scholarly journals S1854 Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patient With Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and High-Grade Duodenal Stricture Across Dual Lumen Apposing Metal Stents

2020 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. S960-S960
Author(s):  
Kornpong Vantanasiri ◽  
Guru Trikudanathan
2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (10) ◽  
pp. 1679-1683
Author(s):  
Mohammed H. Al-Temimi ◽  
Charles Trujillo ◽  
Mital Shah ◽  
Sriram Rangarajan ◽  
Edwin Kim ◽  
...  

Same-day endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and cholecystectomy (LC) could potentially reduce hospital length of stay (HLOS). Patients undergoing same-day procedures (N = 164) between 2012 and 2014 were compared with different-day procedures performed in the second half of 2014 (N = 276), in the Kaiser Permanente Southern California database. Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. ERCP success rate (97.5% vs 93.5%), overall postoperative morbidity (3.66% vs 3.99%), and retained stones (2.5% vs 5.8%) were not different between groups ( P > 0.05); however, HLOS was shorter in the same-day group (2.99 ± 2.34 vs 3.84 ± 2.52 days, P < 0.001). Morbidity, procedure success, and HLOS were not different in the same-day group, whether ERCP was performed before or after LC ( P > 0.05). In the same-day group, those undergoing single anesthesia had higher BMI (40.1 ± 10.8 vs 30.3 ± 6.6) and were more likely to have gastric bypass (30% vs 0%) than those undergoing separate anesthesia sessions ( P < 0.01). Longer HLOS (4.8 ± 3.5 vs 2.9 ± 2.2 days) and higher estimated blood loss (65 ± 90 mL vs 20 ± 29 mL) were also associated with the single-anesthetic session ( P < 0.01). ERCP performed on the same day of LC reduces HLOS without increasing morbidity. This approach does not affect postoperative morbidity and ERCP success rate, whether ERCP was performed before or after LC.


2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. 858-859 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barham K. Abu Dayyeh ◽  
Christopher C. Thompson ◽  
Christopher Gostout

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (03) ◽  
pp. E423-E436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fares Ayoub ◽  
Tony S. Brar ◽  
Debdeep Banerjee ◽  
Ali M. Abbas ◽  
Yu Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is technically challenging in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy, which is increasing in frequency given the rise of obesity. Laparoscopy-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (EA-ERCP) are distinct approaches with their respective strengths and weaknesses. We conducted a meta-analysis comparing the procedural time, rates of success and adverse events of each method. Patients and methods A search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library was performed from inception to October 2018 for studies reporting outcomes of LA or EA-ERCP in patients with RYGB anatomy. Studies using single, double, ‘short’ double-balloon or spiral enteroscopy were included in the EA-ERCP arm. Outcomes of interest included procedural time, papilla identification, papilla cannulation, therapeutic success and adverse events. Therapeutic success was defined as successful completion of the originally intended diagnostic or therapeutic indication for ERCP. Results A total of 3859 studies were initially identified using our search strategy, of which 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of therapeutic success was significantly higher in LA-ERCP (97.9 %; 95 % CI: 96.7–98.7 %) with little heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0 %) when compared to EA-ERCP (73.2 %; 95 % CI: 62.5–82.6 %) with significant heterogeneity (I2: 80.2 %). Conversely, the pooled rate of adverse events was significantly higher in LA-ERCP (19.0 %; 95 % CI: 12.6–26.4 %) when compared to EA-ERCP (6.5 %; 95% CI: 3.9–9.6 %). The pooled mean procedure time for LA-ERCP was 158.4 minutes (SD ± 20) which was also higher than the mean pooled procedure time for EA-ERCP at 100.5 minutes (SD ± 19.2). Conclusions LA-ERCP is significantly more effective than EA-ERCP in patients with RYGB but is associated with a higher rate of adverse events and longer procedural time.


2020 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. S492-S493
Author(s):  
Hardikkumar Shah ◽  
Achint Patel ◽  
Uvesh Mansuri ◽  
Walid Baddoura ◽  
Matthew Grossman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document