A comparative study between single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of large main pancreatic duct stones

dc.contributor.authorBick, Benjamin L.
dc.contributor.authorPatel, Feenalie
dc.contributor.authorEasler, Jeffrey J.
dc.contributor.authorTong, Yan
dc.contributor.authorWatkins, James L.
dc.contributor.authorMcHenry, Lee
dc.contributor.authorLehman, Glen
dc.contributor.authorFogel, Evan L.
dc.contributor.authorGromski, Mark A.
dc.contributor.authorSherman, Stuart
dc.contributor.departmentMedicine, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-11T12:12:01Z
dc.date.available2024-01-11T12:12:01Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractBackground and aims: Endoscopic management of large main pancreatic ductal (MPD) stones often require treatment with lithotripsy. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been the mainstay therapy, and single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal (intracorporeal) lithotripsy (SOPIL) is an emerging technique. However, no comparative studies between these techniques exist. We therefore aimed to compare ESWL to SOPIL for the treatment of large MPD stones. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing patients who were treated with ESWL or SOPIL from September 2013 to September 2019 at a single tertiary center. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with technical success and efficient stone clearance (≤ 2 procedures to clear stones). Results: There were 240 patients who were treated with ESWL and 18 treated with SOPIL. The overall technical success rate of stone clearance was 224/258 (86.8%), which was similar between the ESWL and SOPIL groups (86.7% vs 88.9%, p = 1.000). A SOPIL approach required fewer total procedures (1.6 ± 0.6 vs 3.1 ± 1.5, p < 0.001) and less aggregate procedure time (101.6 ± 68.2 vs 191.8 ± 111.6 min, p = 0.001). Adverse event rates were similar between the groups (6.3% vs 5.6%, p = 1.000). The use of SOPIL was independently associated with greater efficiency compared to ESWL (OR 5.241 [1.348-20.369], p = 0.017). Stone size > 10 mm was associated with less efficient stone clearance (OR 0.484 [0.256-0.912], p = 0.025). Conclusion: Both ESWL and SOPIL are safe and effective endoscopic adjunct modalities for treating large pancreatic duct stones. SOPIL is an emerging alternative to ESWL that is potentially more efficient for lithotripsy and MPD stone clearance.
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscript
dc.identifier.citationBick BL, Patel F, Easler JJ, et al. A comparative study between single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of large main pancreatic duct stones. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(5):3217-3226. doi:10.1007/s00464-021-08631-7
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/37973
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s00464-021-08631-7
dc.relation.journalSurgical Endoscopy
dc.rightsPublisher Policy
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
dc.subjectExtracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy
dc.subjectElectrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy
dc.subjectChronic pancreatitis
dc.subjectPancreatic duct stones
dc.titleA comparative study between single-operator pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of large main pancreatic duct stones
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
nihms-1891977.pdf
Size:
451.15 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: