Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in patients with the algic obstructive form of chronic pancreatitis

Česká verze

Authors: O. Vašíček ¹ ; J. Křivinka ¹ ; T. Tichý ¹ ; A. Chudoba ¹ ; I. Hartmann ² ; P. Falt ¹ ; O. Urban ¹
Authors place of work: II. interní klinika – gastroenterologická a geriatrická LF UP a FN Olomouc ¹; Urologická klinika LF UP a FN Olomouc ²
Published in the journal: Gastroent Hepatol 2026; 80(3): 201-207
Category: Digestivní endoskopie: původní práce
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccgh2026201

Summary

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a progressive inflammatory disease characterized by morphological changes leading to impairment of both exocrine and endocrine functions. Clinically, it most often manifests as abdominal pain and indigestion, with a significant impact on the patients‘ quality of life. The main cause of disease development is chronic alcohol abuse. Diagnosis is mostly morphological and uses imaging methods (CT, MRI, EUS), which can be complemented by the assessment of both external and internal secretory functions. A sign of advanced disease is the occurrence of pancreatic calculi, which is often associated with pain refractory to standard pharmacotherapy (analgesics, pancreatic enzyme replacement). Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) offers a safe and effective treatment option for the painful obstructive form of CP in combination with endoscopic methods. The aim of this work is to assess the current treatment options for this disease and to present the results of our own series of patients treated with ESWL.

Keywords:

extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy – chronic pancreatitis – pancreatic lithiasis

Zdroje

1. Whitcomb DC, Frulloni L, Garg P et al. Chronic pancreatitis: An international draft consensus proposal for a new mechanistic definition. Pancreatology 2016; 16 (2): 218–224. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.02.001.

2. Whitcomb DC; North American Pancreatitis Study Group. Pancreatitis: TIGAR-O Version 2 Risk/Etiology Checklist With Topic Reviews, Updates, and Use Primers. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2019; 10 (6): e00027. doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000027.

3. Špičák J, Hucl T, Mačinga P. Etiopatogeneze chronické pankreatitidy. Gastroent Hepatol 2013; 67 (4): 275–288.

4. Majumder S, Chari ST. Chronic pancreatitis. Lancet (Lond, Engl) 2016; 387 (10031): 1957–1966.

5. Špičák J, Zavoral M, Hucl T. Choroby slinivky břišní. In: Zavoral M (ed). Mařatkova gastroenterologie: Patofyziologie, diagnostika, léčba. Praha: Karolinum 2021 : 871–885.

6. Kirkegård J, Mortensen FV, Cronin-Fenton D. Chronic Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112 (9): 1366–1372. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2017.218.

7. Ammann RW, Akovbiantz A, Largiader F et al. Course and outcome of chronic pancreatitis. Longitudinal study of a mixed medical-surgical series of 245 patients. Gastroenterology 1984; 86 (5 Pt 1): 820–828.

8. Bush N, Tandan M. Pancreatic duct calculi: pathophysiology and management. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2025; 41 (5): 355–360. doi: 10.1097/MOG.0000000000001125.

9. Sauerbruch T, Holl J, Sackmann M et al. Disintegration of a pancreatic duct stone with extracorporeal shock waves in a patient with chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopy 1987; 19 (5): 207–208. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1018284.

10. Dumonceau JM, Delhaye M, Tringali A et al. Endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline –⁠ Updated August 2018. Endoscopy 2019; 51 (2): 179–193. doi: 10.1055/a-0822-0832.

11. Sheth SG, Machicado JD, Chalhoub JM et al; ASGE Standards of Practice Committee Chair. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc 2024; 100 (4): 584–594. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.05.016.

12. Dítě P, Starý K, Novotný I et al. Incidence of chronic pancreatitis in the Czech Republic. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2001; 13 (6): 749–750. doi: 10.1097/00042737-200106000-00024.

13. Farnbacher MJ, Schoen C, Rabenstein T et al. Pancreatic duct stones in chronic pan-creatitis: criteria for treatment intensity and success. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56 (4): 501–506. doi: 10.1067/mge.2002.128162.

14. Karasawa Y, Kawa S, Aoki Y et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of pancreatic duct stones and patient factors related to stone disintegration. J Gastroenterol 2002; 37 (5): 369–375. doi: 10.1007/s005350200051.

15. Jin CX, Naruse S, Kitagawa M et al. Pancreatic stone protein of pancreatic calculi in chronic calcified pancreatitis in man. JOP 2002; 3 (2): 54–61.

16. Inui K, Masamune A, Igarashi Y et al. Management of Pancreatolithiasis: A Nationwide Survey in Japan. Pancreas 2018; 47 (6): 708–714. doi: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000001071.

17. Inui K, Tazuma S, Yamaguchi T et al. Treatment of pancreatic stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: results of a multicenter survey. Pancreas 2005; 30 (1): 26–30.

18. van Huijgevoort NC, Veld JV, Fockens P et al. Success of extracorporeal shock wave litho-tripsy and ERCP in symptomatic pancreatic duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8 (8): E1070–E1085. doi: 10.1055/a-1171-1322.

19. Liu Y, Yin XY, Cui JH et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for pancreatic duct stone treatment in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2024; 60 (8): 1110–1121. doi: 10.1111/apt.18224.

20. Tandan M, Nageshwar Reddy D, Talukdar R et al. ESWL for large pancreatic calculi: Report of over 5000 patients. Pancreatology 2019; 19 (7): 916–921. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2019.08.001.

21. Sasahira N, Tada M, Isayama H et al. Outcomes after clearance of pancreatic stones with or without pancreatic stenting. J Gastroenterol 2007; 42 (1): 63–69. doi: 10.1007/s00535-006-1972-1.

22. Will U, Reichel A, Fueldner F et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage for patients with symptomatic obstruction and enlargement of the pancreatic duct. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21 (46): 13140–13151. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i46.13140.