预防性胰管支架在插管困难的胆道型Oddi括约肌狭窄中的应用

目的 探讨预防性胰管支架在减少插管困难的胆道型Oddi括约肌狭窄术后胰腺炎的临床价值及有效性.方法 回顾63例胆道型Oddi括约肌狭窄且插管困难的患者资料,以2009年1月至2010年1月的33例为对照组(仅行单纯内镜治疗而未放置预防性胰管支架),2010年2月至2011年2月的30例为支架组(行内镜治疗的同时成功置入了预防性胰管支架).比较2组术后胰腺炎的发生率.结果 支架组(0/30,0)与对照组(8/33,24.2％)相比,术后胰腺炎发生率差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 对于明确诊断的胆道型Oddi括约肌狭窄且插管困难的患者而言,预防性胰管支架的置入是安全有效的.     

急诊十二指肠镜治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎94例

目的:探讨急诊十二指肠镜行胆胰管引流治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的价值及可行性,扩大完善内镜在胆胰疾病中的治疗范围.方法:2004-01/2005-12急诊十二指肠镜治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎94例,治疗方式以经内镜鼻胆管引流(ENBD)为主,必要时行Oddi′s括约肌切开(EST).结果:94例患者中成功91例,成功率96.81%.无发展为重症胰腺炎患者.上腹痛症状平均症状缓解时间42.3 h;尿淀粉酶平均56 h下降到正常.内镜治疗后1 wk,复查B超,61例伴有胰腺水肿患者49例水肿消退,形态恢复正常:29例伴有胰周积液患者中21例胰周积液完全吸收,8例积液量明显减少,无伴随临床症状.结论:急诊十二指肠镜治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎是安全可靠的,可以阻止胰腺向恶性转化.     

胰管塑料支架在ERCP选择性胆管插管困难时的应用研究

[目的]探讨胰管塑料支架在内镜逆行性胰胆管造影术(ERCP)选择性胆管插管困难时的应用。[方法]将在ERCP中选择性胆管插管困难的104例患者分为无胰管塑料支架组、胰管塑料支架组,观察并比较2组选择性胆管插管成功率,术后胰腺炎、高淀粉酶血症和腹痛等并发症的发生率。[结果]胰管塑料支架组与无胰管塑料支架组选择性胆管插管成功率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),胰管塑料支架组术后胰腺炎、高淀粉酶血症和腹痛等并发症的发生率较无胰管塑料支架组显著性降低(P0.05~0.01)。[结论]对ERCP选择性胆管插管困难的患者预防性放置胰管塑料支架,虽然未能提高胆管插管的成功率;但是可明显降低术后胰腺炎、高淀粉酶血症和腹痛并发症的发生率。     

急性胆源性胰腺炎早期内镜治疗价值

目的探讨急性胆源性胰腺炎早期内镜治疗的价值及其安全性。方法选择92例急性胆源性胰腺炎患者早期（72h内）行ERCP及内镜治疗（ERCP组），并与同期保守治疗40例（对照组）进行比较。结果ERCP组全部成功实施十二指肠乳头切开取石，72例胆总管结石者行网篮及气囊取石，所有92例均行鼻胆管引流，重症组10例同时行胰管支架引流。ERCP组平均腹痛消失时间、血清淀粉酶恢复时间、平均住院天数及平均费用均明显低于对照组。ERCP组重症组病死率8．3％，对照组重症组病死率33．3％。结论急性胆源性胰腺炎早期ERCP治疗是安全的，能降低患者的病死率，减少患者住院天数和费用。     

重症急性胰腺炎的内镜治疗

近 10年来 ,内镜治疗已成为胰腺炎治疗的重要手段。内镜治疗技术主要有括约肌切开术、取石和支架置入术等 ,其目的主要是减轻胰管压力 ,治疗慢性胰腺炎并发症。1　胆源性重症急性胰腺炎 (SAP)的内镜治疗经内镜十二指肠乳头括约肌切开 (EST)或鼻胆管引流术(ENBD)可清除胆道结石 ,胆流畅通 ,减少胆汁胰管返流 ,使胆源性 SAP患者的病情迅速改善 ,并减少复发 ,成功率达90 %以上。Soetkno等总结了 834例胆源性 SAP的治疗结果 ,早期内镜介入治疗组的效果明显优于对照组 ,降低了病死率(3% ,18% )及胰腺炎复发率 (2 0 % ,6 0 % ) ,并缩短了住…     

急性胆源性胰腺炎早期内镜治疗的临床评价

目的 :评价急性胆源性胰腺炎患者早期行内镜逆行胰胆管造影 (ERCP)治疗的安全性和临床疗效。方法 :对 2 6例急性胆源性胰腺炎住院患者 ,早期行ERCP检查和治疗 ,观察其疗效和并发症 ,评价急性胆源性胰腺炎患者内镜治疗的安全性和疗效。结果 :本组 2 6例患者均治愈 ,无明显并发症发生 ,未见因ERCP检查和治疗而使病情加重者。结论 :对于急性胆源性胰腺炎患者早期行ERCP检查及治疗是安全的 ,急性胆源性胰腺炎经有效的内镜治疗可缩短平均住院时间、降低平均住院费用     

EUS联合ERCP在梗阻型轻症急性胆源性胰腺炎中应用及对细胞因子和淀粉酶的影响

目的观察超声内镜(EUS)联合十二指肠镜逆行性胆胰管造影(ERCP)对梗阻型轻症急性胆源性胰腺炎患者的治疗效果及对细胞因子、淀粉酶的影响。方法梗阻型轻症急性胆源性胰腺炎患者90例,随机分为对照组(n=45)和观察组(n=45)。对照组采用开腹手术治疗,观察组采用EUS联合ERCP治疗。观察两组治疗前、后肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α、白细胞介素(IL)-2、白细胞IL-6、IL-8、IL-10及淀粉酶水平变化。结果观察组治疗后腹痛缓解时间、尿淀粉酶恢复正常时间、血淀粉酶恢复正常时间及住院时间、显著短于对照组(P<0.05);观察组治疗后TNF-α、IL-2、IL-6及IL-8水平低于对照组(P<0.05);观察组术后并发症发生率(8.89%),显著低于对照组(20.00%,P<0.05)。结论梗阻型轻症急性胆源性胰腺炎患者采用EUS联合ERCP治疗效果理想。     

消化系统疾病

20040353急性胆源性胰腺炎的内镜下介入治疗/蔡逢春…刀内科急危币症杂志一2003,9(2)一68、70 103例胆源性胰腺炎患者,扣,57例在72h内行旱期内镜卜介入治疗,43例保守治疗,保守治疗中的19例择期内镜检查及治疗,3例外科手术治疗。结果:旱期内镜治疗组80.70%患者临床症状得到迅速缓解:保守治疗组62.79%也可迅速缓解。全部内镜治疗后3例出现胰腺炎加重。提示旱期内镜介入治疗对于急性胆源性胰腺炎是·种有效而安全的方法,对于有明显黄疽、感染、结石嵌顿的病例应急诊内镜下治疗;对犷病情较轻、黄疽不屯的患者可先保守治疗后再行择期内镜治疗。表…     

急性胆源性胰腺炎的内镜下介入治疗

目的 :综合评价早期内镜下介入治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的方法、疗效及并发症等。方法 :10 3例胆源性胰腺炎患者中 ,5 7例在 72h内行早期内镜下介入治疗 ,4 3例保守治疗 ,保守治疗中的 19例择期内镜检查及治疗 ,3例外科手术治疗。结果 :早期内镜治疗组 80 .70 %患者临床症状得到迅速缓解 ;保守治疗组 6 2 .79%也可迅速缓解。全部内镜治疗后 3例出现胰腺炎加重。结论 :早期内镜介入治疗对于急性胆源性胰腺炎是一种有效而安全的方法 ,对于有明显黄疸、感染、结石嵌顿的病例应急诊内镜下治疗 ;对于病情较轻、黄疸不重的患者可先保守治疗后再行择期内镜治疗     

早期ERCP在急性胆源性胰腺炎治疗中的价值

目的探讨急性胆源性胰腺炎患者早期逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)及内镜治疗的应用价值及安全性。方法选择54例次急性胆源性胰腺炎患者作早期(24～48h)ERCP及内镜治疗(ERCP组),并以同期保守治疗的36例次急性胆源性胰腺炎患者作对照(对照组),观察了两组患者血清淀粉酶恢复时间、腹痛缓解时间、住院天数及并发症发生等情况。结果 ERCP组腹痛缓解天数及平均住院天数分别为(10.5±2.8)及(23.7±3.8)d,明显短于对照组(17.4±3.8)及(35.0±3.1)d(P0.01)。血清淀粉酶恢复时间两组相差不显著。两组均未发生严重并发症。结论早期内镜治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎具有微创、安全有效、快速解除胆道急性梗阻及防止胆汁胰管反流的特点,可使急性胆源性胰腺炎和临床怀疑为胆源性胰腺炎的患者得到及时正确的诊治,以防止其向重型发展。     

PROPHYLACTIC PANCREAS STENTING FOLLOWED BY NEEDLE‐KNIFE FISTULOTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH SPHINCTER OF ODDI DYSFUNCTION AND DIFFICULT CANNULATION: NEW METHOD TO PREVENT POST‐ERCP PANCREATITIS

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to reduce post‐endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications with a combination of early needle‐knife access fistulotomy and prophylactic pancreatic stenting in selected high‐risk sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) patients with difficult cannulation. Methods: Prophylactic pancreatic stent insertion was attempted in 22 consecutive patients with definite SOD and difficult cannulation. After 10 min of failed selective common bile duct cannulation, but repeated (>5×) pancreatic duct contrast filling, a prophylactic small calibre (3–5 Fr) pancreatic stent was inserted, followed by fistulotomy with a standard needle‐knife, then a standard complete biliary sphincterotomy followed. The success and complication rates were compared retrospectively with a cohort of 35 patients, in which we persisted with the application of standard methods of cannulation without pre‐cutting methods. Results: Prophylactic pancreatic stenting followed by needle‐knife fistulotomy was successfully carried out in all 22 consecutive patients, and selective biliary cannulation and complete endoscopic sphincterotomy were achieved in all but two cases. In this group, not a single case of post‐ERCP pancreatitis was observed, in contrast with a control group of three mild, 10 moderate and two severe post‐ERCP pancreatitis cases. The frequency of post‐ERCP pancreatitis was significantly different: 0% versus 43%, as were the post‐procedure (24 h mean) amylase levels: 206 U/L versus 1959 U/L, respectively. Conclusions: In selected, high‐risk, SOD patients, early, prophylactic pancreas stent insertion followed by needle‐knife fistulotomy seems a safe and effective procedure with no or only minimal risk of post‐ERCP pancreatitis. However, prospective, randomized studies are awaited to lend to support to our approach.     

Pancreatic guidewire placement for achieving selective biliary cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography

AIM： To investigate the frequency and risk factors for acute pancreatitis after pancreatic guidewire placement （P-GW） in achieving cannulation of the bile duct during endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography （ERCP）.
METHODS： P-GW was performed in 113 patients in whom cannulation of the bile duct was difficult. The success rate of biliary cannulation, the frequency and risk factors of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and the frequency of spontaneous migration of the pancreatic duct stent were investigated.
RESULTS： Selective biliary cannulation with P-GW was achieved in 73% of the patients. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 12% （14 patients： mild, 13; moderate, 1）. Prophylactic pancreatic stenting was attempted in 59% of the patients. Of the 64 patients who successfully underwent stent placement, three developed mild pancreatitis （4.7%）. Of the 49 patients without stent placement, 11 developed pancreatitis （22%： mild, 10; moderate, 1）. Of the five patients in whom stent placement was unsuccessful, two developed mild pancreatitis. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed no pancreatic stenting to be the only significant risk factor for pancreatitis. Spontaneous migration of the stent was observed within two weeks in 92% of the patients who had undergone pancreatic duct stenting.
CONCLUSION： P-GW is useful for achieving selective biliary cannulation, Pancreatic duct stenting after P-GW can reduce the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis, which requires evaluation by means of prospective randomized controlled trials,     

Need for pancreatic stenting after sphincterotomy in patients with difficult cannulation

AIM: To investigate the need for pancreatic stenting after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in patients with difficult biliary cannulation.METHODS: Between April 2008 and August 2013, 2136 patients underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related procedures. Among them, 55 patients with difficult biliary cannulation who underwent EST after bile duct cannulation using the pancreatic duct guidewire placement method (P-GW) were divided into two groups: a stent group (n = 24; pancreatic stent placed) and a no-stent group (n = 31; no pancreatic stenting). We retrospectively compared the two groups to examine the need for pancreatic stenting to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in patients undergoing EST after biliary cannulation by P-GW.RESULTS: No differences in patient characteristics or endoscopic procedures were observed between the two groups. The incidence of PEP was 4.2% (1/24) and 29.0% (9/31) in the Stent and no-stent groups, respectively, with the no-stent group having a significantly higher incidence (P = 0.031). The PEP severity was mild for all the patients in the stent group. In contrast, 8 had mild PEP and 1 had moderate PEP in the no-stent group. The mean serum amylase levels (means ± SD) 3 h after ERCP (183.1 ± 136.7 vs 463.6 ± 510.4 IU/L, P = 0.006) and on the day after ERCP (209.5 ± 208.7 vs 684.4 ± 759.3 IU/L, P = 0.002) were significantly higher in the no-stent group. A multivariate analysis identified the absence of pancreatic stenting (P = 0.045; odds ratio, 9.7; 95%CI: 1.1-90) as a significant risk factor for PEP.CONCLUSION: In patients with difficult cannulation in whom the bile duct is cannulated using P-GW, a pancreatic stent should be placed even if EST has been performed.     

The role of double-guidewire technique in preventing postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Background and study aimsPostendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications increase with repeated cannulation attempts. We evaluated several advanced biliary cannulation techniques, which have been used when the standard approach fails, to increase the success rate and decrease post-ERCP complications. We aimed to evaluate the use of double-wire technique in terms of success rates and effects on post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and to assess the value of pancreatic duct stenting following needle-knife sphincterotomy in difficult biliary cannulation.Patients and methodsA single-center, retrospective, randomized study was conducted on patients who underwent ERCP in Notre Dame De Secours University Hospital at Byblos, Lebanon, after obtaining the hospital’s ethics committee approval.Patients were divided into three groups. The first group consisted of patients who had an ERCP and was divided into two subgroups, namely, one using double-guidewire technique (DGT) only and another using an extra technique of precut with double-guidewire and pancreatic plastic stent placement. The second group of patients who had only ERCP was the control group. Finally, the third group endured the precut technique alone.ResultsWe could not prove any significant association between the intervention and the occurrence of pancreatitis when comparing double-wire technique plus ERCP to ERCP alone.When DGT with a pancreatic plastic stent was used, the incidence of PEP was significantly lower than that in other techniques.ConclusionDGT has a neutral effect on the reduction of PEP compared with the classic ERCP, but the technique can decrease the time of examination and increase success in difficult cases. ERCP using the double-guidewire with placement of a pancreatic plastic stent can contribute to decreasing PEP.     

Difficult Biliary Access for ERCP

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a technically-demanding procedure. The ability to selectively cannulate the bile duct and pancreatic duct (PD) quickly and atraumatically is the key to successful therapeutic ERCP, and to minimizing post-ERCP complications, especially pancreatitis (PEP). Prophylactic stenting of the PD has significantly reduced the risk of severe PEP. Difficult ERCP access refers to the length of time and number of attempts it takes to achieve deep cannulation of the desired duct. If biliary access cannot be achieved quickly, PD stenting over a guide wire is recommended, which facilitates further attempts to enter the bile duct. Familiarity with guide wires and needle knife papillotomy technique are necessary to achieve close to 100?% biliary cannulation. Anatomic abnormalities, from gastric outlet strictures, periampullary diverticula, and ampullary masses to surgical rearrangement of the upper GI tract, contribute to the difficulty of performing ERCP. Adjunctive techniques to overcome these problems include percutaneous transhepatic biliary access and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided puncture of the bile duct through the stomach or duodenal wall. Therapeutic EUS is emerging as a major tool in the management of pancreatic and biliary disease, and will likely replace many therapeutic ERCP techniques in the next decade.     

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the management of pancreaticobiliary disorders in children

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not yet fully established in children. The purpose of this study was to assess the use of ERCP in the diagnosis and management of various pancreaticobiliary disorders in children. METHODS: Eighty-four ERCPs were performed over 5.5 years in 72 children with suspected pancreaticobiliary tract disorders with an adult-type duodenoscope. In all cases, indications, procedure time, ERCP findings, complications, patients course and therapeutic intervention (if any) were recorded. RESULTS: The mean (+/- SD) age of these children was 8.8 +/- 3.3 years. Successful cannulation was possible in 70 (97%) cases. Of the 44 cases with suspected biliary tract disease, 14 had a choledochal cyst, 13 had portal biliopathy, two each had CBD stones, primary sclerosing cholangitis and a bile leak, one had biliary ascariasis, eight had a normal cholangiogram, and CBD cannulation failed in two. Eight of the 28 children with suspected pancreatic disorders had chronic pancreatitis, five had pancreatic duct disruption, three had pancreas divisum and the rest had a normal pancreatogram (including all eight children with unexplained abdominal pain). Therapeutic ERCP was performed in 22 children, endoscopic nasobiliary or a nasocystic drain was placed in 16, biliary stenting was conducted in two, pancreatic duct stenting was conducted in three, and minor papilla dilation was conducted in one child. Six children had mild procedure-related complications. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is very useful in the treatment of cholangitis, bile leak, pseudocyst and pancreatic fistulae in children. However, its role in unexplained abdominal pain is doubtful.     

Risk factors for postoperative pancreatitis associated with diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

OBJECTIVE : To investigate the risk factors for postoperative pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC), endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and endoscopic biliary stenting. METHODS : Four hundred and twelve patients referred to the endoscopy unit were divided into seven groups: (i) double ducts (pancreatic duct and biliary duct) contrast media filling group (ERCP group); (ii) biliary duct contrast media filling group (ERC group); (iii) pancreatic duct contrast media filling group (ERP group); (iv) ERCP plus biliary stenting group (ERCP + stent group); (v) ERC plus stenting group (ERC + stent group); (vi) ERCP plus EST and stone extraction (SE) group (ERCP + EST + SE group); and (vii) ERC plus EST and SE group (ERC + EST + SE group). Differences in postoperative serum amylase at 4 and 24 h, as well as clinical symptoms, were compared among the different groups. RESULTS : The incidence of postoperative hyperamylasemia at 4 and 24 h was 17.7 and 4.4%, respectively. The overall incidence of postoperative acute pancreatitis was 3.9% and the ERP group had the highest incidence of postoperative acute pancreatitis among the seven groups. CONCLUSIONS : Repeated pancreatic duct contrast filling during ERCP manipulation is the main risk factor for postoperative pancreatitis and therapeutic ERCP, such as EST, stenting and SE, does not increase the incidence of postoperative pancreatitis.     

3种辅助插管技术在ERCP胆管插管困难病例中的临床应用

目的对比双导丝插管技术、针状刀乳头预切开术与经胰管乳头预切开术3种辅助插管技术在ERCP胆管插管困难病例中的成功率和并发症发生率,探讨安全有效的辅助插管技术。方法将104例经内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)选择性胆管插管困难患者随机分成3组分别行3种不同辅助插管技术,即双导丝插管术组(A组)35例,针状刀乳头预切开组(B组)35例,经胰管乳头预切开组(C组)34例。对比3组患者辅助胆管插管的成功率、获得成功插管的时间与并发症的发生率。结果 A组辅助插管成功率为51.43%(18/35),B组为91.43%(32/35),C组为70.59%(24/34),3组成功率差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。3组成功插管时间分别为(7.83±1.08)min,(8.20±0.91)min和(7.91±1.20)min,3组成功插管时间无显著性差异(P>0.05)。3组患者术后胰腺炎发生率分别为:2.86%(1/35),22.86%(8/35)与8.82%(3/34),3组间术后胰腺炎发生率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。3组患者均无严重感染、大出血、穿孔等并发症发生。结论 3种辅助插管技术均可提高胆管插管成功率,其中针状刀乳头预切开术与经胰管乳头预切开术有更高的成功率,但术后胰腺炎等并发症发生率亦较高;双导丝插管术成功率较低,但安全性较高。     

Can pancreatic duct stenting prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients who undergo pancreatic duct guidewire placement for achieving selective biliary cannulation? A prospective randomized controlled trial

Background  

Although pancreatic duct guidewire placement (P-GW) for achieving selective biliary cannulation is reported to be effective in patients in whom endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is difficult, this technique entails a possible increased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to evaluate the prophylactic effect of pancreatic duct stenting on the frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients who underwent P-GW.     

经胰管弓式隔膜乳头预切开术和针式乳头预切开术在困难胆管插管中的应用研究

目的评价经胰管弓式隔膜乳头预切开术处理ERCP困难胆管插管的应用价值。方法回顾2006年1月至2008年7月109例ERCP胆总管插管困难患者进行经胰管弓式隔膜乳头预切开术（下称经胰管组,56例）和常规针式乳头预切开术（下称常规针刀组,53例）的临床资料,比较两种方法插管成功率及并发症发生率。结果109例患者中的97例在乳头预切开术后可成功插入胆管,经胰管组成功率96．4％（54／56）,常规针刀组成功率81．1％（43／53）,两者差异具统计学意义（P〈0．05）。109例中11例出现并发症,包括急性胰腺炎5例、出血4例、胆道感染2例。其中,经胰管组急性胰腺炎2例,常规针刀组急性胰腺炎3例,出血4例,胆道感染2例。两组比较,经胰管组总的并发症发生率低于常规针刀组（3．6％比17．0％,P〈0．05）,术后胰腺炎、出血、感染发生率也分别低于后者,但均无统计学意义。结论内镜经胰管弓式隔膜乳头预切开术超选胆总管成功率高于针式乳头预切开术,而且并发症较低,是处理选择性胆总管插管较困难患者的安全和有效的办法。