Current approaches to the treatment of complications of endoscopic transpapillary interventions

Objective. Retrospective analysis of the treatment of complications after endoscopic retrograde transpapillary interventions.
Material and methods. There were 5701 endoscopic retrograde interventions for the period from 01.01.2008 to 01.01.2019. Overall incidence of complications was 1.5%, mortality rate – 0.24%. Bleeding after endoscopic papillosphincterotomy developed in 13 (0.22%) cases, acute postoperative pancreatitis in 49 (10.85%) cases, ERCPassociated perforation in 24 (0.42%) patients.
Results. Endoscopic approach (epinephrine injection into the edges of major duodenal papilla and cautery) was usually effective for bleeding after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Massive intraoperative bleeding required surgical treatment in one case with favorable outcome. There were no cases of recurrent bleeding. One patient died due to severe bleeding in 3 days after surgery. ERСP-associated (“retroduodenal”) perforation occurred in 24 (0.42%) patients. Endoscopic treatment was undertaken in 16 cases and was effective in 15 (93.75%) cases. Overall mortality among patients with ERCP-induced perforation was 20.8%. An attempt of pancreatic duct stenting for postoperative pancreatitis was made in 30 cases; successful procedure was in 28 (93.3%) cases. Surgery resulted recovery in 26 (86.7%) patients. Progression of acute postoperative pancreatitis followed by death occurred in 2 cases despite successful pancreatic duct stenting. Mortality rate was 25%.
Conclusion. Treatment of ERCP-associated complication is lengthy, time-consuming and expensive. Timely diagnosis and assessment of severity of complications is essential. It is necessary to determine an adequate surgical approach. Everyone should keep in mind all possible risk factors, clearly define the indications for ERCP and follow the technique of the procedure strictly in order to reduce complication rate. In our opinion, endoscopic approach is advisable for post-ERCP complications, because conventional surgery results higher postoperative mortality, increased duration and cost of treatment.

1. Zhou X.D., Chen Q.F., Zhang Y.Y., Yu M.J., Zhong C., Liu Z.J., Li G.H., Zhou X.J., Hong J.B., Chen Y.X. Outcomes of endoscopic sphincterotomy vs open choledochotomy for common bile duct stones. World J. Gastroenterol. 2019; 25 (4): 485–497. http://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i4.485.

2. Afridi F., Rotundo L., Feurdean M., Ahlawat S. Trends in posttherapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography gastrointestinal hemorrhage, perforation and mortality from 2000 to 2012: a nationwide study. Digestion. 2018: 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1159/000494248.

3. Cotton P.B., Eisen G.M., Aabakken L., Baron T.H., Hutter M.M., Jacobson B.C., Mergener K., Nemcek A. Jr., Petersen B.T., Petrini J.L., Pike I.M., Rabeneck L., Romagnuolo J., Vargo J.J. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2010; 71 (3): 446–454. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.027.

4. Freeman M.L. Understanding risk factors and avoiding complications with endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography. Curr. Gastroenterol. Rep. 2003; 5 (2): 145–153.

5. Dumonceau J.-M., Andriulli A., Deviere J., Mariani A., Rigaux J., Baron T.H., Testoni P.A. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline: Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopу. 2010; 42 (6): 503–515. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1244208.

6. Mine T., Morizane T., Kawaguchi Y., Akashi R., Hanada K., Ito T., Kanno A., Kida M., Miyagawa H., Yamaguchi T., Mayumi T., Takeyama Y., Shimosegawa T. Clinical practice guideline for post-ERCP pancreatitis. J. Gastroenterol. 2017; 52 (9): 1013–1022. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-017-1359-5.

7. Li G.Z., Wang F., Fang J., Zha H.L., Zhao Q. Risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancrea ti tis: evidence from 1786 cases. Med. Sci. Monit. 2018; 24: 8544–8552. http://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.913314.

8. Leerhøy B., Elmunzer B.J. How to avoid post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Gastrointest. Endosc. Clin. N. Am. 2018; 28 (4): 439–454. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.giec.2018.05.007.

9. Coughlin S., Roth L., Lurati G., Faulhaber M. Somatostatin analogues for the treatment of enterocutaneous fistulas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J. Surg. 2012; 36 (5): 1016–1029. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1494-3.

10. Kumbhari V., Sinha A., Reddy A., Afghani E., Cotsalas D., Patel Y.A., Storm A.C., Khashab M.A., Kalloo A.N., Singh V.K. Algorithm for the management of ERCP-related perforations. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2016; 83 (5): 934–943. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2015.09.039.

11. Jin Y.J., Jeong S., Kim J.H., Hwang J.C., Yoo B.M., Moon J.H., Park S.H., Kim H.G., Lee D.K., Jeon Y.S., Lee D.H. Clinical course and proposed treatment strategy for ERCP-related duodenal perforation: a multicenter analysis. Endoscopy. 2013; 45 (10): 806–812. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1344230.

12. Kim B.S., Kim I.G., Ryu B.Y., Kim J.H., Yoo K.S., Baik G.H., Kim J.B., Jeon J.Y. Management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations. J Korean Surg. Soc. 2011; 81 (3): 195–204. http://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2011.81.3.195.

13. Stapfer M., Selby R.R., Stain S.C., Katkhouda N., Parekh D., Jabbour N., Garry D. Management of duodenal perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphinctero tomy. Ann. Surg. 2000; 232 (2): 191–198. PMID: 10903596.

14. Bae S.S., Lee D.W., Han J., Kim H.G. Risk factor of bleeding after endoscopic sphincterotomy in average risk patients. Surg. Endosc. 2019; Jan 2. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06623-8.

15. Baron T.H. Endoscopic management of biliary disorders: diagnostic and therapeutic. Surg. Clin. North Am. 2014; 94 (2): 395–411. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2013.12.005.

16. Anderson M.A., Fisher L., Jain R., Evans J.A., Appalaneni V., Ben-Menachem T., Cash B.D., Decker G.A., Early D.S., Fanelli R.D., Fisher D.A., Fukami N., Hwang J.H., Ikenberry S.O., Jue T.L., Khan K.M., Krinsky M.L., Malpas P.M., Maple J.T., Sharaf R.N., Shergill A.K., Dominitz J.A. Complications of ERCP. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012; 75 (3): 467–473. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.010.

17. Chandrasekhara V., Khashab M.A., Muthusamy V.R., Acosta R.D., Agrawa L.D., Bruining D.H., Eloubeidi M.A., Fanelli R.D., Faulx A.L., Gurudu S.R., Kothari S., Lightdale J.R., Qumseya B.J., Shaukat A., Wang A., Wani S.B., Yang J., DeWitt J.M. Adverse events associated with ERCP. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2017; 85 (1): 32–47. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.06.051.

18. Cho K.B. The management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related duodenal perforation. Clin. Endosc. 2014; l; 47 (4): 341–345. http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2014.47.4.341.

19. Jayaraj M., Mohan B.P., Dhindsa B.S., Mashiana H.S., Radhakrishnan G., Dhir V., Trindade A.J., Adler D.G. Periampullary diverticula and ERCP outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2018 Oct 6. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-018-5314-y.

20. Bray M.S., Borgert A.J., Folkers M.E., Kothari S.N. Outcome and management of endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography perforations: A community perspective. Am. J. Surg. 2017; 214 (1): 69–73. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.01.034.

21. Ercan M., Bostanci E.B., Dalgic T., Karaman K., Ozogul Y.B., Ozer I., Ulas M., Parlak E., Akoglu M. Surgical outcome of patients with perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A. 2012; 22 (4): 371–377. http://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2011.0392.

22. Alfieri S., Rosa F., Cina C., Tortorelli A.P., Tringali A., Perri V., Bellantone C., Costamagna G., Doglietto G.B. Management of duodeno-pancreato-biliary perforations after ERCP: outcomes from an Italian tertiary referral center. Surg. Endosc. 2013; 27 (6): 2005–2012. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2702-9.

23. Cirocchi R., Kelly M.D., Griffiths E.A., Tabola R., Sartelli M., Carlini L., Ghersi S., Di Saverio S. A systematic review of the management and outcome of ERCP related duodenal perforations using a standardized classification system. Surgeon. 2017; 15 (6): 379–387. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2017.05.004.

24. Machado N.O. Management of duodenal perforation postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. When and whom to operate and what factors determine the outcome? A review article. JOP. 2012; 13 (1):18–25.

25. Vezakis A., Fragulidis G., Polydorou A. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations: diagnosis and management. World J. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2015; 7 (14): 1135–1141. http://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v7.i14.1135.

26. Kowalczyk L., Forsmark C.E., Ben-David K., Wagh M.S., Chauhan S., Collins D., Draganov P.V. Algorithm for the management of endoscopic perforations: a quality improvement project. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2011; 106 (6): 1022–1027. http://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2010.434.

27. Koti R.S., Gurusamy K.S., Fusai G., Davidson B.R. Metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of somatostatin analogues for pancreatic surgery: a Cochrane review. HPB (Oxford). 2010; 12 (3): 155–165. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00157.x.

28. Lee S.M., Cho K.B. Value of temporary stents for the management of perivaterian perforation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. World J. Clin. Cases. 2014; 2 (11): 689–697. http://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v2.i11.689.

29. Lee T.H., Jung Y.K., Park S.H. Preparation of high-risk patients and the choice of guidewire for a successful endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedure. Clin. Endosc. 2014; 47 (4): 334–340. http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2014.47.4.334.

30. Zeng C.Y., Zhu Y., Guo G.H., Chen Y.X. Single-channel endoscopic closure of ERCP-related large duodenal perforations. Endoscopy. 2014; 46 Suppl 1 UCTN:E603-4. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1390714.

31. Liu Y., Wang D., Li Z. Endoscopic closure for EUS and ERCP related duodenal perforation by endoclips. Gastroenterol. Res. Pract. 2016; 2016: 1051597. Epub 2016 Sep 15. http://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1051597.

32. Park W.Y., Cho K.B., Kim E.S., Park K.S. A case of ampullary perforation treated with a temporally covered metal stent. Clin. Endosc. 2012; 45 (2): 177–180. http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2012.45.2.177.

33. Kodali S., Mönkemüller K., Kim H., Ramesh J., Trevino J., Varadarajulu S., Wilcox C.M. ERCP-related perforations in the new millennium: A large tertiary referral center 10-year experience. Unit. Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2015; 3 (1): 25–30. http://doi.org/10.1177/2050640614560784.

34. Odemis B., Oztas E., Kuzu U.B., Parlak E., Disibeyaz S., Torun S., Kayacetin E. Can a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent be used temporarily for the management of duodenal retroperitoneal perforation during ERCP as a part of conservative therapy? Surg. Laparosc. Endosc. Percutan. Tech. 2016; 26 (1): e9–e17. http://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000240.

35. Motomura Y., Akahoshi K., Gibo J., Kanayama K., Fukuda S., Hamada S., Otsuka Y., Kubokawa M., Kajiyama K., Nakamura K. Immediate detection of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related periampullary perforation: fluoroscopy or endoscopy? World J. Gastroenterol. 2014; 20 (42): 15797–15804. http://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i42.

36. Nepal P., Maemura K., Mataki Y., Kurahara H., Kawasaki Y., Hiwatashi K., Iino S., Sakoda M., Arigami T., Ishigami S., Shinchi H., Natsugoe S. Management of horizontal duodenal perforation: a report of three cases and review of literature. Surg. Case Rep. 2017; 3 (1): 119. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40792-017-0397-9.

37. Lu Y., Loffroy R., Lau J.Y., Barkun A. Multidisciplinary management strategies for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Br. J. Surg. 2014; 101 (1): E34–E50. http://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9351.

38. Fujii L., Lau A., Fleischer D.E., Harrison M.E. Successful nonsurgical treatment of pneumomediastinum, pneumothorax, pneumoperitoneum, pneumoretroperitoneum, and subcutaneous emphysema following ERCP. Gastroenterol. Res. Pract. 2010; 2010: 289135. http://doi.org/10.1155/2010/289135.

39. Guerra F., Giuliani G., Coletta D., Bonapasta S.A., Levi Sandri G.B. Clinical outcomes of ERCP-related retroperitoneal perforations. Hepatobiliary Pancreat. Dis. Int. 2017; 16 (2): 160–163.

40. Rahbour G., Siddiqui M.R., Ullah M.R., Gabe S.M., Warusavitarne J., Vaizey C.J. A meta-analysis of outcomes following use of somatostatin and its analogues for the management of enterocutaneous fistulas. Ann. Surg. 2012; 256 (6): 946–954. http://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318260aa26.

41. Preetha M., Chung Y.F., Chan W.H., Ong H.S., Chow P.K., Wong W.K., Ooi L.L., Soo K.C. Surgical management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations. ANZ J. Surg. 2003; 73 (12): 1011–1014.

42. Alsenbesy M., Shahat K., Nawara A., Sallam M., Fakhry M., Shazly M., Moussa M., Tag-Adeen M., El-Amin H., Sobh M. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) for the extraction of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Rev. Esp. Enferm. Dig. 2019; 111. http://doi.org/10.17235/reed.2019.5865/2018.

43. Mariani A., Segato S., Anderloni A., Cengia G., Parravicini M., Staiano T., Tontini G.E., Lochis D., Cantù P., Manfredi G., Amato A., Bargiggia S., Bernasconi G., Lella F., BerniCanani M., Beretta P., Ferraris L., Signorelli S., Pantaleo G., Manes G., Testoni P.A. Prospective evaluation of ERCP performance in an Italian regional database study. Dig. Liver Dis. 2019; pii: S1590– 8658(19)30002-7. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2018.12.021.

44. Mancerov M.P., Moroz E.V. Reactive pancreatitis after endoscopic procedures on the major duodenal papilla. Russian Journal of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Coloproctology. 2007; 3: 14–24. (In Russian)

45. Li D.F., Yang M.F., Chang X., Wang N.N., Tan F.F., Xie H.N., Fang X., Wang S.L., Fan W., Wang J.Y., Yu Z.C., Wei C., Xiong F., Liu T.T., Luo M.H., Wang L.S., Li Z.S., Yao J., Bai Y. Endocut versus conventional blended electrosurgical current for endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: a meta-analysis of complications. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2019 Feb 18. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-019-05513-w.

46. Bykov M.I., Porhanov V.A. Improving the prevention of acute post-manipulation pancreatitis at the present stage of development of endoscopic transpapillary surgery. Bulletin of Pirogov National Medical & Surgical Center. 2015; 3: 103–108. (In Russian)

47. Panchenkov D.N., Ivanov Yu.V., Sazonov D.V., Shablovskij O.R., Istomin N.P. New approaches to the prevention of acute post-manipulation pancreatitis after endoscopic interventions on the common bile duct. Endoskopicheskaya khirurgiya. 2016; 22 (6): 32–40. https://doi.org/10.17116/endoskop201622632-40. (In Russian)

48. He Q., Wang L., Peng C., Zou X., Zhan Q., Xu Y., Liu Q., Qian J., Gong L., Shen Y., Chen J. Modified prophylactic 5-fr pancreatic duct stent enhances the rate of spontaneous dislodgement: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Unit. Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2018; 6 (10): 1519–1526. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640618804729.

49. Manoharan D., Srivastava D.N., Gupta A.K., Madhusudhan K.S. Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an imaging review. Abdom. Radiol. (NY). 2019 Feb 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-01953-0.

50. Panchenkov D.N., Ivanov Yu.V., Sazonov D.V., Shablovskij O.R., Istomin N.P. Prevention of acute pancreatitis during transpapillary endoscopic interventions. Annaly khirurgicheskoj gepatologii = Annals of HPB Surgery. 2017; 22 (2): 80–88. https://doi.org/10.16931/1995-5464.2017280-88. (In Russian)

51. Fedorov A.G., Davydova S.V., Klimov A.E. Complications of endoscopic transpapillary interventions and their prevention and treatment: a review. Neotlozhnaya medicinskaya pomoshch'. 2012; 3: 29–35. (In Russian)

52. Kerdsirichairat T., Attam R., Arain M., Bakman Y., Radosevich D., Freeman M. Urgent ERCP with pancreatic stent placement or replacement for salvage of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopy. 2014; 46 (12): 1085–1094. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1377750.

53. Maady A.S., Alekseev K.I., Osipov A.S., Vasil'ev I.V. Prophylactic and curative pancreatic stenting for post-ERCP acute pancreatitis. Eksperimental'naia i klinicheskaia gastroenterologiia = Experimental & clinical gastroenterology. 2014; 104 (4): 39–42. (In Russian)