Endoscopic prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Table 3 Efficacy of 3- vs 5-F pancreatic stents in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

	Technical success	Spontaneous migration	PEP	Stents
Rashdan et al[61] (3 F vs 4, 5, 6 F)	NA	86%/73%/67%/65%1 (P < 0.01)	7.5%/10.6%/9.8%/14.6% (P = 0.047)	COOK, 4-12 cm
Chahal et al[56] (3 F vs 5 F)	91%/100% (P = 0.0003)	88%/98% (P = 0.0001)2	14%/9% (P = 0.3)	3 F, 8 and 10 cm/5 F, 3 cm
Zolotarevsky et al[69] (3 F vs 5 F)	97.5%/100%	75%/68.4% (P = 0.617)2	17.5%/10.5% (P = 0.519)	COOK, Zimmon 3 F, 3 cm/ 5 F, 5 cm

¹10-14 d;

²2 wk. PEP: Post-ERCP pancreatitis; NA: Not available.