Feasibility of Peroral Cholangioscopy in the Initial Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Malignant Biliary Strictures.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Yuichi Suzuki, Tomohiro Ishii, Haruo Miwa, Takeshi Sato, Yoshihiro Goda, Kuniyasu Irie, Kazuya Sugimori, Shin Maeda
{"title":"Feasibility of Peroral Cholangioscopy in the Initial Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Malignant Biliary Strictures.","authors":"Yuichi Suzuki, Tomohiro Ishii, Haruo Miwa, Takeshi Sato, Yoshihiro Goda, Kuniyasu Irie, Kazuya Sugimori, Shin Maeda","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics14222589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) is valuable for assessing malignant biliary strictures; however, biliary drainage prior to POCS often hinders accurate diagnosis. <b>Objectives:</b> This retrospective study aimed to investigate the feasibility of POCS using a newly developed cholangioscope, CHF-B290, during initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant biliary strictures. <b>Methods:</b> This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent initial ERCP for malignant biliary strictures at two institutions between January 2018 and March 2022. Patients who underwent initial ERCP with POCS were classified into the POCS group, and those without POCS were classified into the non-POCS group. To prevent post-POCS cholangitis, the original irrigation system for CHF-B290 was used in all POCS examinations. The primary endpoint was the rate of post-ERCP biliary infections, and the secondary endpoints were other ERCP-related complications, including pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 53 and 94 patients were included in the POCS and non-POCS groups, respectively. For the primary endpoint, the rate of post-ERCP biliary infection was not significantly different between the two groups (1.9% vs. 5.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.42). For the secondary endpoints, no significant differences were observed in the rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis (5.7% vs. 6.4%, <i>p</i> = 1.00) and other ERCP-related complications. The overall complication rate was 9.4% in the POCS group and 13% in the non-POCS group (<i>p</i> = 0.60). <b>Conclusions:</b> POCS during the initial ERCP for malignant biliary strictures is feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"14 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14222589","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) is valuable for assessing malignant biliary strictures; however, biliary drainage prior to POCS often hinders accurate diagnosis. Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the feasibility of POCS using a newly developed cholangioscope, CHF-B290, during initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant biliary strictures. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent initial ERCP for malignant biliary strictures at two institutions between January 2018 and March 2022. Patients who underwent initial ERCP with POCS were classified into the POCS group, and those without POCS were classified into the non-POCS group. To prevent post-POCS cholangitis, the original irrigation system for CHF-B290 was used in all POCS examinations. The primary endpoint was the rate of post-ERCP biliary infections, and the secondary endpoints were other ERCP-related complications, including pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation. Results: Overall, 53 and 94 patients were included in the POCS and non-POCS groups, respectively. For the primary endpoint, the rate of post-ERCP biliary infection was not significantly different between the two groups (1.9% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.42). For the secondary endpoints, no significant differences were observed in the rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis (5.7% vs. 6.4%, p = 1.00) and other ERCP-related complications. The overall complication rate was 9.4% in the POCS group and 13% in the non-POCS group (p = 0.60). Conclusions: POCS during the initial ERCP for malignant biliary strictures is feasible.

在恶性胆道狭窄的初始内镜逆行胰胆管造影术中采用口周胆道造影术的可行性。
背景:口周胆管造影术(POCS)对评估恶性胆道狭窄很有价值;但在 POCS 之前进行胆道引流往往会妨碍准确诊断。研究目的这项回顾性研究旨在探讨在恶性胆道狭窄的初次内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)中使用新开发的胆道镜 CHF-B290 进行口周胆道镜检查的可行性。方法:这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了2018年1月至2022年3月期间在两家机构接受初次ERCP治疗恶性胆道狭窄的患者。接受初始ERCP时使用POCS的患者被分为POCS组,未使用POCS的患者被分为非POCS组。为防止POCS后胆管炎,所有POCS检查均使用CHF-B290的原始灌洗系统。主要终点是ERCP术后胆道感染率,次要终点是其他ERCP相关并发症,包括胰腺炎、出血和穿孔。结果:POCS 组和非 POCS 组分别有 53 名和 94 名患者。在主要终点方面,两组ERCP术后胆道感染率无明显差异(1.9% 对 5.3%,P = 0.42)。在次要终点方面,ERCP术后胰腺炎的发生率(5.7% vs. 6.4%,p = 1.00)和其他ERCP相关并发症的发生率无明显差异。POCS组的总并发症发生率为9.4%,非POCS组为13%(P = 0.60)。结论在治疗恶性胆道狭窄的初始ERCP期间进行POCS是可行的。
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
Diagnostics
Diagnostics Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍: Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.
×
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