Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective study reveals low rates of problematic pancreatic duct stent retention in ERCP patients, indicating routine endoscopic removal of short non-flanged stents is rarely needed.
Background/Aims: Pancreatic duct (PD) stent selection impacts migration and retention. We evaluated risk factors for migration versus inappropriate retention of PD stents at a high volume center using a standardized stent management protocol. Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with PD stenting were retrospectively categorized by stent status at 2 weeks post-ERCP. Spontaneous migration was defined as absence of a PD stent on follow-up imaging, while inappropriate retention was defined as persistence of a non-flanged PD stent within the duct. The primary endpoint was PD stent retention at 2 weeks. Secondary endpoints included predictors of inappropriate retention and the need for endoscopic stent removal. Results: A total of 482 patients underwent ERCP for biliary (n=289), pancreatic (n=181), or dual (n=12) indications. Non-flanged PD stents for biliary vs. pancreatic indications were 74.4% vs. 31.5% (p<0.001). Among 425 patients with follow-up imaging, predictors of PD stent retention included internal flanges (odds ratio [OR], 6.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.29-12.67), pancreatic indication (OR, 2.23; 95%CI, 1.22-4.07), and stent length >3cm (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.23-5.07). Inappropriate retention of non-flanged stents occurred in 29 patients (12.5%), with only 5 (2.2%) requiring endoscopic removal due to mechanical obstruction. Conclusions: Inappropriate retention of short, narrow caliber, non flanged PD stents is infrequent and rarely requires endoscopic removal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kohli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: