Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with rendezvous cannulation reduces pancreatic injury

Table 3 Clinical outcome and biometric results at 4-, 8- and 24 h after conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, rendezvous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone (n = 122)

Group	CV ERCP (n = 41)	RV ERCP (n = 40)	LC control1 (n = 41)	P-value
Difficult cannulation, > 6 attempts	9 (22)	0 (0)	NA	0.002a
Precut techniques	6 (15)	0 (0)	NA	0.03a
Cannulation failure	3 (7)	0 (0)	NA	0.24
Pancreatic cannulation	13 (32)	0 (0)	NA	< 0.001a
Pancreatic duct opacification	11 (27)	0 (0)	NA	0.001a
Stone clearance at index procedure	33 (81)	38 (95)	NA	0.01a
Stone size	6.4 ± 5.1	5.5 ± 3.2	NA	0.40
Median endoscopic procedure time, minutes (range)	36 (10-80)	28 (17-55)	NA	0.11
Post ERCP pancreatitis	3 (7)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0.24
Hyperamylasemia, > 3 fold rise above upper reference value, with or without post ERCP pancreatitis	6 (15)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0.03a
Pancreatic amylase (μcat/L), 4 h	2.0 ± 4.2	0.5 ± 0.3	0.4 ± 0.3	0.0015a
Pancreatic amylase (μcat/L), 8 h	3.5 ± 9.0	0.6 ± 0.3	0.5 ± 0.3	0.03a
Pancreatic amylase (μcat/L), 24 h	2.4 ± 6.0	0.6 ± 0.3	0.4 ± 0.2	0.056
Procarboxypeptidase B (nmol/L), 4 h	90.7 ± 237.7	7.2 ± 8.1	6.5 ± 9.3	< 0.0001a
Procarboxypeptidase B (nmol/L), 8 h	111.7 ± 287.3	7.9 ± 7.9	8.0 ± 18.4	< 0.0001a
Procarboxypeptidase B (nmol/L), 24 h	47.4 ± 131.7	8.5 ± 7.9	8.2 ± 9.2	< 0.0001a
Trypsinogen-2 (μg/L) 24 h	317.8 ± 547.1	145.6 ± 67.2	134.0 ± 80.2	0.03a

Data are expressed as mean ± SD or n (%). P-value indicate differences between conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (CV ERCP) vs rendezvous ERCP (RV ERCP) and

^aP < 0.05.

¹Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) without ERCP. NA: Not applicable.