Proximal migration of a pancreatic duct stent: endoscopic retrieval using interventional cardiology accessories

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Treatment of Proximally Migrated Pancreatic Stents

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, risk factors, and treatment strategies of proximally migrated pancreatic stents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of 626 sessions of 421 patients with pancreatic duct stenting were retrospectively analyzed between 2010 and 2018, and patients with proximally migrated stents were included in the study.

RESULTS

Of 626 stents examined, 77 migrated proximally (12%). The migration rate (MR) was 16%, 2%, and 7%, respectively, in patients treated with chronic pancreatitis, malignancy, and pancreatic leakage indication. The MR was 14% in procedures with pancreatic duct stenosis, 21% in procedures with pancreatic sphincterotomy, and 27% in procedures performed from minor papillae. The MR of the 5, 7, and 10 Fr stents was 4%, 17%, and 10%, respectively. Of the 77 migrated stents, 64 were successfully removed (83%). This success rate (SR) was 84% in procedures with chronic pancreatitis indication, 83% in procedures with pancreatic duct stenosis, 79% in procedures with sphincterotomy, and 75% in procedures performed from minor papillae. The SR of the 5, 7, and 10 Fr stents was 100%, 79%, and 92%, respectively. It was also determined that 33 stents were fractured and migrated (43%). The SR of the fractured stents was 76%. Moreover, of the stents that were successfully removed, 35 were removed with forceps (55%) and 15 (23%) were removed with a balloon. Furthermore, in 47 cases, the stent was removed in the first session (73%). Acute pancreatitis occurred in 5 patients (8%) and perforation occurred in 1 patient (2%).

CONCLUSION

In this study, it was shown that proximal migration of pancreatic stents is frequent and most of these stents can be removed successfully.

Endoscopic treatment of intraductal pancreatic stent fragmentation

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Complications of endoscopic treatment are reported more and more often as a result of popularization of pancreatic endotherapy. Our study presents the results of treatment in patients with intraductal pancreatic stent fragmentation diagnosed during endotherapy of chronic pancreatitis.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 2496 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures which were carried out in 607 patients at the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit of the University Clinical Center in Gdansk.

RESULTS

In the course of pancreatic endotherapy, intraductal pancreatic stent fragmentation was stated during 33 of 2496 (0.013%) procedures in 33 of 607 (5.44%) patients with chronic pancreatitis. In 33 patients, there were 46 intraductal fragments of broken stents. Most patients were asymptomatic. In 31/33 patients, fragments of broken stents were removed from the pancreatic duct endoscopically. In the case of two patients, endoscopic management was ineffective and they were treated surgically. Altogether, 44/46 stent fragments were removed endoscopically. Most fragments of pancreatic stents were removed during the first endoscopic procedure. One fragment of a broken stent was retrieved with polypectomy snare and four with Dormia basket. The remaining fragments of broken pancreatic stents were removed with rat-tooth forceps.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraductal fragmentation of pancreatic stent is a rare complication of pancreatic endotherapy and it often has an asymptomatic course. Most fragments of broken pancreatic stents can be removed endoscopically from the pancreatic duct with an acceptable complication rate.

Usefulness of an algorithm for endoscopic retrieval of proximally migrated 5Fr and 7Fr pancreatic stents

BACKGROUND

Proximal migration of pancreatic stent (PMPS) is an infrequent event but its management can be technically challenging and there are no standard retrieval methods. This study aimed to determine the results of an endoscopic stent retrieval algorithm in terms of feasibility and efficacy of the endoscopic procedure.

METHODS

During the period from January 2008 to December 2009, 15 patients (8 women and 7 men with a mean age of 51.9 years) with PMPS were included in this study. Stent retrieval was approached initially with balloon extraction followed by rat-tooth forceps and basket. A rescue approach such as using a stent retriever was attempted when other approaches failed.

RESULTS

All the PMPSs (six 5Fr, nine 7Fr) were retrieved successfully within one ERCP session. Balloon extraction was successful in 9 (60%) patients. In the 6 failed cases of balloon extraction, wire-guided rat-tooth forceps grasp was successful in 4, and stone extraction basket grasp was successful in 1 in whom forceps grasp failed. One stent was finally rescued with a stent retriever when balloon extraction, forceps and basket grasp all failed. In patients with successful balloon extraction, 44.4% (4/9) developed post-ERCP hyperamylasemia but none of them developed post-procedure pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

With this algorithm, 5Fr and 7Fr PMPS were successfully retrieved in all of the patients. Most PMPSs can be safely retrieved with the commonly-used approaches in this study. Those less used approaches can be used as a rescue method.

Pancreatic stents for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Placement of pancreatic stents is a relatively new and increasingly adopted approach to reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Evidence for the efficacy of pancreatic stents in reducing post-ERCP pancreatitis continues to accumulate. Routine use of pancreatic stents in high-risk cases at advanced centers has changed the complexion of ERCP, reducing the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis to a more acceptable level, and eliminating some of the fear factor surrounding previously prohibitively risky settings, such as treatment of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). On the other hand, the adoption of prophylactic pancreatic stenting into some practices has been sporadic. Problems with pancreatic stent placement include technical difficulty with placement, need for follow-up evaluation to ensure passage or removal, and potential for inducing pancreatic ductal injury. There remain many challenges and unanswered questions which will be addressed in this review, including which patients are at risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, how might pancreatic stents reduce risk, what is the evidence supporting efficacy of pancreatic stenting in reducing risk; and based on those data, which ERCPs are at sufficiently high risk to warrant a stent; at what point in an ERCP should a pancreatic stent be placed; how long pancreatic stents need to remain in place to be effective, the risk of inducing pancreatic duct injury by placement of a stent; the frequency and consequences of failure at attempted stent placement, and effectiveness of pancreatic stent placement in the hands of those with limited experience. Current recommendations for use of pancreatic stents and areas requiring further investigation are discussed.

Dilation of high-grade pancreatic and biliary ductal strictures with small-caliber angioplasty balloons

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic and bile duct strictures may be too stenotic to allow passage of conventional endoscopic dilators.

METHODS

Four patients with strictures (3 pancreatic, 1 biliary) that could not be traversed with conventional endoscopic dilating devices, or in 1 case by a Soehendra stent extractor, underwent stricture dilation with a 3.3F peripheral angioplasty balloon to a maximum diameter of 6 mm.

OBSERVATIONS

All strictures in the 4 patients were successfully traversed and dilated and stents were placed with resolution of the presenting clinical problem.

CONCLUSIONS

Small-caliber angioplasty balloons are useful for dilation with subsequent stent placement of pancreatic and biliary strictures that are refractory to standard endoscopic approaches.