Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is There Any Difference in Outcomes Between Long Pigtail and Short Flanged Prophylactic Pancreatic Duct Stents?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement has been shown to reduce the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) especially in high-risk patients. However, there is no consensus on the best type of PD stent. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the differences in the outcomes between long (>3 cm) pigtail and short (≤3 cm) flanged 4 Fr Freeman Pancreatic Flexi-Stents in preventing PEP.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all ERCP procedures performed between 08/01/2006 and 10/01/2007 by one of two experienced endoscopists (>5 years of experience) with the assistance of a trainee. Patient data was collected for indications, risk factors for PEP, type and reason for PD stent, complications, and any mortality. The PD stent was removed endoscopically if it was still in place on abdominal X-ray done 2 weeks post-ERCP. The data was analyzed with Student's t test, Chi-square, and ANOVA tests by using SPSS software version 15.0.

Results

Out of a total of 753 ERCP procedures, 179 (23.8%) required either long or short prophylactic PD stents. The incidence of PEP was 3.7% versus 13.6% for long and short stent groups, respectively (p = 0.019). Spontaneous stent dislodgement rate was 95.4% versus 81.8% for long and short stent groups, respectively (p = 0.007). There was no difference in non-pancreatic complications between the two stent groups. There was no procedure-related mortality.

Conclusions

Long (>3 cm) pigtail PD stent due to their specific design showed better outcomes as compared to short (<3 cm) flanged PD stent in preventing PEP and spontaneous stent dislodgement rates. However, further prospective trials are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tarnasky PR, Palesh YY, Cunningham JT, et al. Pancreatic stenting prevents pancreatitis after biliary sphincterotomy in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Gastroenterology. 1998;115:1518–1524.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Smithline A, Silverman W, Rogers D, et al. Effect of prophylactic main pancreatic duct stenting on the incidence of biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 1993;39:652–657.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fazel A, Quadri A, Catalano MF, et al. Does a pancreatic duct stent prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:291–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Aizawa T, Ueno N. Stent placement in the pancreatic duct prevents pancreatitis after endoscopic sphincter dilation for removal of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;34:280–285.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sofuni A, Maguchi H, Itoi T, et al. Prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis by an endoscopic pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5(11):1339–1346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tsuchiya T, Itoi T, Sofuni A, et al. Temporary pancreatic stent to prevent post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a preliminary, single-center, randomized controlled trial. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2007;14(3):302–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fogel EL, Eversman D, Jamidar P, et al. Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction: pancreaticobiliary sphincterotomy with pancreatic stent placement has a lower rate of pancreatitis than biliary sphincterotomy alone. Endoscopy. 2002;34:280–285.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Elton E, Howell DA, Parsons WG, et al. Endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy: indications, outcome, and a safe stentless technique. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:240–249.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Norton ID, Gostout CJ, Baron TH, et al. Safety and outcome of endoscopic snare excision of the major duodenal papilla. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:239–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Catalano MF, Linder JD, Chak A, et al. Endoscopic management of adenoma of the major duodenal papilla. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:225–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Freeman ML, Overby C, Qi D. Pancreatic stent insertion: consequences of failure and results of a modified technique to maximize success. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;5:8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vandervoort J, Soetikno RM, Montes H, et al. Accuracy and complication rate of brush cytology from bile duct versus pancreatic duct. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;49:322–327.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Singh P, Das A, Isenberg G, et al. Does prophylactic pancreatic stent placement reduce the risk of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:544–550.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37:383–393.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL, et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:139–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Freeman ML, DiSario JA, Nelson DB, et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:425–434.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G, et al. Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;48:1–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Masci E, Toti G, Mariani A, et al. Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:417–423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Freeman ML, Guda NM. Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comprehensive review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:845–864.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sherman S, Lehman GA. ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis. Pancreas. 1991;6:350–367.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996;13:909–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sherman S, Ruffolo TA, Hawes RH, et al. Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy. A prospective series with emphasis on the increased risk associated with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction and nondilated bile ducts. Gastroenterology. 1991;101:1068–1075.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Das A, Singh P, Sivak MV Jr, et al. Pancreatic-stent placement for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:960–968.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Somogyi L, Chuttani R, Croffie J, et al. Biliary and pancreatic stents. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:910–919.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brackbill S, Young S, Schoenfeld P, et al. A survey of physician practices on prophylactic pancreatic stents. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64(1):45–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rashdan A, Fogel EL, McHenry L Jr, et al. Improved stent characteristics for prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2(4):322–329.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Guda N, Catalano MF, Geenen JE. Post ERCP pancreatitis: differences in outcomes between 3 Fr long pigtail and modified short 5 Fr Geenen stents: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:AB113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Chahal P, Todd HB, Tarnasky PR, et al. A prospective multicenter randomized trial of pancreatic duct stents to prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Smith MT, Sherman S, Ikenberry SO, et al. Alterations in pancreatic ductal morphology following polyethylene pancreatic stent therapy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44:268–275.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Chahal P, Baron TH, Peterson BT, et al. Pancreatic stent prophylaxis of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: spontaneous migration rates and clinical outcomes. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol. 2007;53(3):225–230.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Andriulli A, Forlano R, Napolitano G, et al. Pancreatic duct stents in the prophylaxis of pancreatic damage after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systemic analysis of benefits and associated risks. Digestion. 2007;75(2–3):156–163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, 270-05 76th Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY, 11040, USA

    Shahzad Iqbal

  2. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, 18104, USA

    Shashin Shah

  3. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Vasudha Dhar & Peter D. Stevens

  4. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA

    Stavros N. Stavropoulos

Authors
  1. Shahzad Iqbal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shashin Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vasudha Dhar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stavros N. Stavropoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Peter D. Stevens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahzad Iqbal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Iqbal, S., Shah, S., Dhar, V. et al. Is There Any Difference in Outcomes Between Long Pigtail and Short Flanged Prophylactic Pancreatic Duct Stents?. Dig Dis Sci 56, 260–265 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1262-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1262-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation