English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

:   Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with Billroth II gastrectomy is still a challenging procedure. The optimal approach, namely the type of endoscope and sphincter management, has yet to be defined.   Aim:   To compare the efficacy and safety of forward-viewing gastroscope and the side-viewing duodenoscope in ERCP of patients with Billroth II gastrectomy.   Methods:   We conducted a retrospective, single-center cohort study of consecutive patients with Billroth II gastrectomy submitted to ERCP in an expert center for ERCP between 2005 and 2021. The outcomes assessed were: papilla identification, deep biliary cannulation, and adverse events (AEs). Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate potential associations and predictors of the main outcomes.   Results:   We included 83 patients with a median age of 73 (IQR 65–81) years. ERCP was performed using side-viewing duodenoscope in 52 and forward-viewing gastroscope in 31 patients. Patients’ characteristics were similar in the two groups. The global rate of papilla identification was 66% ( n  = 55). The rate of deep cannulation was 58% considering all patients and 87% in the subgroup of patients in which the papilla major was identified. Cannulation was performed with standard methods in 65% of cases and with needle-knife fistulotomy in 35%. AEs occurred in 4 patients. There was no difference between duodenoscope and gastroscope in papilla identification (64% [95% CI: 51–77] vs. 71% [55–87]). Although not statistically significant, duodenoscope had a lower deep cannulation rate when considering all patients (52% [15–39] vs. 68% [7–35]) and a higher AEs rate (8% [1–15] vs. 0% [0–1]). In a multivariate analysis, the use of gastroscope significantly increased the deep cannulation rate (OR = 152.62 [2.5–9,283.6]).   Conclusion:   This study demonstrates that forward-viewing gastroscope is at least as effective and safe as side-viewing duodenoscope for ERCP in patients with Billroth II gastrectomy. Moreover, our study showed that gastroscope is an independent predictor of successful cannulation.

Side-Viewing Duodenoscope versus Forward-Viewing Gastroscope for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Billroth II Gastrectomy Patients