Impact of periampullary diverticulum on the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiography pancreatitis

Table 3 Multivariate Logistic regression analysis of periampullary diverticulum and post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis incidence

Variable	Crude		Model 12		Model 23
	OR (95%CI)	P value	OR (95%CI)	P value	OR (95%CI)	P value
PAD
No	1.01		1.01		1.01
Yes	3.86 (2.03-7.35)	< 0.001	4.13 (2.1-8.11)	< 0.001	4.23 (2.06-8.69)	< 0.001
PAD type
Non-PAD	1.01		1.01		1.01
A-PAD	1.22 (0.47-3.17)	0.68	1.32 (0.5-3.49)	0.572	1.52 (0.56-4.17)	0.411
B-PAD	13.38 (6.39-28.03)	< 0.001	14.65 (6.63-32.33)	< 0.001	14.16 (5.84-34.34)	< 0.001
P value for trend		0.052		0.056		0.039

¹1.0 was used as the reference group, indicates the reference category.

²Model 1: Adjusted for age and sex.

³Model 2: Adjusted for model 1 + periampullary diverticulum, guidewire insertion into the pancreatic duct during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, hepatitis, history of cholecystectomy, post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis, Postoperative hyperamylasemia.

PAD: Periampullary diverticulum; A-PAD: Type A periampullary diverticulum; B-PAD: Type B periampullary diverticulum; OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.