Cargando…

Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP

BACKGROUND: Radiation exposure is inherently involved in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which could cause radiation-induced injury to endoscopists with long-term exposure. Nonradiation ERCP has been applied to pregnant patients. Conceivably, the same techniques could be used...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zeng, Wei, Hu, Jie, Pan, Yanglin, Zhang, Mingqing, Xu, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9160145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34698935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08822-2
_version_ 1784719210805460992
author Zeng, Wei
Hu, Jie
Pan, Yanglin
Zhang, Mingqing
Xu, Li
author_facet Zeng, Wei
Hu, Jie
Pan, Yanglin
Zhang, Mingqing
Xu, Li
author_sort Zeng, Wei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Radiation exposure is inherently involved in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which could cause radiation-induced injury to endoscopists with long-term exposure. Nonradiation ERCP has been applied to pregnant patients. Conceivably, the same techniques could be used to benefit endoscopists. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nonradiation-to-endoscopist (NRE) ERCP, compared with standard ERCP. METHODS: A retrospective, single-center study was conducted from August 2010 to December 2015. Patients aged 18–90 years and with choledocholithiasis (< 15 mm) or distal biliary stricture were eligible. Pre-ERCP evaluation with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography was mandatory. To overcome selection bias, we performed 1:2 match using propensity score matching (PSM) between NRE and standard groups. The primary endpoint was overall ERCP success rate. Secondary endpoints were cannulation success rate, stone clearance rate, complication rate, and duration of hospitalization. RESULTS: A total of 329 patients met inclusion criteria. After PSM, 73 patients were included in the NRE group and 146 in the standard group. The ERCP overall success rate for NRE and standard groups was equivalent (94.5% vs. 93.2%, P = 0.70). There was no difference in cannulation success rates between the two groups (95.6% vs. 97.8%, P = 0.39). A total of 88.3% of patients in the NRE group and 93.9% of patients in the standard group had stones cleared at initial ERCP (P = 0.57). No difference in overall stone clearance rate between the two groups (95.0% vs. 93.9%, P = 0.77) was found after second ERCP. The complication rate (1.4% vs. 1.4%, P = 1.00) and hospital duration (8.3 ± 5.1 vs. 10.2 ± 8.8 days, P = 0.07) were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although technically demanding, NRE-ERCP is both safe and feasible in selected patients compared with standard ERCP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9160145
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91601452022-06-03 Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP Zeng, Wei Hu, Jie Pan, Yanglin Zhang, Mingqing Xu, Li Surg Endosc Article BACKGROUND: Radiation exposure is inherently involved in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which could cause radiation-induced injury to endoscopists with long-term exposure. Nonradiation ERCP has been applied to pregnant patients. Conceivably, the same techniques could be used to benefit endoscopists. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nonradiation-to-endoscopist (NRE) ERCP, compared with standard ERCP. METHODS: A retrospective, single-center study was conducted from August 2010 to December 2015. Patients aged 18–90 years and with choledocholithiasis (< 15 mm) or distal biliary stricture were eligible. Pre-ERCP evaluation with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography was mandatory. To overcome selection bias, we performed 1:2 match using propensity score matching (PSM) between NRE and standard groups. The primary endpoint was overall ERCP success rate. Secondary endpoints were cannulation success rate, stone clearance rate, complication rate, and duration of hospitalization. RESULTS: A total of 329 patients met inclusion criteria. After PSM, 73 patients were included in the NRE group and 146 in the standard group. The ERCP overall success rate for NRE and standard groups was equivalent (94.5% vs. 93.2%, P = 0.70). There was no difference in cannulation success rates between the two groups (95.6% vs. 97.8%, P = 0.39). A total of 88.3% of patients in the NRE group and 93.9% of patients in the standard group had stones cleared at initial ERCP (P = 0.57). No difference in overall stone clearance rate between the two groups (95.0% vs. 93.9%, P = 0.77) was found after second ERCP. The complication rate (1.4% vs. 1.4%, P = 1.00) and hospital duration (8.3 ± 5.1 vs. 10.2 ± 8.8 days, P = 0.07) were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although technically demanding, NRE-ERCP is both safe and feasible in selected patients compared with standard ERCP. Springer US 2021-10-26 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9160145/ /pubmed/34698935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08822-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021, corrected publication 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Zeng, Wei
Hu, Jie
Pan, Yanglin
Zhang, Mingqing
Xu, Li
Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title_full Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title_fullStr Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title_full_unstemmed Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title_short Nonradiation-to-endoscopist ERCP is non-inferior to standard ERCP
title_sort nonradiation-to-endoscopist ercp is non-inferior to standard ercp
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9160145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34698935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08822-2
work_keys_str_mv AT zengwei nonradiationtoendoscopistercpisnoninferiortostandardercp
AT hujie nonradiationtoendoscopistercpisnoninferiortostandardercp
AT panyanglin nonradiationtoendoscopistercpisnoninferiortostandardercp
AT zhangmingqing nonradiationtoendoscopistercpisnoninferiortostandardercp
AT xuli nonradiationtoendoscopistercpisnoninferiortostandardercp