<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><article xml:lang="en" article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="pmc-domain-id">1323</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="pmc-domain">worldjgastendo</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>World J Gastrointest Endosc</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><publisher><publisher-name>Baishideng Publishing Group Inc</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC5114460</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmcaid">5114460</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmcaiid">5114460</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">27909551</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4253/wjge.v8.i19.709</article-id><title-group><article-title>Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: Risk factors and predictors of severity</article-title></title-group><contrib-group content-type="author"><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>El Nakeeb</surname><given-names initials="A">Ayman</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>El Hanafy</surname><given-names initials="E">Ehab</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Salah</surname><given-names initials="T">Tarek</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Atef</surname><given-names initials="E">Ehab</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Hamed</surname><given-names initials="H">Hosam</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Sultan</surname><given-names initials="AM">Ahmad M</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Hamdy</surname><given-names initials="E">Emad</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Said</surname><given-names initials="M">Mohamed</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>El Geidie</surname><given-names initials="AA">Ahmed A</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>Kandil</surname><given-names initials="T">Tharwat</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>El Shobari</surname><given-names initials="M">Mohamed</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib><name name-style="western"><surname>El Ebidy</surname><given-names initials="G">Gamal</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label>Ayman El Nakeeb, Ehab El Hanafy, Tarek Salah, Ehab Atef, Hosam Hamed, Ahmad M Sultan, Emad Hamdy, Mohamed Said, Ahmed A El Geidie, Tharwat Kandil, Mohamed El Shobari, Gamal El Ebidy, Gastroenterology Surgical Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt</aff><author-notes><fn id="fn1"><p>Author contributions: El Nakeeb A designed the research; El Nakeeb A, El Hanafy E, Salah T, Atef E, Hamed H, Sultan AM, Hamdy E, Said M, El Geidie AA, KandilT, El Shobari M and El Ebidy G performed the research; El Nakeeb A and Said M analyzed data; El Nakeeb A and Hamed H wrote the paper.</p><p>Correspondence to: Ayman El Nakeeb, Associate Professor, Gastroenterology Surgical Center, Mansoura University, El Gomhouria St, Mansoura 35516, Egypt. <email>elnakeebayman@yahoo.com</email></p><p>Telephone: +2-50-2353430 Fax: +2-50-2243220</p></fn></author-notes><pub-date><day>16</day><month>11</month><year>2016</year></pub-date><volume>8</volume><issue>19</issue><fpage>709</fpage><page-range>709–715</page-range><pub-history><event event-type="pmc-release"><date><day>1</day><month>12</month><year>2016</year></date></event></pub-history><permissions><copyright-statement>©The Author(s) 2016. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.</copyright-statement><license><license-p>This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="WJGE-8-709.pdf" content-type="pmc-pdf"><?cloudpmc-path 5fc9/5114460/801216edb8e1/WJGE-8-709.pdf?><?cloudpmc-bucket app?><?size 895753?></self-uri><abstract id="abstract1"><title>Abstract</title><sec id="sec1" disp-level="2"><title>AIM</title><p>To detect risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and investigate the predictors of its severity.</p></sec><sec id="sec2" disp-level="2"><title>METHODS</title><p>This is a prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent ERCP. Pre-ERCP data, intraoperative data, and post-ERCP data were collected.</p></sec><sec id="sec3" disp-level="2"><title>RESULTS</title><p>The study population consisted of 996 patients. Their mean age at presentation was 58.42 (± 14.72) years, and there were 454 male and 442 female patients. Overall, PEP occurred in 102 (10.2%) patients of the study population; eighty (78.4%) cases were of mild to moderate degree, while severe pancreatitis occurred in 22 (21.6%) patients. No hospital mortality was reported for any of PEP patients during the study duration. Age less than 35 years (<italic>P</italic> = 0.001, OR = 0.035), narrower common bile duct (CBD) diameter (<italic>P</italic> = 0.0001) and increased number of pancreatic cannulations (<italic>P</italic> = 0.0001) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP.</p></sec><sec id="sec4" disp-level="2"><title>CONCLUSION</title><p>PEP is the most frequent and devastating complication after ERCP. Age less than 35 years, narrower median CBD diameter and increased number of pancreatic cannulations are independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP. Patients with these risk factors are candidates for prophylactic and preventive measures against PEP.</p></sec><sec id="kwd-group1" sec-type="kwd-group" disp-level="2"><p><bold>Keywords:</bold> Pancreatitis, Obstructive jaundice, Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography</p></sec></abstract><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>status</meta-name><meta-value>released</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>display-pdf</meta-name><meta-value>yes</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-olf</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-manuscript</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-preprint</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-journal-matter</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-scanned</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>is-retracted</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta><notes notes-type="article-notes"><sec id="historyarticle-meta1" sec-type="history" disp-level="2"><p>Received 2016 Jun 5; Revised 2016 Jul 27; Accepted 2016 Aug 27; Issue date 2016 Nov 16.</p></sec></notes></front><body><p><bold>Core tip:</bold> Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is increasingly used for therapeutic management of various biliary and pancreatic diseases. However, ERCP is not a procedure without morbidities. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains the most devastating and frequent complication after ERCP. Identification of risk factors for PEP helps adopt prophylactic measures in high risk patients and early discharge in low risk patients. Age less than 35 years, narrower median common bile duct diameter and increased number of pancreatic cannulations were identified to be independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP.</p><sec id="sec5" disp-level="1"><title>INTRODUCTION</title><p>Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is increasingly used for therapeutic management of various biliary and pancreatic diseases[<xref rid="B1" ref-type="bibr">1</xref>]. However, ERCP is not a procedure without morbidities[<xref rid="B2" ref-type="bibr">2</xref>]. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains the most common and serious complication after ERCP[<xref rid="B3" ref-type="bibr">3</xref>]. The reported incidence of PEP is around 5%[<xref rid="B4" ref-type="bibr">4</xref>,<xref rid="B5" ref-type="bibr">5</xref>]. This rate may increase up to 20%-40% in high risk patients. Although the majority of PEP cases are of mild degree, it can be severe and life threatening in a substantial proportion of cases[<xref rid="B6" ref-type="bibr">6</xref>].</p><p>Identification of risk factors for PEP helps adopt prophylactic measures in high risk patients and early discharge in low risk patients[<xref rid="B1" ref-type="bibr">1</xref>,<xref rid="B7" ref-type="bibr">7</xref>,<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. Being convinced with a number of patient-related risk factors, some gastroenterologists and surgeons prefer adoption of alternative management strategies for ERCP whenever possible in high risk patients. Similarly, some endoscopists try to avoid procedure-related risk factors to increases the safety of the procedure. All these factors make identification of risk factors for PEP be of paramount importance for the practice of ERCP.</p><p>Many patient and procedure related factors have been suggested to be associated with increased likelihood of PEP[<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. The trigger mechanism and pathogenesis for PEP remain unclear[<xref rid="B9" ref-type="bibr">9</xref>]. The aim of this study was to detect risk factors for PEP and investigate the predictors of its severity in a tertiary high volume referral surgical center in Middle East in Egypt.</p></sec><sec id="sec6" disp-level="1"><title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</title><p>This is a prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent ERCP between August 2012 and September 2014. Excluded patients were those who presented with obstructed stent, active pancreatitis, previous endoscopic sphinterotomy, biliary complications after liver transplantation, dye allergy, pregnancy, or mental disability.</p><p>Patients were admitted 24 h before the procedure. Baseline laboratory assessment of liver functions, blood count and serum amylase level were done prior to ERCP. No pre-ERCP treatment was used to decrease the risk of PEP. In our center, ERCP is performed under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in left semi prone position with monitoring of oxygen saturation, heart rate, and blood pressure. The procedure was performed by experienced endoscopists who had performed at least 1500 ERCPs over the last 10 years. Selective bile duct cannulation was carried out in all patients, but pancreatic duct cannulation was performed when necessary. When three or more attempts were needed due to difficulty in cannulation, precut papillotomy was selectively performed. In addition, endoscopic papillotomy for stone extraction using balloon, basket and mechanical lithotripsy, bile duct placement of either plastic or self-expanding metallic stent, as well as brush cytology and dilation, were performed when indicted. Pancreatic duct stenting was not used to minimize PEP in our practice.</p><p>ERCP data were recorded in a standardized manner including all potential risk factors for PEP. Patients were hospitalized for 24 h after the procedure and observed for symptoms and signs of post-ERCP complications. Complete blood picture and serum amylase level were determined routinely after 6 h and 24 h.</p><p>PEP was defined and classified according to the consensus definition and grading system[<xref rid="B10" ref-type="bibr">10</xref>]. PEP was defined as new or worsened abdominal pain together with a serum amylase level at least three times normal at more than 24 h after ERCP and necessitating hospitalization for more than one night. PEP was graded according to the length of hospital stay and the need for intervention. Mild PEP required hospitalization for 2-3 nights, moderate PEP required hospitalization for 4-10 nights, and severe pancreatitis required hospitalization for more than 10 d, or required intervention or was complicated by pseudocyst[<xref rid="B10" ref-type="bibr">10</xref>].</p><p>Descriptive data are presented as means and standard deviation or medians with range according to the data distribution. Comparison of means was done by <italic>χ</italic><sup>2</sup> test for categorical data or Student’s <italic>t</italic> test for continuous data. Difference was considered significant when a <italic>P</italic>-value was less than 0.05. Independent risk factors for PEP were assessed by multiple logistic regression. Statistical analyses of the data in this study were performed using SPSS software, version 17 (Chicago, IL).</p></sec><sec id="sec7" disp-level="1"><title>RESULTS</title><p>From August 2012 to September 2014, a total of 1296 patients underwent ERCP at Gastrointestinal Surgical Center, Mansoura University, Egypt. The study population consisted of 996 cases after exclusion of those who presented with obstructed stent (<italic>n</italic> = 66), active pancreatitis (<italic>n</italic> = 24), previous endoscopic sphinterotomy (<italic>n</italic> = 110), biliary complications after liver transplantation (<italic>n</italic> = 36), dye allergy (<italic>n</italic> = 10), pregnancy (<italic>n</italic> = 14), or mental disability (<italic>n</italic> = 10).</p><p>Indications for ERCP were malignant obstructive jaundice due to periampullary tumor (<italic>n</italic> = 460, 46.2%) or hilar cholangiocarcinoma (<italic>n</italic> = 2, 0.2%), calcular obstructive jaundice (<italic>n</italic> = 512, 51.4%), benign biliary stricture (<italic>n</italic> = 10, 1.0%), and post-cholecystectomy biliary leakage (<italic>n</italic> = 12, 1.2%). The mean age at presentation was 58.42 (± 14.727) years. There were 554 male in comparison to 442 female patients, with a male to female ratio of 1.3:1.</p><p>Overall, PEP occurred in 102 (10.2%) patients of the study population. Eighty (78.4%) cases were of mild to moderate degree, while severe pancreatitis occurred in 22 (21.6%) patients. The median length of hospital stay in patients with pancreatitis was 3 d (range, 2-15 d). No hospital mortality was reported for any of PEP patients during the study duration. Univariate analysis showed that patient age and narrower CBD diameter are statistically significant patient-related risk factors associated with occurrence and severity of PEP, while increased number of cannulation attempts and pancreatic cannulation more than three times were significant procedure-related risk factors associated with occurrence and severity of PEP. Indication for ERCP was not significantly associated with occurrence of pancreatitis (<italic>P</italic> = 0.4), but it was significantly associated with the severity of PEP (<italic>P</italic> = 0.009) (Tables <xref rid="T1" ref-type="table">1</xref> and <xref rid="T2" ref-type="table">2</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="T1" position="float"><?disp-level 2?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>Risk factors for pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography <italic>n</italic> (%)</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>No pancreatitis</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Pancreatitis</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold><italic>P</italic>-value</bold></td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>894 (89.9)</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>102 (10.2)</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr></thead><tbody align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Patient related factors</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median age (yr)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">60</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">48</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age group</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 35</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">32 (7.2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">20 (39.2)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 35</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">415 (92.8)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">31 (60.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Sex</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Male</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">510 (57)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">44 (43.1)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.05</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Female</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">384 (43)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58 (56.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median serum bilirubin (mg%)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10.6</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">12.5</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.76</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">124 (88.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (11.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">770 (90)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">86 (10)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.72</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median CBD diameter (mm)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">70 (7.8)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58 (56.9)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">824 (92.2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">44 (43.1)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Indication for ERCP</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Malignant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">402 (45)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">40 (39.2)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.43</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Benign</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">492 (55)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">62 (60.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Type of papilla</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Normal</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">540 (60.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">56 (54.9)</td><td rowspan="8" colspan="1">0.01</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Atrophic</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">18 (2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">8 (7.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Pregnant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">68 (7.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2 (2)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Tumour</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">64 (7.2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">4 (3.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Redundant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">66(7.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">12 (11.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Juxtadivericular</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">68 (7.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (15.7)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Small</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">60 (6.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2 (2)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Long</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10 (1.1)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2 (2)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Procedure related factors</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Number of cannulation attempts</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 5</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">660 (73.9)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58 (56.9)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.01</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">≥ 6</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">234 (26.1)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">44 (43.1)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Number of pancreatic cannulations</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 3 times</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">864 (96.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">60 (58.8)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 3 times</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">28 (3.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">42 (41.2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Method of cannulation</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Conventional</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">640 (89.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">76 (10.6)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.7</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Precut</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">252 (90.6)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">26 (9.4)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Biliary sphincter balloon dilatation</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">No</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">654 (73.2)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">86 (84.3)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.08</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Yes</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">240 (26.8)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (15.7)</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><fn id="fn2"><p>CBD: Common bile duct; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography</p></fn></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><table-wrap id="T2" position="float"><?disp-level 2?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>Predictors of severity of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography <italic>n</italic> (%)</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Mild to moderate pancreatitis (80)</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Severe pancreatitis (22)</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold><italic>P</italic>-value</bold></td></tr></thead><tbody align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Patient related factors</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median age (yr)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">52</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">30</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 35</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">26 (32.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">14 (63.6)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 35</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">54 (67.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">8 (36.4)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Sex</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Male</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">38 (47.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6 (27.3)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.08</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Female</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">42 (52.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (72.7)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median serum bilirubin (mg%)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">14.1</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">9.9</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.3</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">8 (50)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">8 (50)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">72 (85.7)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">14 (14.3)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.07</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median CBD diameter (mm)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">9</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">42 (52.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (72.7%)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 10</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">38 (47.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6 (27.3%)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Indication for ERCP</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Malignant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">39 (97.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1 (2.5)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.009</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Benign</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">41 (66.1)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">21 (33.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Type of papilla</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Normal</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">39</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">17</td><td rowspan="8" colspan="1">0.06</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Atrophic</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Pregnant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Tumour</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">4</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Redundant</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">9</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">3</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Juxtadivericular</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">15</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Small</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Long</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Procedure related factors</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">No. of cannulation attempts</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 5</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">46 (57.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">12 (54.5)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.03</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">≥ 6</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">34 (27.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10 (45.5)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Median number of pancreatic cannulations</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">4</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&lt; 3 times</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58 (72.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2 (9.1)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">&gt; 3 times</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">22 (52.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">20 (90.9)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Method of cannulation</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Conventional</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58 (72.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">18 (81.8)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.07</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Precut</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">22 (52.4)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">4 (18.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Biliary sphincter balloon dilatation</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">No</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">70 (87.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">16 (72.7)</td><td rowspan="2" colspan="1">0.1</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Yes</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10 (12.5)</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6 (27.3)</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><fn id="fn3"><p>CBD: Common bile duct; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.</p></fn></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><p>Multivariate analysis after binary logistic regression analysis revealed that patient age less than 35 years (<italic>P</italic> = 0.001, OR = 0.035), narrower median CBD diameter (<italic>P</italic> = 0.0001) and increased number of pancreatic cannulations (<italic>P</italic> = 0.0001) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP (Table <xref rid="T3" ref-type="table">3</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="T3" position="float"><?disp-level 2?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p>Multivariate logistic regression for analysis of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Variable</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold><italic>P</italic>-value</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Odds ratio</bold></td><td colspan="2" rowspan="1"><bold>95%CI for EXP(B)</bold><hr/></td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Lower</bold></td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><bold>Upper</bold></td></tr></thead><tbody align="center"><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age group</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.001</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.035</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.005</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.259</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.519</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1.012</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.976</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1.050</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Sex</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.362</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.143</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.075</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.270</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">CBD diameter below 10 mm</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.609</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.726</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.212</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2.481</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">CBD diameter</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.000</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.612</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.495</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.757</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Difficult cannulation</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.207</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.476</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.150</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1.506</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">No. of pancreatic cannulations below 3</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.117</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.219</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.033</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">1.460</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">No. of pancreatic cannulations</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.000</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">5.258</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">2.665</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">10.370</td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Papilla</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0.964</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"/></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><fn id="fn4"><p>CBD: Common bile duct.</p></fn></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec id="sec8" disp-level="1"><title>DISCUSSION</title><p>PEP is the most common and serious complication after ERCP[<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. PEP is associated with higher morbidity and mortality beside its effect in increasing the consumption of hospital resources[<xref rid="B11" ref-type="bibr">11</xref>]. Identification of clinical and procedural correlates for PEP is of crucial importance in the practice of ERCP. It affects the medical decision regarding patient choice, adoption of pharmacological prophylactic measures, avoidance of procedural risk factors, and determination of the time of discharge after the procedure[<xref rid="B1" ref-type="bibr">1</xref>,<xref rid="B7" ref-type="bibr">7</xref>,<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. Risk factors for PEP have been a matter of controversy and the pathogenesis of PEP is not fully understood yet[<xref rid="B9" ref-type="bibr">9</xref>,<xref rid="B11" ref-type="bibr">11</xref>]. This study reports risk factors for PEP according to the experience of a tertiary high volume surgical center in Egypt.</p><p>Despite advanced accessories and novel techniques in ERCP, complication rate after ERCP remained unchanged over the last decade[<xref rid="B7" ref-type="bibr">7</xref>,<xref rid="B12" ref-type="bibr">12</xref>]. According to previous reports, the incidence of PEP ranges from 5% to 40%. This great discrepancy in the reported rates can be attributed to heterogeneity of the definition of PEP and its grading system, variability in data collection, inclusion of diagnostic ERCP in the study, and difference in expertise among endoscopists[<xref rid="B13" ref-type="bibr">13</xref>]. The incidence of PEP in this cohort was 10.2% with adoption of the consensus definition of PEP[<xref rid="B10" ref-type="bibr">10</xref>]. Mild to moderate PEP occurred in 80 (8%) patients, while severe PEP occurred in 22 (2.2%) patients. These ratios are concordant with data reported by previous studies[<xref rid="B14" ref-type="bibr">14</xref>-<xref rid="B16" ref-type="bibr">16</xref>].</p><p>Among different patient related risk factors, younger age and non-dilated extrahepatic biliary radicals were independent risk factors for PEP on multivariate analysis in this study. Also, using a cutoff value of 35 years to divide patients into two groups, the rate of PEP was significantly higher in the younger group by univariate analysis. Younger age has been a subject of controversy regarding its association with PEP[<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. Many studies reported an insignificant relation between patient age and likelihood of PEP[<xref rid="B2" ref-type="bibr">2</xref>,<xref rid="B17" ref-type="bibr">17</xref>]. However, Freeman et al[<xref rid="B18" ref-type="bibr">18</xref>] first reported relatively younger age as a predictor of PEP on multivariate analysis. This finding was confirmed by later studies[<xref rid="B5" ref-type="bibr">5</xref>,<xref rid="B16" ref-type="bibr">16</xref>,<xref rid="B19" ref-type="bibr">19</xref>]. Higher incidence of PEP in younger age was explained by the aging effect on pancreatic exocrine function, smaller common bile duct diameter and the higher incidence of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction in younger age[<xref rid="B13" ref-type="bibr">13</xref>,<xref rid="B16" ref-type="bibr">16</xref>,<xref rid="B18" ref-type="bibr">18</xref>].</p><p>Management of CBD stones in case of non-dilated extrahepatic biliary system represents a surgical challenge[<xref rid="B20" ref-type="bibr">20</xref>]. Laparoscopic transcholedochal CBD exploration mandates a CBD diameter of at least 6-8 mm[<xref rid="B21" ref-type="bibr">21</xref>-<xref rid="B23" ref-type="bibr">23</xref>]. According to many studies including this one, normal caliber CBD is associated with increased difficulty of the ERCP procedure[<xref rid="B24" ref-type="bibr">24</xref>-<xref rid="B26" ref-type="bibr">26</xref>]. However, most of recent studies reported absence of association between narrower CBD diameter and PEP[<xref rid="B13" ref-type="bibr">13</xref>]. Laparoscopic management for surgically fit patients with concomitant gall bladder and CBD stones in case of non-dilated CBD through transcystic CBD exploration or laparoendoscopic Rendez-vous is better to avoid or minimize the risk of PEP[<xref rid="B21" ref-type="bibr">21</xref>]. In case of isolated choledocholithiasis or in patients who are unfit for surgery, prophylactic measures against PEP should be adopted.</p><p>In this cohort, difficult cannulation, denoted by frequent cannulation attempts and pancreatic cannulation more than three times, was associated with a higher risk of PEP. The effect of pancreatic duct injection with contrast dye on PEP could not be evaluated because we did not use the conventional contrast cannulation method. The effect of precut sphincterotomy on PEP is controversial[<xref rid="B11" ref-type="bibr">11</xref>]. Some authors advocate that precut sphincterotomy causes papillary oedema which retains pancreatic secretion resulting in PEP[<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>,<xref rid="B24" ref-type="bibr">24</xref>]. On the other hand, some authors indicate that precut sphincterotomy is usually preceded by difficult cannulation through the conventional approach and that the later, not the precut sphincterotomy itself, is responsible for the development of PEP[<xref rid="B26" ref-type="bibr">26</xref>]. This is supported by the finding that precut sphinctertomy was not reported as a risk factor for PEP from endoscopists who adopted precut sphincterotomy as a preferred technique from the start not just a salvage procedure after difficult cannulation through conventional cannulation methods[<xref rid="B27" ref-type="bibr">27</xref>]. Early precut leads to more successful cannulation rate without more hazard of morbidity after ERCP[<xref rid="B28" ref-type="bibr">28</xref>-<xref rid="B33" ref-type="bibr">33</xref>].</p><p>Risk factors for PEP have a synergetic effect[<xref rid="B8" ref-type="bibr">8</xref>]. Jeurnink et al[<xref rid="B1" ref-type="bibr">1</xref>] suggested that development of prognostic models and scoring systems based on various patient and procedure related risk factors will help in defining patients at the highest risk for PEP. According to this cohort, young patients (&lt; 35 years) with narrow CBD (&lt; 10 mm) who had shown evidence of difficult cannulation (high number of cannulation attempts or pancreatic cannulation more than three times) are candidates for prophylactic and preventive measures against PEP[<xref rid="B28" ref-type="bibr">28</xref>].</p><p>Despite the improvement of techniques of ERCP in recent years and increased experiences, the incidence of PEP has not decreased. Therefore, studies to determine risky patients and predict severity of PEP are very important to give the risk factors prophylactic agents for prevention of PEP[<xref rid="B34" ref-type="bibr">34</xref>-<xref rid="B37" ref-type="bibr">37</xref>]. Pre-ERCP administration of rectal indometacin reduced the overall occurrence of PEP without increasing risk of bleeding[<xref rid="B34" ref-type="bibr">34</xref>]. Some studies reported that the combination of a temporary prophylactic pancreatic plastic stent placement and rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is recommended for preventing PEP in high-risk cases[<xref rid="B34" ref-type="bibr">34</xref>-<xref rid="B36" ref-type="bibr">36</xref>]. Somatostatin can reduce the incidence of PEP but has not been routinely administrated in most of centers nor recommended by guidelines as a prophylactic measure for PEP[<xref rid="B36" ref-type="bibr">36</xref>,<xref rid="B37" ref-type="bibr">37</xref>]. Patients at high risk of PEP should be also monitored for at least 24 h to avoid occurrence of PEP after early discharge[<xref rid="B1" ref-type="bibr">1</xref>,<xref rid="B7" ref-type="bibr">7</xref>].</p><p>In conclusion, PEP is the most frequent and devastating complication after ERCP. PEP is associated with higher morbidity and mortality beside its effect in increasing the consumption of hospital resources. Age less than 35 years, narrower median CBD diameter and increased number of pancreatic cannulations are independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP. Patients with these risk factors are candidates for prophylactic and preventive measures against PEP.</p></sec><sec id="sec9" disp-level="1"><title>COMMENTS</title><sec id="sec10" disp-level="2"><title>Background</title><p>Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is increasingly used for therapeutic management of various biliary and pancreatic diseases. However, ERCP is not a procedure without morbidities. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains the most common and serious complication after ERCP. The reported incidence of PEP is around 5%. This rate may increase up to 20%-40% in high risk patients. Identification of risk factors for PEP helps adopt prophylactic measures in high risk patients and early discharge in low risk patients.</p></sec><sec id="sec11" disp-level="2"><title>Research frontiers</title><p>Many studies have tried to identify the risk factors for pancreatitis after ERCP. Many patient and procedure related factors are suggested to be associated with increased likelihood of PEP. The trigger mechanism and pathogenesis for PEP remain unclear.</p></sec><sec id="sec12" disp-level="2"><title>Innovations and breakthroughs</title><p>ERCP is not a procedure without morbidities. Identification of risk factors for PEP helps adopt prophylactic measures in high risk patients and early discharge in low risk patients.</p></sec><sec id="sec13" disp-level="2"><title>Applications</title><p>The data in this study suggested risk factors for PEP and investigated the predictors of its severity in a tertiary high volume. Furthermore, this study also provided readers with important information regarding the risk factors for PEP.</p></sec><sec id="sec14" disp-level="2"><title>Terminology</title><p>PEP remains the most devastating and frequent complication after ERCP. The reported incidence of PEP is around 5%. This rate may increase up to 20%-40% in high risk patients.</p></sec><sec id="sec15" disp-level="2"><title>Peer-review</title><p>This is an interesting manuscript with a significant number of patients treating an important topic, and the aim of this study was to detect risk factors for PEP and investigate the predictors of its severity in a tertiary high volume referral surgical center in Egypt.</p></sec></sec><sec id="fn-group1" sec-type="fn-group" disp-level="1"><title>Footnotes</title><fn-group><fn id="fn5"><p>Manuscript source: Unsolicited manuscript</p></fn><fn id="fn6"><p>Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology</p></fn><fn id="fn7"><p>Country of origin: Egypt</p></fn><fn id="fn8"><p>Peer-review report classification</p></fn><fn id="fn9"><p>Grade A (Excellent): 0</p></fn><fn id="fn10"><p>Grade B (Very good): B, B</p></fn><fn id="fn11"><p>Grade C (Good): C, C, C</p></fn><fn id="fn12"><p>Grade D (Fair): D</p></fn><fn id="fn13"><p>Grade E (Poor): 0</p></fn><fn id="fn14"><p>Institutional review board statement: This study was approved by the institutional review board of Mansoura University.</p></fn><fn id="fn15"><p>Informed consent statement: All patients underwent ERCP after a careful explanation of the nature of the disease and possible complications.</p></fn><fn id="fn16"><p>Conflict-of-interest statement: There are no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.</p></fn><fn id="fn17"><p>Data sharing statement: No additional data are available.</p></fn><fn id="fn18"><p>Peer-review started: June 6, 2016</p></fn><fn id="fn19"><p>First decision: July 20, 2016</p></fn><fn id="fn20"><p>Article in press: August 29, 2016</p></fn><fn id="fn21"><p>P- Reviewer: Hauser G, Gonzalez-Ojeda A, Ikeuchi N, Malak M, Sferra TJ, Shi H S- Editor: Qi Y L- Editor: Wang TQ E- Editor: Li D</p></fn></fn-group></sec><sec id="ref-list1" sec-type="ref-list" disp-level="1"><title>References</title><sec id="ref-list1_sec2" disp-level="2"><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Jeurnink SM, Siersema PD, Steyerberg EW, Dees J, Poley JW, Haringsma J, Kuipers EJ. Predictors of complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a prognostic model for early discharge. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2892–2900. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1638-9.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1007/s00464-011-1638-9"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3160559"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="21455806"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Surg Endosc&amp;title=Predictors of complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a prognostic model for early discharge&amp;author=SM Jeurnink&amp;author=PD Siersema&amp;author=EW Steyerberg&amp;author=J Dees&amp;author=JW Poley&amp;volume=25&amp;publication_year=2011&amp;pages=2892-2900&amp;pmid=21455806&amp;doi=10.1007/s00464-011-1638-9&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Cotton PB, Garrow DA, Gallagher J, Romagnuolo J. Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:80–88. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.039.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.039"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="19286178"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years&amp;author=PB Cotton&amp;author=DA Garrow&amp;author=J Gallagher&amp;author=J Romagnuolo&amp;volume=70&amp;publication_year=2009&amp;pages=80-88&amp;pmid=19286178&amp;doi=10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.039&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Yang D, Draganov PV. Indomethacin for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis: is it the magic bullet? World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:4082–4085. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i31.4082.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.3748/wjg.v18.i31.4082"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3422786"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="22919238"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=World J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Indomethacin for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis: is it the magic bullet?&amp;author=D Yang&amp;author=PV Draganov&amp;volume=18&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=4082-4085&amp;pmid=22919238&amp;doi=10.3748/wjg.v18.i31.4082&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Williams EJ, Taylor S, Fairclough P, Hamlyn A, Logan RF, Martin D, Riley SA, Veitch P, Wilkinson ML, Williamson PR, et al.  Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large-scale, prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy. 2007;39:793–801. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966723.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1055/s-2007-966723"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="17703388"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Endoscopy&amp;title=Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large-scale, prospective multicenter study&amp;author=EJ Williams&amp;author=S Taylor&amp;author=P Fairclough&amp;author=A Hamlyn&amp;author=RF Logan&amp;volume=39&amp;publication_year=2007&amp;pages=793-801&amp;pmid=17703388&amp;doi=10.1055/s-2007-966723&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL, Barnett J, Freeman M, Geenen J, Ryan M, Parker H, Frakes JT, Fogel EL, et al.  Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:139–147. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00380.x.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00380.x"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="16405547"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Am J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study&amp;author=CL Cheng&amp;author=S Sherman&amp;author=JL Watkins&amp;author=J Barnett&amp;author=M Freeman&amp;volume=101&amp;publication_year=2006&amp;pages=139-147&amp;pmid=16405547&amp;doi=10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00380.x&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Moon SH, Kim MH. Prophecy about post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: from divination to science. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:631–637. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i5.631.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.3748/wjg.v19.i5.631"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3574588"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="23429236"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=World J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Prophecy about post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: from divination to science&amp;author=SH Moon&amp;author=MH Kim&amp;volume=19&amp;publication_year=2013&amp;pages=631-637&amp;pmid=23429236&amp;doi=10.3748/wjg.v19.i5.631&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Katsinelos P, Lazaraki G, Chatzimavroudis G, Gkagkalis S, Vasiliadis I, Papaeuthimiou A, Terzoudis S, Pilpilidis I, Zavos C, Kountouras J. Risk factors for therapeutic ERCP-related complications: an analysis of 2,715 cases performed by a single endoscopist. Ann Gastroenterol. 2014;27:65–72.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3959534"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="24714755"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Ann Gastroenterol&amp;title=Risk factors for therapeutic ERCP-related complications: an analysis of 2,715 cases performed by a single endoscopist&amp;author=P Katsinelos&amp;author=G Lazaraki&amp;author=G Chatzimavroudis&amp;author=S Gkagkalis&amp;author=I Vasiliadis&amp;volume=27&amp;publication_year=2014&amp;pages=65-72&amp;pmid=24714755&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Dumonceau JM, Andriulli A, Deviere J, Mariani A, Rigaux J, Baron TH, Testoni PA. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline: prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopy. 2010;42:503–515. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1244208.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1055/s-0029-1244208"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="20506068"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Endoscopy&amp;title=European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline: prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis&amp;author=JM Dumonceau&amp;author=A Andriulli&amp;author=J Deviere&amp;author=A Mariani&amp;author=J Rigaux&amp;volume=42&amp;publication_year=2010&amp;pages=503-515&amp;pmid=20506068&amp;doi=10.1055/s-0029-1244208&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Tammaro S, Caruso R, Pallone F, Monteleone G. Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography pancreatitis: is time for a new preventive approach? World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:4635–4638. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i34.4635.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.3748/wjg.v18.i34.4635"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3442201"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="23002332"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=World J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography pancreatitis: is time for a new preventive approach?&amp;author=S Tammaro&amp;author=R Caruso&amp;author=F Pallone&amp;author=G Monteleone&amp;volume=18&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=4635-4638&amp;pmid=23002332&amp;doi=10.3748/wjg.v18.i34.4635&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">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;37:383–393. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="2070995"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus&amp;author=PB Cotton&amp;author=G Lehman&amp;author=J Vennes&amp;author=JE Geenen&amp;author=RC Russell&amp;volume=37&amp;publication_year=1991&amp;pages=383-393&amp;pmid=2070995&amp;doi=10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Chen JJ, Wang XM, Liu XQ, Li W, Dong M, Suo ZW, Ding P, Li Y. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review of clinical trials with a large sample size in the past 10 years. Eur J Med Res. 2014;19:26. doi: 10.1186/2047-783X-19-26.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1186/2047-783X-19-26"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC4035895"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="24886445"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Eur J Med Res&amp;title=Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review of clinical trials with a large sample size in the past 10 years&amp;author=JJ Chen&amp;author=XM Wang&amp;author=XQ Liu&amp;author=W Li&amp;author=M Dong&amp;volume=19&amp;publication_year=2014&amp;pages=26&amp;pmid=24886445&amp;doi=10.1186/2047-783X-19-26&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Freeman ML. Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: avoidance and management. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2012;22:567–586. doi: 10.1016/j.giec.2012.05.001.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/j.giec.2012.05.001"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="22748249"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am&amp;title=Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: avoidance and management&amp;author=ML Freeman&amp;volume=22&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=567-586&amp;pmid=22748249&amp;doi=10.1016/j.giec.2012.05.001&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Testoni PA, Mariani A, Giussani A, Vailati C, Masci E, Macarri G, Ghezzo L, Familiari L, Giardullo N, Mutignani M, et al.  Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in high- and low-volume centers and among expert and non-expert operators: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1753–1761. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.136.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1038/ajg.2010.136"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="20372116"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Am J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in high- and low-volume centers and among expert and non-expert operators: a prospective multicenter study&amp;author=PA Testoni&amp;author=A Mariani&amp;author=A Giussani&amp;author=C Vailati&amp;author=E Masci&amp;volume=105&amp;publication_year=2010&amp;pages=1753-1761&amp;pmid=20372116&amp;doi=10.1038/ajg.2010.136&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Perney P, Berthier E, Pageaux GP, Hillaire-Buys D, Roques V, Fabbro-Peray P, Melki M, Hanslik B, Bauret P, Larrey D, et al.  Are drugs a risk factor of post-ERCP pancreatitis? Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58:696–700. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(03)02019-4.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/s0016-5107(03)02019-4"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="14595303"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Are drugs a risk factor of post-ERCP pancreatitis?&amp;author=P Perney&amp;author=E Berthier&amp;author=GP Pageaux&amp;author=D Hillaire-Buys&amp;author=V Roques&amp;volume=58&amp;publication_year=2003&amp;pages=696-700&amp;pmid=14595303&amp;doi=10.1016/s0016-5107(03)02019-4&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Andriulli A, Clemente R, Solmi L, Terruzzi V, Suriani R, Sigillito A, Leandro G, Leo P, De Maio G, Perri F. Gabexate or somatostatin administration before ERCP in patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:488–495. doi: 10.1067/mge.2002.128130.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1067/mge.2002.128130"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="12297762"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Gabexate or somatostatin administration before ERCP in patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial&amp;author=A Andriulli&amp;author=R Clemente&amp;author=L Solmi&amp;author=V Terruzzi&amp;author=R Suriani&amp;volume=56&amp;publication_year=2002&amp;pages=488-495&amp;pmid=12297762&amp;doi=10.1067/mge.2002.128130&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">He QB, Xu T, Wang J, Li YH, Wang L, Zou XP. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: A retrospective single-center study. J Dig Dis. 2015;16:471–478. doi: 10.1111/1751-2980.12258.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1111/1751-2980.12258"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="25955444"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=J Dig Dis&amp;title=Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: A retrospective single-center study&amp;author=QB He&amp;author=T Xu&amp;author=J Wang&amp;author=YH Li&amp;author=L Wang&amp;volume=16&amp;publication_year=2015&amp;pages=471-478&amp;pmid=25955444&amp;doi=10.1111/1751-2980.12258&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Masci E, Mariani A, Curioni S, Testoni PA. Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2003;35:830–834. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-42614.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1055/s-2003-42614"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="14551860"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Endoscopy&amp;title=Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis&amp;author=E Masci&amp;author=A Mariani&amp;author=S Curioni&amp;author=PA Testoni&amp;volume=35&amp;publication_year=2003&amp;pages=830-834&amp;pmid=14551860&amp;doi=10.1055/s-2003-42614&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, Haber GB, Herman ME, Dorsher PJ, Moore JP, Fennerty MB, Ryan ME, Shaw MJ, et al.  Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:909–918. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199609263351301.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1056/NEJM199609263351301"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="8782497"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=N Engl J Med&amp;title=Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy&amp;author=ML Freeman&amp;author=DB Nelson&amp;author=S Sherman&amp;author=GB Haber&amp;author=ME Herman&amp;volume=335&amp;publication_year=1996&amp;pages=909-918&amp;pmid=8782497&amp;doi=10.1056/NEJM199609263351301&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Wang P, Li ZS, Liu F, Ren X, Lu NH, Fan ZN, Huang Q, Zhang X, He LP, Sun WS, et al.  Risk factors for ERCP-related complications: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:31–40. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.5.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1038/ajg.2008.5"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="19098846"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Am J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Risk factors for ERCP-related complications: a prospective multicenter study&amp;author=P Wang&amp;author=ZS Li&amp;author=F Liu&amp;author=X Ren&amp;author=NH Lu&amp;volume=104&amp;publication_year=2009&amp;pages=31-40&amp;pmid=19098846&amp;doi=10.1038/ajg.2008.5&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Sharma A, Dahiya P, Khullar R, Soni V, Baijal M, Chowbey PK. Management of common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era. Indian J Surg. 2012;74:264–269. doi: 10.1007/s12262-012-0593-6.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1007/s12262-012-0593-6"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3397180"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="23730054"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Indian J Surg&amp;title=Management of common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era&amp;author=A Sharma&amp;author=P Dahiya&amp;author=R Khullar&amp;author=V Soni&amp;author=M Baijal&amp;volume=74&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=264-269&amp;pmid=23730054&amp;doi=10.1007/s12262-012-0593-6&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">El Nakeeb A, El Geidie A, El Hanafy E, Atef E, Askar W, Sultan AM, Hamdy E, El Shobary M, Hamed H, Abdelrafee A, et al.  Management and Outcome of Borderline Common Bile Duct with Stones: A Prospective Randomized Study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016;26:161–167. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0493.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1089/lap.2015.0493"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="26828596"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A&amp;title=Management and Outcome of Borderline Common Bile Duct with Stones: A Prospective Randomized Study&amp;author=A El Nakeeb&amp;author=A El Geidie&amp;author=E El Hanafy&amp;author=E Atef&amp;author=W Askar&amp;volume=26&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=161-167&amp;pmid=26828596&amp;doi=10.1089/lap.2015.0493&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Shojaiefard A, Esmaeilzadeh M, Ghafouri A, Mehrabi A. Various techniques for the surgical treatment of common bile duct stones: a meta review. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2009;2009:840208. doi: 10.1155/2009/840208.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1155/2009/840208"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC2722154"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="19672460"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastroenterol Res Pract&amp;title=Various techniques for the surgical treatment of common bile duct stones: a meta review&amp;author=A Shojaiefard&amp;author=M Esmaeilzadeh&amp;author=A Ghafouri&amp;author=A Mehrabi&amp;volume=2009&amp;publication_year=2009&amp;pages=840208&amp;pmid=19672460&amp;doi=10.1155/2009/840208&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Lee HM, Min SK, Lee HK. Long-term results of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration by choledochotomy for choledocholithiasis: 15-year experience from a single center. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014;86:1–6. doi: 10.4174/astr.2014.86.1.1.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.4174/astr.2014.86.1.1"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3994609"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="24761400"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Ann Surg Treat Res&amp;title=Long-term results of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration by choledochotomy for choledocholithiasis: 15-year experience from a single center&amp;author=HM Lee&amp;author=SK Min&amp;author=HK Lee&amp;volume=86&amp;publication_year=2014&amp;pages=1-6&amp;pmid=24761400&amp;doi=10.4174/astr.2014.86.1.1&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Sherman S, Ruffolo TA, Hawes RH, Lehman GA. Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy. A prospective series with emphasis on the increased risk associated with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction and nondilated bile ducts. Gastroenterology. 1991;101:1068–1075.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="1889699"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastroenterology&amp;title=Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy. A prospective series with emphasis on the increased risk associated with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction and nondilated bile ducts&amp;author=S Sherman&amp;author=TA Ruffolo&amp;author=RH Hawes&amp;author=GA Lehman&amp;volume=101&amp;publication_year=1991&amp;pages=1068-1075&amp;pmid=1889699&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Kahaleh M, Freeman M. Prevention and management of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications. Clin Endosc. 2012;45:305–312. doi: 10.5946/ce.2012.45.3.305.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.5946/ce.2012.45.3.305"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3429758"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="22977824"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Clin Endosc&amp;title=Prevention and management of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications&amp;author=M Kahaleh&amp;author=M Freeman&amp;volume=45&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=305-312&amp;pmid=22977824&amp;doi=10.5946/ce.2012.45.3.305&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Chen YK, Foliente RL, Santoro MJ, Walter MH, Collen MJ. Endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis: increased risk associated with nondilated bile ducts and sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89:327–333.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="8122639"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Am J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis: increased risk associated with nondilated bile ducts and sphincter of Oddi dysfunction&amp;author=YK Chen&amp;author=RL Foliente&amp;author=MJ Santoro&amp;author=MH Walter&amp;author=MJ Collen&amp;volume=89&amp;publication_year=1994&amp;pages=327-333&amp;pmid=8122639&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Freeman ML, Guda NM. ERCP cannulation: a review of reported techniques. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:112–125. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02463-0.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02463-0"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="15672074"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=ERCP cannulation: a review of reported techniques&amp;author=ML Freeman&amp;author=NM Guda&amp;volume=61&amp;publication_year=2005&amp;pages=112-125&amp;pmid=15672074&amp;doi=10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02463-0&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Zhang QS, Han B, Xu JH, Gao P, Shen YC. Needle-knife papillotomy and fistulotomy improved the treatment outcome of patients with difficult biliary cannulation. Surg Endosc. 2016 doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4914-x. Epub ahead of print.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1007/s00464-016-4914-x"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="27129550"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Surg Endosc&amp;title=Needle-knife papillotomy and fistulotomy improved the treatment outcome of patients with difficult biliary cannulation&amp;author=QS Zhang&amp;author=B Han&amp;author=JH Xu&amp;author=P Gao&amp;author=YC Shen&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pmid=27129550&amp;doi=10.1007/s00464-016-4914-x&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Ayoubi M, Sansoè G, Leone N, Castellino F. Comparison between needle-knife fistulotomy and standard cannulation in ERCP. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;4:398–404. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v4.i9.398.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.4253/wjge.v4.i9.398"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC3487187"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="23125897"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=World J Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Comparison between needle-knife fistulotomy and standard cannulation in ERCP&amp;author=M Ayoubi&amp;author=G Sansoè&amp;author=N Leone&amp;author=F Castellino&amp;volume=4&amp;publication_year=2012&amp;pages=398-404&amp;pmid=23125897&amp;doi=10.4253/wjge.v4.i9.398&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Swan MP, Alexander S, Moss A, Williams SJ, Ruppin D, Hope R, Bourke MJ. Needle knife sphincterotomy does not increase the risk of pancreatitis in patients with difficult biliary cannulation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:430–436.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.017.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.017"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="23313840"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol&amp;title=Needle knife sphincterotomy does not increase the risk of pancreatitis in patients with difficult biliary cannulation&amp;author=MP Swan&amp;author=S Alexander&amp;author=A Moss&amp;author=SJ Williams&amp;author=D Ruppin&amp;volume=11&amp;publication_year=2013&amp;pages=430-436.e1&amp;pmid=23313840&amp;doi=10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.017&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B31"><label>31.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Jin YJ, Jeong S, Lee DH. Utility of needle-knife fistulotomy as an initial method of biliary cannulation to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in a highly selected at-risk group: a single-arm prospective feasibility study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:808–813. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.04.011.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/j.gie.2016.04.011"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="27102829"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastrointest Endosc&amp;title=Utility of needle-knife fistulotomy as an initial method of biliary cannulation to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in a highly selected at-risk group: a single-arm prospective feasibility study&amp;author=YJ Jin&amp;author=S Jeong&amp;author=DH Lee&amp;volume=84&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=808-813&amp;pmid=27102829&amp;doi=10.1016/j.gie.2016.04.011&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B32"><label>32.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Mariani A, Di Leo M, Giardullo N, Giussani A, Marini M, Buffoli F, Cipolletta L, Radaelli F, Ravelli P, Lombardi G, et al.  Early precut sphincterotomy for difficult biliary access to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized trial. Endoscopy. 2016;48:530–535. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-102250.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1055/s-0042-102250"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="26990509"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Endoscopy&amp;title=Early precut sphincterotomy for difficult biliary access to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized trial&amp;author=A Mariani&amp;author=M Di Leo&amp;author=N Giardullo&amp;author=A Giussani&amp;author=M Marini&amp;volume=48&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=530-535&amp;pmid=26990509&amp;doi=10.1055/s-0042-102250&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B33"><label>33.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Kim SJ, Kang DH, Kim HW, Choi CW, Park SB, Song BJ, Hong YM. Needle-knife fistulotomy vs double-guidewire technique in patients with repetitive unintentional pancreatic cannulations. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21:5918–5925. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i19.5918.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.3748/wjg.v21.i19.5918"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC4438026"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="26019456"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=World J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Needle-knife fistulotomy vs double-guidewire technique in patients with repetitive unintentional pancreatic cannulations&amp;author=SJ Kim&amp;author=DH Kang&amp;author=HW Kim&amp;author=CW Choi&amp;author=SB Park&amp;volume=21&amp;publication_year=2015&amp;pages=5918-5925&amp;pmid=26019456&amp;doi=10.3748/wjg.v21.i19.5918&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B34"><label>34.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Luo H, Zhao L, Leung J, Zhang R, Liu Z, Wang X, Wang B, Nie Z, Lei T, Li X, et al.  Routine pre-procedural rectal indometacin versus selective post-procedural rectal indometacin to prevent pancreatitis in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:2293–301. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30310-5.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30310-5"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="27133971"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Lancet&amp;title=Routine pre-procedural rectal indometacin versus selective post-procedural rectal indometacin to prevent pancreatitis in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial&amp;author=H Luo&amp;author=L Zhao&amp;author=J Leung&amp;author=R Zhang&amp;author=Z Liu&amp;volume=387&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=2293-301&amp;pmid=27133971&amp;doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30310-5&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B35"><label>35.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Elmunzer BJ, Serrano J, Chak A, Edmundowicz SA, Papachristou GI, Scheiman JM, Singh VK, Varadurajulu S, Vargo JJ, Willingham FF, et al.  Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17:120. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1251-2.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1186/s13063-016-1251-2"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC4778337"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="26941086"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Trials&amp;title=Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial&amp;author=BJ Elmunzer&amp;author=J Serrano&amp;author=A Chak&amp;author=SA Edmundowicz&amp;author=GI Papachristou&amp;volume=17&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=120&amp;pmid=26941086&amp;doi=10.1186/s13063-016-1251-2&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B36"><label>36.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Yin HK, Wu HE, Li QX, Wang W, Ou WL, Xia HH. Pancreatic Stenting Reduces Post-ERCP Pancreatitis and Biliary Sepsis in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized, Controlled Study. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2016;2016:9687052. doi: 10.1155/2016/9687052.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.1155/2016/9687052"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC4789431"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="27057161"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Gastroenterol Res Pract&amp;title=Pancreatic Stenting Reduces Post-ERCP Pancreatitis and Biliary Sepsis in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized, Controlled Study&amp;author=HK Yin&amp;author=HE Wu&amp;author=QX Li&amp;author=W Wang&amp;author=WL Ou&amp;volume=2016&amp;publication_year=2016&amp;pages=9687052&amp;pmid=27057161&amp;doi=10.1155/2016/9687052&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B37"><label>37.</label><mixed-citation><named-content content-type="citation-string">Qin X, Lei WS, Xing ZX, Shi F. Prophylactic effect of somatostatin in preventing Post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated meta-analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2015;21:372–378. doi: 10.4103/1319-3767.167187.</named-content><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.4103/1319-3767.167187"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmcid" xlink:href="PMC4707805"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="pmid" xlink:href="26655132"/><ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="google-scholar" xlink:href="journal=Saudi J Gastroenterol&amp;title=Prophylactic effect of somatostatin in preventing Post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated meta-analysis&amp;author=X Qin&amp;author=WS Lei&amp;author=ZX Xing&amp;author=F Shi&amp;volume=21&amp;publication_year=2015&amp;pages=372-378&amp;pmid=26655132&amp;doi=10.4103/1319-3767.167187&amp;"/></mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></sec></sec></body></article>