Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective study identifies risk factors for pancreatitis and evaluates stent exchange intervals in children, indicating potential personalized approaches.
Background ERPD serves as the first-line endoscopic interventional therapy for pediatric chronic pancreatitis (CP). However, pediatric-specific risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) and the optimal stent exchange intervals remain poorly defined. Methods In this single-center retrospective study, pediatric CP patients (≤ 14 years) undergoing ERPD procedures (2015–2024) were enrolled. PEP was diagnosed per ESGE 2020 criteria (new/worsened abdominal pain + amylase/lipase > 3×ULN). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified PEP risk factors. Stent exchange intervals (standard interval vs. long interval) were compared for symptoms and acute pancreatitis occurrence. Results A cohort of 51 pediatric CP patients underwent 131 successful ERPD procedures. PEP occurred in 23 procedures (17.6%), all classified as mild and managed conservatively without severe complications. Univariate analysis revealed potential associations between PEP and several variables and multivariate analysis identified that pancreaticobiliary maljunction (PBM) (Adjusted OR = 4.861, 95% CI: 1.143–20.716, P = 0.032) and small stent diameter (≤ 5 Fr) (Adjusted OR = 3.083, 95% CI: 1.163–9.495, P = 0.047) were associated with increased PEP risk. No significant differences were observed in interval symptoms (standard interval: 22.7% vs. long interval: 27.6%, P = 0.693) or acute pancreatitis episodes (9.1% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.881) between the two groups. Conclusions PBM and small stent diameter (≤ 5 Fr) are associated with increased PEP risk, although causality cannot be established. Extending stent exchange intervals beyond 6 months does not increase the risk of symptoms or acute pancreatitis. Individualizing stent replacement schedules to lower procedural burden appears feasible, which requires further validation in prospective studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: