Endoscopy 2021; 53(S 01): S27
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1724325
Abstracts | ESGE Days
ESGE Days 2021 Oral presentations
Thursday, 25 March 2021 17:00 – 17:45 ERCP: What to do when things go wrong Room 6

Endoscopic Retrieval of Proximally Migrated Pancreatic Stents: Experience in a University Hospital

V Ubieto
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
D Martinez de Acitores
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
L Zabalza
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
J Carrascosa
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
Urien I Fernandez
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
V Jusue
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
F Estremera
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
,
Vila JJ
1   Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Endoscopy Unit. Gastroenterology Dpt., Pamplona, Spain
› Author Affiliations
 
 

    Aims To assess the utility of ERCP to remove proximmally migrated pancreatic stents (PMPS).

    Methods A retrospective analysis of a prospectivelly filled database from 2009 to 2019 including all the ERCP procedures performed in our hospital was made. Patients who underwent an ERCP for PMPS removal were identified. Analysed variables: demographic data, initial pancreatic pathology, PMPS types, reasons for stent migration, time from migration to retrieval, location of the migrated stent, techniques of stent removal and adverse effects. The characteristics of patients and stents, and outcomes are described.

    Results We identified 12 patitents who underwent ERCP for PMPS removal. Mean age: 50,58±11,48 years (range: 28-72 years), 5 women and 5 with chronic pancreatitis. Seven patients were from our hospital, 5 referred from external hospitals. Reasons of stent migration: excessive insertion (3 patients), stent fracture (2), reversed insertion (1) and no determined (6). The mean time from migration to endoscopic removal was 39,33±84,06 weeks (range: 0-275 weeks). Size of stents: 5Fr (5), 7Fr (5) y 4Fr (2) and most frequent length was 5cm (6). Most frequent localizations of PMPS were: pancreatic head (6), body (4) and neck (2). In 4 patients stent had been placed with prophylactic intention after a biliary ERCP. We achieved technical success in all patients. Most stents were removed using the Lasso technique (7), followed by Fogarty balloon (3) and Dormia basket (2). Retrieval was associated to pancreatic sphincterotomy (1 patient), sphincteroplasty (4) and transmural access guided by endoscopic ultrasound (1). Three patients developed mild pancreatitis after retrieval, without any other adverse effect.

    Conclusions In our experience, endoscopic treatment is effective for PMPS removal with low morbility and mostly using the Lasso technique.

    Citation: Ubieto V, Martinez de Acitores D, Zabalza L et al. OP65 ENDOSCOPIC RETRIEVAL OF PROXIMALLY MIGRATED PANCREATIC STENTS: EXPERIENCE IN A UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL. Endoscopy 2021; 53: S27.


    #

    Publication History

    Article published online:
    19 March 2021

    © 2021. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.

    Georg Thieme Verlag KG
    Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany