Skip to main content

Table 2 Endoscopic procedures and adverse events in the matched cohort

From: Comparison of the efficacy and safety between palliative biliary stent placement and duct clearance among elderly patients with choledocholithiasis: a propensity score-matched analysis

Total number of patients

EBS

Complete stone removal

p value

nā€‰=ā€‰25

nā€‰=ā€‰25

Ampullary intervention

ES, n (%)

2 (8.0)

18 (72.0)

Ā 

EPBD, n (%)

Ā 

1 (4.0)

Ā 

EPLBD, n (%)

1 (4.0)

Ā Ā 

EPLBD with ES, n (%)

Ā 

6 (24.0)

Ā 

Type of stent

Straight type, n (%)

17 (68.0)

Ā Ā 

Pig tail type, n (%)

8 (32.0)

Ā Ā 

Length of stent

5Ā cm/7Ā cm/9Ā cm/10Ā cm, n

9/13/2/1

Ā Ā 

Diameter of stent

7Fr/8.5Fr, n

22/3

Ā Ā 

Total number of ERCP sessions

1, n (%)

22 (88.0)

17 (68.0)

0.17

2ā€“3, n (%)

3 (12.0)

8 (32.0)

Ā 

Procedure time, median (range), minutes

17 (5ā€“181)

41 (10ā€“88)

<ā€‰0.01

Adverse eventsa (AE), n (%)

4 (16.0)

2 (8.0)

0.67

Early AEs

Ā Acute pancreatitis (mild)

1 (4.0)

2 (8.0)

Ā 

Ā Aspiration pneumonia (mild)

1 (4.0)

Ā Ā 

Ā Retroperitoneal perforation (severe)

1 (4.0)

Ā Ā 

Late AEs

Ā Acute cholecystitis (moderate)

1 (4.0)

Ā Ā 
  1. ES endoscopic sphincterotomy, EPBD endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation, EPLBD endoscopic large balloon dilatation
  2. aExcept for cholangitis or stent-related adverse events