Abstract:
Objective To investigate the value of biliary stent implantation or endoscopic nasobiliary drainage after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in preventing complications in patients with choledocholithiasis.
Methods In this prospective study, 338 patients with choledocholithiasis admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from April 2017 to January 2019 were randomly divided into stent group (170 cases) and drainage group (168 cases). All patients were treated with ERCP. Nasal bile duct drainage was performed concurrently in the drainage group; biliary stent implantation was performed in the stent group. The incidence of complications and prognosis were compared between the two groups.
Results No severe bleeding, perforation or death occurred in the two groups, and there was no significant difference in the complete stone clearance rate between the two groups. Compared with the stent group, the drainage group had higher incidence of pancreatic tube intubation, blood amylase level 4 h after operation, hyperamylasemia, acute pancreatitis and the total incidence of complications (P<0.05). The abdominal pain scores at different time points 24, 48 and 72 h after operation were higher (P<0.05) in the drainage group.
Conclusions For patients with choledocholithiasis treated with ERCP, ENBD and biliary stent implantation show no significant difference in the effect of complete stone removal, but biliary stent implantation can reduce the risk of postoperative complications, relieve abdominal pain symptoms, and maximize the patients’ benefit.
Key words:
Choledocholithiasis,
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,
Biliary stent implantation,
Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage,
Complications
Abibula Nigatijan, Hussain Elhati, Khan Aifu. Comparison of complications between biliary stent implantation and nasobiliary drainage after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for choledocholithiasis[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(01): 46-49.