Byung Kyu Park1,2, Tae Joo Jeon3,4, Vijay Jayaraman5, Christopher Hammerle6, Kapil Gupta3, Laith H Jamil3, Simon K Lo3. 1. Division of Digestive Diseases, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. mintpbk@naver.com. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Gyeonggi, Korea. mintpbk@naver.com. 3. Division of Digestive Diseases, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 5. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nevada School of Medicine, Las Vegas, NV, USA. 6. Idaho Gastroenterology Associates, Boise, ID, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Performing ERCP in patients with previous pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is technically challenging. Balloon-assisted ERCP has recently been recognized as a useful tool in patients with surgically altered anatomies. However, there are few studies that focus on ERCP in post-PD patients. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of ERCP in patients in post-PD and the patterns for type of endoscopes used. METHODS: Patients with previous PD who had undergone ERCP were included in this retrospective study. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty ERCP procedures were performed on 47 post-PD patients. The overall success of ERCP was 82.3 % (107/130). Endoscope insertion to the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses was accomplished in 93.8 % (122/130), which resulted in successful completion of ERCP in 87.7 % (107/122) of the procedures: 89.5 % (94/105) in biliary indications and 76.5 % (13/17) in pancreas indications. Using the conventional endoscopes (CEs) led to ERCP success in 66.4 % (71/107) of attempts versus 78.3 % (36/46) with balloon-assisted enteroscopes (BAEs). Among 105 cases in which CEs were initially tried, ERCP was successful in 69 (65.7 %) cases with CEs alone. When CEs failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses, the subsequent use of BAEs resulted in a successful ERCP in 16/19 (84.2 %) of attempts. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP in post-PD patients can be performed with a high success rate. We recommend that CEs should be used initially for ERCP in patients with PD and that BAEs be reserved for situation in which CEs have failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses.
BACKGROUND: Performing ERCP in patients with previous pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is technically challenging. Balloon-assisted ERCP has recently been recognized as a useful tool in patients with surgically altered anatomies. However, there are few studies that focus on ERCP in post-PDpatients. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of ERCP in patients in post-PD and the patterns for type of endoscopes used. METHODS:Patients with previous PD who had undergone ERCP were included in this retrospective study. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty ERCP procedures were performed on 47 post-PDpatients. The overall success of ERCP was 82.3 % (107/130). Endoscope insertion to the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses was accomplished in 93.8 % (122/130), which resulted in successful completion of ERCP in 87.7 % (107/122) of the procedures: 89.5 % (94/105) in biliary indications and 76.5 % (13/17) in pancreas indications. Using the conventional endoscopes (CEs) led to ERCP success in 66.4 % (71/107) of attempts versus 78.3 % (36/46) with balloon-assisted enteroscopes (BAEs). Among 105 cases in which CEs were initially tried, ERCP was successful in 69 (65.7 %) cases with CEs alone. When CEs failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses, the subsequent use of BAEs resulted in a successful ERCP in 16/19 (84.2 %) of attempts. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP in post-PDpatients can be performed with a high success rate. We recommend that CEs should be used initially for ERCP in patients with PD and that BAEs be reserved for situation in which CEs have failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses.
Authors: Raj J Shah; Maximiliano Smolkin; Roy Yen; Andrew Ross; Richard A Kozarek; Douglas A Howell; Gennadiy Bakis; Sreenivasan S Jonnalagadda; Abed A Al-Lehibi; Al Hardy; Douglas R Morgan; Amrita Sethi; Peter D Stevens; Paul A Akerman; Shyam J Thakkar; Brian C Brauer Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Kaye M Reid-Lombardo; Antonio Ramos-De la Medina; Kristine Thomsen; William S Harmsen; Michael B Farnell Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-10-11 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Jong Won Byun; Jae Woo Kim; Se Yong Sung; Ho Yeon Jung; Hyo Keun Jeon; Hong Jun Park; Moon Young Kim; Hyun Soo Kim; Soon Koo Baik Journal: Clin Endosc Date: 2012-11-30