Primary Needle-Knife Fistulotomy Versus Conventional Cannulation Method in a High-Risk Cohort of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis. (7th January 2020)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Primary Needle-Knife Fistulotomy Versus Conventional Cannulation Method in a High-Risk Cohort of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis. (7th January 2020)
- Main Title:
- Primary Needle-Knife Fistulotomy Versus Conventional Cannulation Method in a High-Risk Cohort of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis
- Authors:
- Jang, Sung Ill
Kim, Dong Uk
Cho, Jae Hee
Jeong, Seok
Park, Jin-Seok
Lee, Don Haeng
Kwon, Chang-Il
Koh, Dong Hee
Park, Se Woo
Lee, Tae Hoon
Lee, Hye Sun - Abstract:
- Abstract : OBJECTIVES: Successful biliary cannulation is a prerequisite and important component of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, but conventional cannulation methods (CCMs) have a postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) rate of 14.1% in patients at high risk for PEP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of needle-knife fistulotomy (NKF), compared with a CCM, when used for primary biliary access in patients at high risk for developing PEP. METHODS: A total of 207 patients with one or more risk factors for PEP were prospectively enrolled. The patients were randomly allocated to one of 2 groups according to the primary biliary cannulation technique (NKF or CCM). We compared biliary cannulation success rates, cannulation and procedure times, and the incidence of adverse events, including PEP, between the groups. RESULTS: The mean number of PEP risk factors was similar between the groups (NKF, 2.2 ± 1.0; CCM, 2.2 ± 0.9). PEP occurred in 8 patients in the CCM group and in no patients in the NKF group (9.2% vs 0%, P < 0.001). The rates of other adverse events did not differ between the groups. The biliary cannulation success rate was high in the NKF group, but relatively low in the CCM group, possibly because of the stringent failure criteria aimed at reducing PEP. However, the mean cannulation and total procedural times were longer in the NKF group than in the CCM group. DISCUSSION: NKF is an effectiveAbstract : OBJECTIVES: Successful biliary cannulation is a prerequisite and important component of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, but conventional cannulation methods (CCMs) have a postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) rate of 14.1% in patients at high risk for PEP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of needle-knife fistulotomy (NKF), compared with a CCM, when used for primary biliary access in patients at high risk for developing PEP. METHODS: A total of 207 patients with one or more risk factors for PEP were prospectively enrolled. The patients were randomly allocated to one of 2 groups according to the primary biliary cannulation technique (NKF or CCM). We compared biliary cannulation success rates, cannulation and procedure times, and the incidence of adverse events, including PEP, between the groups. RESULTS: The mean number of PEP risk factors was similar between the groups (NKF, 2.2 ± 1.0; CCM, 2.2 ± 0.9). PEP occurred in 8 patients in the CCM group and in no patients in the NKF group (9.2% vs 0%, P < 0.001). The rates of other adverse events did not differ between the groups. The biliary cannulation success rate was high in the NKF group, but relatively low in the CCM group, possibly because of the stringent failure criteria aimed at reducing PEP. However, the mean cannulation and total procedural times were longer in the NKF group than in the CCM group. DISCUSSION: NKF is an effective and safe procedure to gain primary biliary access in patients at high risk for developing PEP. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02916199. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- American journal of gastroenterology. Volume 115:Number 4(2020)
- Journal:
- American journal of gastroenterology
- Issue:
- Volume 115:Number 4(2020)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 115, Issue 4 (2020)
- Year:
- 2020
- Volume:
- 115
- Issue:
- 4
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2020-0115-0004-0000
- Page Start:
- 616
- Page End:
- 624
- Publication Date:
- 2020-01-07
- Subjects:
- Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals
Intestines -- Diseases -- Periodicals
Gastroenterology -- Periodicals
Gastrointestinal Diseases -- Periodicals
Electronic journals
Periodicals
616.33 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.mdconsult.com/public/search?search_type=journal&j_sort=pub_date&j_date_range=1995-current&j_issn=0002-9270 ↗
http://www.amjgastro.com/ ↗
http://www.nature.com/ajg/archive/index.html ↗
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00029270 ↗
http://www.nature.com/ ↗
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117955841/home ↗
http://firstsearch.oclc.org ↗
http://firstsearch.oclc.org/journal=0002-9270;screen=info;ECOIP ↗ - DOI:
- 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000480 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0002-9270
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 0824.650000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 24189.xml