Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 15;32(11):1814–1819. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.11.1814

Table 2. Univariate comparison of patients with and without PEP.

Variables PEP P value
Yes (n = 16) No (n = 500)
Mean age 51.1 ± 20.9 63.8 ± 33.9 0.137
Female sex 10 (62.5) 215 (43.0) 0.132
Nondilated EHD 6 (50.0) 97 (19.4) 0.007
Therapeutic purpose 12 (75.0) 362 (72.4) 0.819
Precut sphincterotomy 5 (31.3) 47 (9.4) 0.016
Pancreatogram performance 6 (37.5) 62 (12.4) 0.012
EP(L)BD 1 (6.3) 72 (14.4) 0.712
Pancreatic sphincterotomy 3 (18.8) 7 (1.4) 0.003
ERPD 3 (18.8) 48 (9.6) 0.204
EML 0 (0.0) 33 (6.6) 0.614
Failure to clear bile duct stones 2 (12.5) 46 (9.2) 0.653
4-hour amylase level, U/L 965.75 ± 775.13 158.49 ± 273.13 0.001
4-hour lipase level, U/L 2,018.94 ± 2,038.27 222.74 ± 826.53 0.003

Values are presented as number (%). Continuous variables are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation.

ERCP = endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, PEP = post-ERCP pancreatitis, EHD = extrahepatic bile duct, EP(L)BD = endoscopic papillary (large) balloon dilation, ERPD = endoscopic retrograde pancreatic drainage, EML = endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy.