Technical Factors Associated With the Benefit of Prophylactic Pancreatic Stent Placement During High-Risk Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Secondary Analysis of the SVI Trial Data Set.

IF 8 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
American Journal of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-27 DOI:10.14309/ajg.0000000000003052
B Joseph Elmunzer, Jingwen Zhang, Gregory A Coté, Steven A Edmundowicz, Sachin Wani, Raj Shah, Ji Young Bang, Shyam Varadarajulu, Vikesh K Singh, Mouen Khashab, Richard S Kwon, James M Scheiman, Field F Willingham, Steven A Keilin, Georgios I Papachristou, Amitabh Chak, Adam Slivka, Daniel Mullady, Vladimir Kushnir, James Buxbaum, Rajesh Keswani, Timothy B Gardner, Nauzer Forbes, Amit Rastogi, Andrew Ross, Joanna Law, Patrick Yachimski, Yen-I Chen, Alan Barkun, Zachary L Smith, Jose Serrano, Bret Petersen, Andrew Y Wang, John R Saltzman, Rebecca L Spitzer, Collins Ordiah, Cathie Spino, Lydia D Foster, Valerie Durkalski-Mauldin
{"title":"Technical Factors Associated With the Benefit of Prophylactic Pancreatic Stent Placement During High-Risk Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Secondary Analysis of the SVI Trial Data Set.","authors":"B Joseph Elmunzer, Jingwen Zhang, Gregory A Coté, Steven A Edmundowicz, Sachin Wani, Raj Shah, Ji Young Bang, Shyam Varadarajulu, Vikesh K Singh, Mouen Khashab, Richard S Kwon, James M Scheiman, Field F Willingham, Steven A Keilin, Georgios I Papachristou, Amitabh Chak, Adam Slivka, Daniel Mullady, Vladimir Kushnir, James Buxbaum, Rajesh Keswani, Timothy B Gardner, Nauzer Forbes, Amit Rastogi, Andrew Ross, Joanna Law, Patrick Yachimski, Yen-I Chen, Alan Barkun, Zachary L Smith, Jose Serrano, Bret Petersen, Andrew Y Wang, John R Saltzman, Rebecca L Spitzer, Collins Ordiah, Cathie Spino, Lydia D Foster, Valerie Durkalski-Mauldin","doi":"10.14309/ajg.0000000000003052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) is effective for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk cases, but the optimal technical approach to this intervention remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this secondary analysis of 787 clinical trial patients who underwent successful stent placement, we studied the impact of (i) whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP or naturally during the conduct of the case, (ii) the amount of effort expended on PSP, (iii) stent length, (iv) stent diameter, and (v) guidewire caliber. We used logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between each technical factor and post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-one of the 787 patients experienced PEP. There was no clear association between PEP and whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP (vs occurring naturally; odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-1.84), whether substantial effort expended on stent placement (vs nonsubstantial effort; OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73-3.45), stent length (>5 vs ≤5 cm; OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63-1.61), stent diameter (≥5 vs <5 Fr; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.96), or guidewire caliber (0.035 vs 0.025 in; 0.83, 95% CI 0.49-1.41).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The 5 modifiable technical factors studied in this secondary analysis of large-scale randomized trial data did not appear to have a strong impact on the benefit of prophylactic PSP in preventing PEP after high-risk ERCP. Within the limitations of post hoc subgroup analysis, these findings may have important implications in procedural decision making and suggest that the benefit of PSP is robust to variations in technical approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":7608,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":"811-815"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11865352/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003052","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) is effective for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk cases, but the optimal technical approach to this intervention remains uncertain.

Methods: In this secondary analysis of 787 clinical trial patients who underwent successful stent placement, we studied the impact of (i) whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP or naturally during the conduct of the case, (ii) the amount of effort expended on PSP, (iii) stent length, (iv) stent diameter, and (v) guidewire caliber. We used logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between each technical factor and post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

Results: Ninety-one of the 787 patients experienced PEP. There was no clear association between PEP and whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP (vs occurring naturally; odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-1.84), whether substantial effort expended on stent placement (vs nonsubstantial effort; OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73-3.45), stent length (>5 vs ≤5 cm; OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63-1.61), stent diameter (≥5 vs <5 Fr; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.96), or guidewire caliber (0.035 vs 0.025 in; 0.83, 95% CI 0.49-1.41).

Discussion: The 5 modifiable technical factors studied in this secondary analysis of large-scale randomized trial data did not appear to have a strong impact on the benefit of prophylactic PSP in preventing PEP after high-risk ERCP. Within the limitations of post hoc subgroup analysis, these findings may have important implications in procedural decision making and suggest that the benefit of PSP is robust to variations in technical approach.

与高风险ERCP期间预防性胰腺支架置入获益相关的技术因素:对SVI试验数据集的二次分析。
背景:预防性胰腺支架置入术(PSP)可有效预防高风险病例在内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)后发生胰腺炎,但这种干预的最佳技术方法仍不确定:在这项对 787 名成功植入支架的临床试验参与者进行的二次分析中,我们研究了以下因素的影响:方法: 在这项二次分析中,我们研究了 787 名成功接受支架置入术的临床试验参与者的以下影响:1)胰腺导丝入路是仅为 PSP 而实现的,还是在手术过程中自然实现的;2)PSP 所花费的精力;3)支架长度;4)支架直径;5)导丝口径。我们使用逻辑回归模型研究了每个技术因素与ERCP术后胰腺炎(PEP)之间的调整关系:结果:787 位患者中有 91 位出现了 PEP。结果:787 名患者中有 91 人发生了 PEP。PEP 与以下因素之间没有明显的关联:胰腺导丝接入是否仅为 PSP 的目的(vs. 自然发生;OR 0.82,95%CI 0.37-1.84)、支架置入是否耗费大量精力(vs. 非大量精力;OR 1.58,95%CI 0.73-3.45)、支架长度(>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm;OR 1.01,95%CI 0.63-1.61)、支架直径(≥5 Fr vs. ≤5 Fr;OR 1.01,95%CI 0.63-1.61)、支架长度(>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm;OR 1.01,95%CI 0.63-1.61)、支架直径(≥5 Fr vs. ≤5 Fr;OR 1.58,95%CI 0.73-3.45):在这项对大规模随机试验数据的二次分析中,研究的 5 个可改变的技术因素似乎对预防性胰腺支架置入术在高风险 ERCP 后预防 PEP 的益处影响不大。在事后亚组分析的限制下,这些发现可能对手术决策有重要影响,并表明预防性胰腺支架置入术的益处不受技术方法变化的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Gastroenterology
American Journal of Gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
458
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), The American Journal of Gastroenterology (AJG) stands as the foremost clinical journal in the fields of gastroenterology and hepatology. AJG offers practical and professional support to clinicians addressing the most prevalent gastroenterological disorders in patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信