BackgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiography using a short double-balloon endoscope (DB-ERC) is a promising minimally-invasive method for accessing hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) anastomosis in patients with surgically altered anatomy. We aimed to evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of balloon dilatation for benign HJ anastomotic stricture (HJAS) in patients who had previously undergone Whipple’s procedure using a DB-ERC.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 46 patients who underwent balloon dilatation alone with a DB-ERC for benign HJAS between November 2008 and November 2014. The median follow-up duration was 3.5 (interquartile range [IQR], 1.9–5.1) years.ResultsThe technical and clinical success rates were 100%, and adverse events occurred in 7% (3/46, cholangitis). The median hospitalization period was seven (IQR, 5–10) days. Of 42 patients (91%) followed-up for > 1 year, 24 (51%) had recurrent HJAS at a median of 1.2 (IQR, 0.6–2.9) years after balloon dilatation. The cumulative anastomotic patency rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 73, 55, and 49%, respectively. In univariate analysis, early stricture formation (< 1 year) was a risk factor for recurrent stenosis, although no statistically significant risk factors were observed in multivariate analysis.ConclusionsEndoscopic balloon dilatation with DB-ERC for benign HJAS is effective and safe, having good immediate technical success and few adverse events. Further improvements to this procedure are needed to prevent recurrent HJAS.
Serum and plasma were found to be good materials for detecting cancer-specific DNA in the peripheral blood and the presence of KRAS mutations in blood-derived DNA may be used as a prognostic biomarker for patients with pancreatic cancer.
Background:Bile duct stones after hepaticojejunostomy are considered a troublesome adverse event. Although percutaneous transhepatic procedures using a cholangioscopy is performed to treat these bile duct stones, a peroral endoscopic procedure using a short, double-balloon enteroscope (sDBE) is an alternative. This study aimed to compare the immediate and long-term outcomes of both treatments for bile duct stones in patients who underwent prior hepaticojejunostomy.Methods:Between October 2001 and May 2013, 40 consecutive patients were treated for bile duct stones after hepaticojejunostomy at a tertiary care hospital. Initial success with biliary access, biliary intervention-related technical success, clinical success, adverse events, hospitalization duration, and stone-free survival were retrospectively evaluated.Results:The initial success rates for biliary access were 100% (8/8) with percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS) and 91% (29/32) with sDBE. In three patients in whom biliary access during initial sDBE failed, successful access with subsequent PTCS was achieved, and biliary intervention-related technical success and clinical success were eventually achieved in all 40 patients. The rate of adverse events was significantly lower with sDBE than with PTCS (10% versus 45%; p = 0.025). The median hospitalization duration for complete stone clearance was significantly shorter with sDBE than with PTCS (10 versus 35 days; p < 0.001). During the median 7.2 year or 3.1 year follow up, the probabilities of being stone-free at 1, 2, and 3 years were 100%, 73%, and 64% for PTCS and 85%, 65%, and 59% for sDBE, respectively (p = 0.919).Conclusions:sDBE was useful, with few adverse events and short hospitalization; therefore, experienced endoscopists can consider it as first-line treatment for bile duct stones in patients with prior hepaticojejunostomy.
Some patients had stent dysfunction irrespective of the survival period after double stenting. Endoscopic reintervention was technically feasible and clinically effective even after double stenting. Duodenal stent dysfunction and biliary stent end's location were risk factors for biliary stent dysfunction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.