Evidence Hub

Pancreatic stent and transpapillary pseudocyst drainage via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for children with blunt pancreatic duct injury

Kouchi K, Fumita T, Nakata C, Kagaya K

European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2026

Abstract

Background: Nonoperative management (NOM) in blunt pancreatic injury (BPI) is frequently complicated by pseudocyst formation and pancreatic atrophy. To address these complications, we have utilized a pancreatic stent via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for children with PDI since 2019.

Aim: We present our experience with ERCP-based NOM for PDI and provide a literature review of stent therapy in pediatric PDI.

Materials and methods: Ten children with BPI treated between January 2007 and December 2025 were classified according to the 2024 American Association for the Surgery of Trauma pancreatic injury grades: IB (n = 3), IIA (n = 3), IIIA (n = 2), and IIIB (n = 2). Pancreatic stents were placed in two IIIA cases and one IIIB case. The IIIB case subsequently underwent transpapillary pseudocyst drainage (TPPD) due to a pseudocyst infection.

Results: NOM was successful in all low-grade injuries (< II) without complications. One IIIB patient treated without stenting developed a pseudocyst requiring cyst-gastrostomy; 1-year follow-up demonstrated severe pancreatic atrophy. In the two IIIA stent cases, the duct injury was successfully bridged: one patient had no pseudocyst formation, and the other developed a pseudocyst that resolved spontaneously; both showed preserved pancreatic parenchyma. The IIIB patient treated with TPPD experienced rapid cyst resolution; 1-year imaging revealed approximately 50% distal pancreatic atrophy.

Conclusion: TPPD should be…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free