Cargando…

Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic duct stents are frequently placed for prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Because of concern for possible secondary ductal changes from a retained stent, these stents need to be monitored and removed if retained. Usually an abdomina...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Loloi, Justin, Lipkin, Jacob S., Gagliardi, Eileen M., Levenick, John M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6636219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31360920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2631774519862895
_version_ 1783436029396516864
author Loloi, Justin
Lipkin, Jacob S.
Gagliardi, Eileen M.
Levenick, John M.
author_facet Loloi, Justin
Lipkin, Jacob S.
Gagliardi, Eileen M.
Levenick, John M.
author_sort Loloi, Justin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pancreatic duct stents are frequently placed for prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Because of concern for possible secondary ductal changes from a retained stent, these stents need to be monitored and removed if retained. Usually an abdominal X-ray is performed to assess retained stent, and if present, an esophagogastroduodenoscopy is performed to remove the stent. Limited data is published on false-negative radiology reports for spontaneous passage of stents. METHODS: Using an Institutional Review Board–approved stent log, a retrospective chart review of all pancreatic duct stents placed at our institution from 2008 to 2014 was performed. RESULTS: A total of 856 pancreatic duct stents were placed during the study period. Of these, 435 (50.8%) were prophylactic stents and 421 (49.2%) were therapeutic. Complete follow-up data were available in 426 (97.9%) patients with prophylactic stents. Six patients (1.4%) were lost to follow up and three (0.7%) expired prior to removal. In all, 283 (66%) had follow-up imaging, with 167 (39.2%) having the official radiology read with no retained pancreatic duct stent in place. Eight of these cases were “false-negative” radiology interpretation (4.8% of cases read as “no stent,” NNH = 20). The stent was found either by review of image by an endoscopist or incidental stent discovery during a follow-up procedure. CONCLUSION: Radiologist interpretation of abdominal X-rays to assess spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic ducts stents resulted in a false-negative interpretation in approximately 5% of cases. Independent review of the images by the endoscopist may be beneficial given unfamiliarity of these stents by radiologists.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6636219
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66362192019-07-29 Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate? Loloi, Justin Lipkin, Jacob S. Gagliardi, Eileen M. Levenick, John M. Ther Adv Gastrointest Endosc Original Research BACKGROUND: Pancreatic duct stents are frequently placed for prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Because of concern for possible secondary ductal changes from a retained stent, these stents need to be monitored and removed if retained. Usually an abdominal X-ray is performed to assess retained stent, and if present, an esophagogastroduodenoscopy is performed to remove the stent. Limited data is published on false-negative radiology reports for spontaneous passage of stents. METHODS: Using an Institutional Review Board–approved stent log, a retrospective chart review of all pancreatic duct stents placed at our institution from 2008 to 2014 was performed. RESULTS: A total of 856 pancreatic duct stents were placed during the study period. Of these, 435 (50.8%) were prophylactic stents and 421 (49.2%) were therapeutic. Complete follow-up data were available in 426 (97.9%) patients with prophylactic stents. Six patients (1.4%) were lost to follow up and three (0.7%) expired prior to removal. In all, 283 (66%) had follow-up imaging, with 167 (39.2%) having the official radiology read with no retained pancreatic duct stent in place. Eight of these cases were “false-negative” radiology interpretation (4.8% of cases read as “no stent,” NNH = 20). The stent was found either by review of image by an endoscopist or incidental stent discovery during a follow-up procedure. CONCLUSION: Radiologist interpretation of abdominal X-rays to assess spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic ducts stents resulted in a false-negative interpretation in approximately 5% of cases. Independent review of the images by the endoscopist may be beneficial given unfamiliarity of these stents by radiologists. SAGE Publications 2019-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6636219/ /pubmed/31360920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2631774519862895 Text en © The Author(s), 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Research
Loloi, Justin
Lipkin, Jacob S.
Gagliardi, Eileen M.
Levenick, John M.
Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title_full Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title_fullStr Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title_full_unstemmed Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title_short Assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by X-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
title_sort assessing spontaneous passage of prophylactic pancreatic duct stents by x-ray: is a radiology report adequate?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6636219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31360920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2631774519862895
work_keys_str_mv AT loloijustin assessingspontaneouspassageofprophylacticpancreaticductstentsbyxrayisaradiologyreportadequate
AT lipkinjacobs assessingspontaneouspassageofprophylacticpancreaticductstentsbyxrayisaradiologyreportadequate
AT gagliardieileenm assessingspontaneouspassageofprophylacticpancreaticductstentsbyxrayisaradiologyreportadequate
AT levenickjohnm assessingspontaneouspassageofprophylacticpancreaticductstentsbyxrayisaradiologyreportadequate