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
[31]  
DiSario J.A., Freeman M.L., Bjorkman D.J., Et al., Endoscopic balloon dilation compared to sphincterotomy (EDES) for extraction of bile duct stones: Preliminary results, Gastrointest. Endosc., 45, (1997)
[32]  
Cotton P.B., Outcomes of endoscopy procedures: Sruggling towards definitions, Gastrointest. Endosc., 40, pp. 514-518, (1994)
[33]  
Fleischer D.E., Better definition of endoscopic complications and other negative outcomes, Gastrointest. Endosc., 40, pp. 511-514, (1994)
[34]  
Freeman M.L., Nelson D.B., Snady H.W., Et al., Failures and complications of ERCP: Impact on procedural outcome and resource utilization, Am. J. Gastroenterol., 92, (1997)
[35]  
Concato J., Feinstein A.R., Holford T.R., The risk of determining risk with multivariable models, Ann. Intern. Med., 118, pp. 201-210, (1993)
[36]  
Freeman M.L., Sedation and monitoring for gastrointestinal endoscopy, Textbook of Gastroenterology, pp. 2655-2667, (1999)
[37]  
Trap R., Adamsen S., Hart-Hansen O., Henriksen M., Severe and fatal complications after diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: A prospective series of claims to insurance covering public hospitals, Endoscopy, 31, pp. 125-130, (1999)
[38]  
Geenen J.E., Hogan W.J., Dodds W.J., Et al., The efficacy of endoscopic sphincterotomy after cholecystectomy in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, N. Engl. J. Med., 320, pp. 82-87, (1989)
[39]  
Kozarek R.A., Biliary dyskinesia: Are we any closer to defining the entity?, Gastrointest. Endosc. Clin. N. Am., 3, pp. 167-178, (1993)
[40]  
Lehman G.A., Sherman S., Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, Int. J. Pancreatol., 20, pp. 11-25, (1996)