BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Retrospective Study
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Aug 16, 2020; 12(8): 220-230
Published online Aug 16, 2020. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v12.i8.220
Table 2 Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedural characteristics between the esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy groups
EGDS group (n = 17)CS group (n = 27)P value
EST, n (%)7 (41.2)19 (70.4)0.07
EPBD or EPLBD, n (%)6 (35.3)13 (48.1)0.54
Procedural time [min, median (range)]60 (20-100)90 (40-128)< 0.01
Papilla of Vater access, n (%)14 (82.4)25 (92.6)0.36
Stone clearance, n (%)6/11 (54.5)8/19 (42.1)1.0
Stone destruction, n (%)3/11 (27.3)6/19 (31.6)1.0
Procedural success, n (%)14 (82.4)17 (63.0)0.20
Adverse events, n (%)0 (0)0 (0)
PEP, n (%)0 (0)0 (0)

  • Citation: Sugimoto M, Takagi T, Suzuki R, Konno N, Asama H, Sato Y, Irie H, Watanabe K, Nakamura J, Kikuchi H, Takasumi M, Hashimoto M, Kato T, Hikichi T, Ohira H. Which scope is appropriate for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after Billroth II reconstruction: An esophagogastroduodenoscope or a colonoscope? World J Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 12(8): 220-230
  • URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v12/i8/220.htm
  • DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v12.i8.220

Write to the Help Desk