yes | No |
| 20 | Female | 46 | II | 92 | 3i | No | No | Resolution | Yes | pancreatitis (1st ERCP) |
| 21 | Female | 27 | II | 110 | 7j | No | No | Improvement | Yes | No |
| 22 | Female | 29 | I | 35 | 3k | Yes | No | Improvement | Yes | pancreatitis (3rd ERCP) |
| 23 | Female | 43 | I | 2 | 2 | No | Yes | Improvement | Yes | pancreatitis (1st ERCP) |
Conventional over-the-wire biliary sphincterotomy was performed in all patients. In some patients, pre-cut sphincterotomy was performed to obtain access to the common bile duct prior to conventional sphincterotomy. The pre-cut and conventional sphincterotomy were performed during the same procedure apart from patient no 5 and 23 in whom they were performed a few weeks apart from each other as access to the common bile duct was achieved on a subsequent procedure a few weeks after pre-cut sphincterotomy.
a2nd ERCP, sphincterotomy extended; 3rd ERCP, trial of stent; 4th ERCP, stent removal as it was ineffective
b2nd ERCP for pancreatic sphincter of Oddi manometry showing raised pressure, pancreatic sphincterotomy performed leading to symptom improvement
c2nd ERCP, sphincterotomy assessed to be inadequate and was widened with no effect on symptoms
d2nd ERCP showed patent sphincterotomy, no endotherapy performed
e2nd ERCP for pancreatic SOM but pancreatic duct cannulation failed
f2nd ERCP done as pancreatic duct appeared dilated on follow-up MRCP. Pancreatic orifice appeared stenosed. No endotherapy performed as pancreatic stent could not be inserted despite deep guide wire pancreatic duct cannulation; 3rd ERCP for repeat attempt to perform pancreatic sphincterotomy, instrument failure during procedure; 4th ERCP pancreatic stenting and pancreatic sphincterotomy achieved leading to improvement in symptoms
g2n ERCP for pancreatic SOM normal pancreatic pressure thus no endotherapy performed
h2nd ERCP showed re-stenosed biliary sphincterotomy, biliary stenting performed; 3rd ERCP cholangitis due to stent obstruction, re-stenting; 4th ERCP extended sphincterotomy
i2nd ERCP showed patent sphincterotomy, biliary stenting performed; 3rd ERCP removal of stent as ineffective
j2nd ERCP, patent sphincterotomy, biliary stenting which was effective; 3rd-7th ERCP stent changes until surgery (choledochojejunostomy)
k2nd ERCP done for pancreatic sphincter of Oddi manometry, raised pancreatic pressure found and pancreatic sphincterotomy performed with improvement in symptoms; 3rd ERCP done due to symptom recurrence showed patent sphincterotomies, referred for surgery (open transduodenal sphincteroplasty)