Plastic vs Biodegradable Pancreatic Stent in Post-ERCP Pancreatitis Prevention

Biliary Tract Diseases Clinical Trial

Official title:

Plastic vs Biodegradable Pancreatic Stent Comparison in the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Active, not recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT05307861
• Other study ID #: IECED-14022022
• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: February 1, 2022
• Est. completion date: January 30, 2023

Study information

• Verified date: March 2022
• Source: Instituto Ecuatoriano de Enfermedades Digestivas
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Multiple risk factors have been linked with post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP); therefore, it is critical to follow strategies to reduce associated risk, morbidity, and mortality. However, there are also factors, such as pancreatic duct stenting, which have shown evidence of PEP prevention. The investigators pursue to compare plastic vs biodegradable pancreatic stents in the prevention of PEP.

Description:

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a high-skilled endoscopic procedure, which is currently mainly used as a therapeutic mean for various pancreaticobiliary disorders. Its most common serious adverse event is PEP. Multiple risk factors have been linked with PEP (patient/procedure/operator-related). Therefore, it is critical to follow strategies to reduce associated risk, morbidity, and mortality. A recent metanalysis reported an overall incidence of PEP close to 10%, with an even higher incidence (14.7%) in high-risk patients. PEP's risk factors work synergically and have exhibited up to a 40% incidence rate in multifactorial patients. However, there are also factors, such as pancreatic duct stenting, which have shown evidence of PEP prevention. The prophylactic use of pancreatic duct stents (especially 5 Fr stents) has exhibited a statistically significant PEP severity and incidence reduction; particularly for high-risk patients, for those who have undergone inadvertent repeated pancreatic duct cannulation or those in whom it is difficult to perform biliary cannulation. Controversially, failed pancreatic duct placement has shown a 34.7% PEP incidence rate and is considered an independent risk factor for PEP. In the case of stent migration, stent-induced perforation may arise regardless of the type of stent used (plastic or metallic), but if no signs of peritonitis are displayed, the endoscopic approach may suffice for stent removal and tracks closure. Rarely the surgical approach is guaranteed for migrated stents in the presence of peritonitis or retroperitoneal fluid collection. The investigators pursue to compare plastic vs biodegradable pancreatic stents in the prevention of PEP.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Enrollment: 98
• Est. completion date: January 30, 2023
• Est. primary completion date: December 30, 2022
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 99 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patient is scheduled for ERCP
• Patient is 18 years old or older
• Biliary tract disease presence
• Non-manipulated pancreatic papilla
• Written informed consent provided

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patient not requiring pancreatic stenting during ERCP
• Failed pancreatic stent placement
• Patients at risk of fluid overload
• Patients with cholangitis, sepsis, acute/flared up chronic pancreatitis
• Recent previous biliary tract manipulation (i.e., pancreatoscopy, wirsungoscopy, etc.)
• Hemodynamic instability
• Uncontrolled coagulopathy, kidney/liver failure, or any comorbidity with a meaningful impact on cardiac risk assessment (NHYA III/IV)
• Pregnancy or nursing
• Refuse to participate in the study or to sign corresponding informed consent

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Biliary Tract Diseases
• Pancreatitis

Intervention

Device:
• Pancreatic duct stenting with plastic stent
Plastic pancreatic duct stent placement (5fr x 4 cm) for patients in need of pancreatic duct stenting during ERCP.
• Pancreatic duct stenting with Biodegradable Stent
Biodegradable pancreatic duct stent placement (6fr x 4 cm or 6fr x 4 cm) for patients in need of pancreatic duct stenting during ERCP.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Ecuador	Carlos Robles-Medranda	Guayaquil	Guayas

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Instituto Ecuatoriano de Enfermedades Digestivas

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Ecuador, 

References & Publications (9)

Anderloni A, Fugazza A, Maroni L, Ormando V, Maselli R, Carrara S, Cappello A, Mangiavillano B, Omodei P, Preatoni P, Galtieri PA, Pellegatta G, Repici A. New biliary and pancreatic biodegradable stent placement: a single-center, prospective, pilot study — View Citation

ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Chandrasekhara V, Khashab MA, Muthusamy VR, Acosta RD, Agrawal D, Bruining DH, Eloubeidi MA, Fanelli RD, Faulx AL, Gurudu SR, Kothari S, Lightdale JR, Qumseya BJ, Shaukat A, Wang A, Wani SB, Yang J, DeWitt JM. Adverse — View Citation

Buxbaum J, Yan A, Yeh K, Lane C, Nguyen N, Laine L. Aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's solution reduces pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Feb;12(2):303-7.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.201 — View Citation

Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J, Geenen JE, Russell RC, Meyers WC, Liguory C, Nickl N. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991 May-Jun;37(3):383-93. Review. — View Citation

Freeman ML, Guda NM. Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comprehensive review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Jun;59(7):845-64. Review. — View Citation

Kochar B, Akshintala VS, Afghani E, Elmunzer BJ, Kim KJ, Lennon AM, Khashab MA, Kalloo AN, Singh VK. Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review by using randomized, controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jan;81 — View Citation

Mazaki T, Mado K, Masuda H, Shiono M. Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol. 2014 Feb;49(2):343-55. doi: 10.1007/s00535-013-0806-1. Epub 2013 Apr 24. Review. — View Citation

Moffatt DC, Yu BN, Yie W, Bernstein CN. Trends in utilization of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP and cholecystectomy over the past 25 years: a population-based study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Apr;79(4):615-22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.08.028. Epub 2013 Oc — View Citation

Phillip V, Pukitis A, Epstein A, Hapfelmeier A, Haf D, Schwab M, Demir IE, Rosendahl J, Hoffmeister A, Schmid RM, Weber A, Algül H. Pancreatic stenting to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized multicenter trial. Endosc Int Open. 2019 Jul;7(7):E860- — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	PEP prevention at 72 hours	Determine if plastic or biodegradable pancreatic stent placement renders PEP prevention. PEP is defined as proposed by Cotton et al in 1991(new hospitalization admission or 2/3-day hospital stay extension due to an abdominal pain suggestive of pancreatitis, plus a threefold increase of serum amylase/lipase above the normal limits 24 hours post-procedure).	up to 72 hours after randomization
Secondary	PEP prevention at 4 weeks	Determine if plastic or biodegradable pancreatic stent placement renders PEP prevention. PEP is defined as proposed by Cotton et al in 1991(new hospitalization admission or 2/3-day hospital stay extension due to an abdominal pain suggestive of pancreatitis, plus a threefold increase of serum amylase/lipase above the normal limits 24 hours post-procedure).	up to 4 weeks after randomization