Understanding risk factors and avoiding complications with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

被引:78
作者
Martin L. Freeman
机构
[1] Division of Gastroenterology, University of Minnesota, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN 55415
关键词
Pancreatitis; Common Bile Duct Stone; Bile Duct Stone; Endoscopic Sphincterotomy; Oddi Dysfunction;
D O I
10.1007/s11894-003-0084-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Complications and technical failures of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) cause significant morbidity and, occasionally, mortality. An understanding of patient- and procedure-related risks is important for decision making with regard to whether or how ERCP should be performed. Instances in which ERCP is the least clearly indicated are often the most likely to cause complications. Patient-related risk factors include suspected sphincter of Oddi (SO) dysfunction, female sex, normal serum bilirubin, or previous history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, with multiple risk factors conferring especially high risk. Technique-related risk factors include difficult cannulation, pancreatic contrast injection, balloon sphincter dilation, and precut sphincterotomy performed by endoscopists of varied experience. Pancreatic stents may reduce the risk of pancreatitis in a number of settings including SO dysfunction. Hemorrhage and perforation are rare and can be avoided with endoscopic technique and attention to the patient's coagulation status. Cholangitis is avoidable with adequate biliary drainage. Because success rates are higher and complication rates lower for endoscopists performing large volumes of ERCP, ERCP should be concentrated as much as possible among endoscopists with adequate experience. Patients with a high risk for complications may be best served by referral to an advanced center. Copyright © 2003 by Current Science Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:145 / 153
页数:8
相关论文
共 88 条
[21]  
Hawes R.H., Cotton P.B., Vallon A.G., Folow up 6 to 11 years after duodenoscopic sphincterotomy for stones in patients with prior cholecystectomy, Gastroenterology, 98, pp. 1008-1012, (1990)
[22]  
Prat F., Malak M.A., Pelletier G., Biliary symptoms and complications more than 8 years after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithasis, Gastroenterology, 110, pp. 894-899, (1996)
[23]  
Bergman J.J.G., van der Mey S., Rauws E.A.J., Et al., Long-term follow-up after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones in patients younger than 60 years of age, Gastrointest. Endosc., 44, pp. 643-649, (1996)
[24]  
Silvis S.E., Endoscopic sphincterotomy with an intact gallbladder, Gastrointest. Endosc. Clin. N. Am., 1, pp. 65-77, (1991)
[25]  
Hill J., Martin D.F., Tweedle D.E., Risks of leaving the gallbladder in situ after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones, Br. J. Surgery, 78, pp. 554-557, (1991)
[26]  
Geenen J.E., Touli J., Hogan W.J., Endoscopic sphincterotomy: Follow-up evaluation of effects on the sphincter of Oddi, Gastroenterology, 87, pp. 754-758, (1984)
[27]  
May G.R., Cotton P.B., Edmunds E.J., Removal of stones from the bile duct at ERCP without sphincterotomy, Gastrointest. Endosc., 396, pp. 749-751, (1993)
[28]  
MacMathuna P., White P., Clarke E., Et al., Endoscopic balloon sphincteroplasty (papillary dilation) for bile duct stones: Efficacy, safety, and follow-up in 100 patients, Gastrointest. Endosc., 42, pp. 468-474, (1995)
[29]  
Bergman J.J., Rauws E.A., Fockens P., Et al., Randomised trial of endoscopic balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile duct stones, Lancet, 349, pp. 1124-1129, (1997)
[30]  
Ochi Y., Mukawa K., Kiyosawa K., Et al., Comparing the treatment outcomes of endoscopic papillary dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile duct stones, J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol., 14, pp. 90-96, (1999)