Comparison of radiation exposure between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage and transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for pancreatobiliary diseases.

Objectives The transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP-D) cannot be performed without fluoroscopy, and there are many situations in which fluoroscopy is required even in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUS-D). Previous studies have compared the efficacy, but not the radiation exposure of EUS-D and ERCP-D. While radiation exposure in ERCP-D has been previously evaluated, there is a paucity of information regarding radiation doses in EUS-D. This study aimed to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. Methods This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-D and ERCP-D between October 2017 and March 2019. The air kerma (AK: mGy), kerma-area product (KAP: Gycm2 ), fluoroscopy time (FT: min), and procedure time (PT: min) were assessed. The invasive probability weighting method was used to qualify the comparisons. Results We enrolled 372 and 105 patients who underwent ERCP-D and EUS-D, respectively. The mean AK, KAP, and FT in the EUS-D group were higher by 53%, 28%, and 27%, respectively, than those in the ERCP-D group, whereas PT was shorter by approximately 11% (AK; 135.0 vs. 88.4, KAP; 28.1 vs. 21.9, FT; 20.4 vs. 16.0, PT; 38.7 vs. 43.5). The sub-analysis limited to biliary drainage cases showed the same trend (AK; 128.3 vs. 90.9, KAP; 27.0 vs. 22.2, FT; 16.4 vs. 16.1, PT; 32.5 vs. 44.4). Conclusions This is the first study to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. Radiation exposure was significantly higher in EUS-D than in ERCP-D, despite the shorter procedure time.