TY - JOUR
T1 - Peroral Pancreatoscopy-Guided Lithotripsy Compared with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in the Management of Pancreatic Duct Stones in Chronic Pancreatitis
T2 - A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study
AU - Iwata, Keisuke
AU - Iwashita, Takuji
AU - Mukai, Tsuyoshi
AU - Iwasa, Yuhei
AU - Okuno, Mitsuru
AU - Yoshida, Kensaku
AU - Maruta, Akinori
AU - Uemura, Shinya
AU - Yasuda, Ichiro
AU - Shimizu, Masahito
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 by the authors.
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - Background: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a common treatment for pancreatic stones in chronic pancreatitis. In contrast, peroral pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy (POPS-L) remains underexplored, with limited comparative studies to ESWL. This study compared the treatment outcomes of disposable POPS-L tools and ESWL for pancreatic stones. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 66 patients who had undergone pancreatic stone treatment at three institutions between 2006 and 2022. The treatment outcomes of POPS-L and ESWL were compared. Results: This study included 19 and 47 patients who had undergone POPS-L and ESWL, respectively. In a comparison between POPS-L and ESWL, the stone clearance rates were 78.9% vs. 70.2% (p = 0.55), while the procedure-related complication rates were 21% vs. 6.3% (p = 0.09). The median total session counts were 1 vs. 5 (p < 0.01). The cumulative stone recurrence rates were comparable in both groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no significant factors influencing the stone clearance rates, and the choice between POPS-L and ESWL did not affect the stone clearance rates. Conclusions: POPS-L and ESWL exhibited comparable treatment outcomes in terms of stone clearance, complications, and recurrence rates. Furthermore, POPS-L is advantageous due to the need for fewer sessions to achieve pancreatic stone clearance.
AB - Background: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a common treatment for pancreatic stones in chronic pancreatitis. In contrast, peroral pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy (POPS-L) remains underexplored, with limited comparative studies to ESWL. This study compared the treatment outcomes of disposable POPS-L tools and ESWL for pancreatic stones. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 66 patients who had undergone pancreatic stone treatment at three institutions between 2006 and 2022. The treatment outcomes of POPS-L and ESWL were compared. Results: This study included 19 and 47 patients who had undergone POPS-L and ESWL, respectively. In a comparison between POPS-L and ESWL, the stone clearance rates were 78.9% vs. 70.2% (p = 0.55), while the procedure-related complication rates were 21% vs. 6.3% (p = 0.09). The median total session counts were 1 vs. 5 (p < 0.01). The cumulative stone recurrence rates were comparable in both groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no significant factors influencing the stone clearance rates, and the choice between POPS-L and ESWL did not affect the stone clearance rates. Conclusions: POPS-L and ESWL exhibited comparable treatment outcomes in terms of stone clearance, complications, and recurrence rates. Furthermore, POPS-L is advantageous due to the need for fewer sessions to achieve pancreatic stone clearance.
KW - chronic pancreatitis
KW - endoscopic therapy
KW - extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL)
KW - pancreatic duct stone
KW - peroral pancreatoscopy (POPS)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85192711768&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/diagnostics14090891
DO - 10.3390/diagnostics14090891
M3 - 学術論文
C2 - 38732306
AN - SCOPUS:85192711768
SN - 2075-4418
VL - 14
JO - Diagnostics
JF - Diagnostics
IS - 9
M1 - 891
ER -