Long-period pancreatic stenting for painful chronic calcified pancreatitis required higher medical costs and frequent hospitalizations compared with surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the benefits between endoscopic drainage and surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct for patients with chronic calcified pancreatitis.
METHODS: A total of 68 patients were classified into endoscopic (n = 34) or surgical (n = 34) treatment groups. Patients receiving endoscopic treatment were further divided into 2 subgroups: a short-period group, patients who could discontinue serial pancreatic stenting within 1 year (n = 19); and a long-period group, patients who needed pancreatic drainage by serial endoscopic stenting for more than 1 year (n = 15). The medical records of these patients were retrospectively analyzed.
RESULTS: Hospital stays, frequency of hospitalizations, and medical expense were similar between the short-period endoscopic treatment group and surgery group. On the other hand, patients in the long-period endoscopic treatment group required significantly longer hospital stays, more frequent hospitalizations, and had higher medical expenses than the short-period endoscopic treatment group as well as than the surgery group.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent serial endoscopic stenting for more than 1 year showed no benefit compared with surgical treatment in terms of the frequency of hospital stays and medical costs.