Pancreatic Duct Disorder, Pseudocyst Pancreas
Conditions
Keywords
Pancreatic Pseudocyst
Brief summary
Pancreatic pseudocysts (PP) present as a complication that occurs in 5-15% of acute pancreatitis and 26-40% of chronic pancreatitis (1-3). To date the endoscopic drainage with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has replace the surgical treatment due to the similar success and complication rate but with a lower cost and short hospital stay (4-6). Regarding recurrence, it is important to know the anatomy of the main pancreatic duct (MPD). For this purpose, the endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) has been describe as a useful tool. In fact, many authors perform it before the endoscopic drainage while others wait several weeks after the drainage (7-9) with similar technical success (5,8). However, there are no studies that compare the technical difficulty and the total cost between these two approaches.
Detailed description
METHODS: Random control trial between two groups. Group 1 the ERP will be performed the same day of the endoscopic drainage of PP. Group 2 the ERP will be performed 6 weeks after the endoscopic drainage of PP. Each ERP will be performed by an expert in ERP in patients who fulfilled the Atlanta criteria for PP. The patients will be enrolled and informed consent will be explained and signed. In those patients who ERP fails, a second attempt will be performed 6 weeks after the endoscopic drainage of PP (Group 1) or a magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography will be performed (Group 2).
Interventions
PROCEDUREEndoscopic retrograde pancreatography
Endoscopic cannulation of main pancreatic duct
Sponsors
Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador Zubiran
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Intervention model description
Random control trial
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
19 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. Pancreatic pseudocyst that fulfilled the Atlanta Classification 2. Symptomatic pancreatic pseudocyst 3. Informed consent obtained
Exclusion criteria
1. Patient unwilling to participate 2. Absence of duration time of the pancreatography procedure in the record 3. Absence of the number of weeks between the drainage and the pancreatography
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The impact of the pancreatography in the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts | 6 weeks | Determine the impact of the timing performing an endoscopic pancreatography in relation of the drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst |
Outcome results
None listed