Endoskopik retrograd kolanjiopankreatografi komplikasyonları

Erdem Koçak; Levent Filik

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications

Yıl 2010, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1, 19 - 22, 01.04.2010

Öz

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has been widely used in the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatobiliary diseases since 1970. The reported complication rate after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography varies between 5% and 10%. Precise identification of risk factors for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications is important for improving the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Herein, we aimed to summarize the complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in light of the current literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

ERCP, complication, pancreas

Kaynakça

Jowell PS, Baillie J, Branch MS, et al. Quantitative assessment of proce- dural competence. A prospective study of training in endoscopic retrog- rade cholangiopancreatography. Ann Intern Med 1996;15:983-9.
Feeman ML. Adverse outcomes of ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56: 273-82.
Adler DG, Baron TH, Davila RE, et al. ASGE guideline: The role of ERCP in diseases of the biliary tract and the pancreas. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;62:1.
Cohen S, Bacon BR, Berlin JA, et al. National Institutes of Health state- of-the-science conference statement: ERCP for diagnosis and therapy, Ja- nuary 14-16, 2002. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:803.
Barish MA, Yucel EK, Ferrucci JT. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancre- atography. N Engl J Med 1999;341:258.
Varghese JC, Farrell MA, Courtney G, et al. A prospective comparison of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic retrog- rade cholangiopancreatography in the evaluation of patients with sus- pected biliary tract disease. Clin Radiol 1999; 54:513-20.
Lomanto D, Pavone P, Laghi A, et al. Magnetic resonance-cholangiopan- creatography in the diagnosis of biliopancreatic diseases. Am J Surg 1997;174:33-8.
Polkowski M, Palucki J, Regula J, et al. Helical computed tomographic cholangiography versus endosonography for suspected bile duct stones: a prospective blinded study in non-jaundiced patients. Gut 1999;45:744-9.
Aubé C, Delorme B, Yzet T, et al. MR cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic sonography in suspected common bile duct lithiasis: a pros- pective, comparative study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:55-62.
Kondo S, Isayama H, Akahane M, et al. Detection of common bile duct stones: comparison between endoscopic ultrasonography, magnetic re- sonance cholangiography, and helical-computed-tomographic cholangi- ography. Eur J Radiol 2005;54:271-5.
Mallery JS, Baron TH, Dominitz JA, et al. Complications of ERCP. Gas- trointest Endosc 2003;57:633.
Feeman ML. Adverse outcomes of ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56: 273-82.
Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G, et al. Incidence rates of post- ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102:1781-8.
Williams EJ, Taylor S, Fairclough P, et al. Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large-scale, prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy 2007;39:793-801.
Wang P, Li ZS, Liu F, et al. Risk factors for ERCP-related complications: A prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:31-40.
Freeman ML, DiSario AJ, Nelson DB et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study . Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 54:425-34 .
Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL et al. Risk factors for Post-ERCP pan- creatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101: 139-47 .
Williams EJ, Taylor S, Fairclough P et al. Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large -scale, prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy 2007;39:793-801.
Christoforidis E, Goulimaris I, Kanellos I et al. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: patient-related and operative risk factors. Endos- copy 2002;34:286-92.
Adnriulli A, lCemente R, Solmi L et al. Gabexate or somatostatin admi- nistration before ERCP in patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreati- tis. A multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Gastro- intest Endosc 2002;56:488-95.
Masci E, Mariani A, Curioni S et al. Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis. En- doscopy 2003;35:830-4.
Friedland S, Soetikno RM, Vandervoort J et al. Bedside scoring systemto predict the risk of developing pancreatitis following ERKP. Endoscopy 2002;34:483-8 .
Catalano MF, Linder JD, Geenen JE. Endoscopic transpancreatic papil- lary septotomy for inaccessible obstructed bile ducts: comparison with standard pre-cut papillotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:557-61.
Freeman ML, Guda NM. ERCP cannulation: a review of reported techni- ques. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:112-25.
Stapfer M, Selby RR, Stain SC, et al. Management of duodenal perforati- on after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincte- rotomy. Ann Surg 2000; 232:191-8.
Aliperti G. Complications related to diagnostic and therapeutic endosco- pic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1996;6:379-407.
Stewart ET, Dodds WJ. Radiology of the esophagus. In: Freeny PC, Ste- venson GW, eds. Margulis and Burhenne’s alimentary tract radiology. St Louis, Mo: Mosby–Year Book, 1994; 192-263.
Lewis FW, Moloo N, Stiegmann GV, Goff JS. Splenic injury complicating therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37:632-3.