TRANSPAPILLARY ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY: COMPLICATIONS AND PREVENTION OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Improvement of endoscopic techniques and tools, minimal invasiveness of transpapillary endoscopic surgery (TES), accumulated experience, as well as the introduction of preventive measures, do not always avoid the development of life-threatening complications (6.8 - 10,2% of patients) and deaths (1,7 - 3%). The purpose of the study is to assess the practical significance of the proposed predictors of TES complications in the treatment of patients with impaired patency of the ductal systems of the liver and pancreas, to propose program measures for the prevention of complications. The results of TES in 3305 patients performed in the planned and emergency order with various diseases of the hepatopancreatobiliary region are analyzed. Based on multivariate analysis, statistically significant (p <0.05) predictors of major life-threatening complications of TES were distinguished: 1) post-operative pancreatitis (female (78.2%), difficult cannulation (54.6%), multiple cannulation, fast / tight contrasting pancreatic duct (49.4%)); 2) bleeding (current mode (52.1%), presence of cholangitis (43.5%), coagulopathy in the presence of jaundice (65.2%)); 3) duodenum perforation (elderly and senile age (68.2%), difficult cannulation (66.7%)); 4) acute cholangitis (inadequate drainage of the bile ducts (83.3%), unsuccessful attempt to drain the bile ducts (48.6%)). We are supplemented prophylactic measures for postoperative complications in case of TES. A personalized record of the main predictors of complications of the feasibility study and the use of a program of preventive measures will allow an adequate choice of tactical approaches and technical options for operations, which will lead to improved treatment outcomes, minimizing the frequency of complications and mortality.

About the authors

P N Romashchenko

Military Medical Academy S.M. Kirov

SPIN-code: 3850-1792
194044, Academician Lebedev 6zh, St. Petersburg, Russia

A A Filin

Leningrad Regional Clinical Hospital

194291, pr. Lunacharsky, 45-49, St. Petersburg, Russia

N A Maistrenko

Military Medical Academy S.M. Kirov

SPIN-code: 2571-9603
194044, Academician Lebedev 6zh, St. Petersburg, Russia

A A Fekliunin

Military Medical Academy S.M. Kirov

SPIN-code: 8925-0955
194044, Academician Lebedev 6zh, St. Petersburg, Russia

E S Zherebtsov

ФГБВОУ ВО «Военно-медицинская академия имени С.М. Кирова»

SPIN-code: 3554-0000
194044, ул. Академика Лебедева д.6Ж, Санкт-Петербург, Россия

References

  1. Rustagi T., Jamidar P.A. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related adverse events: general overview // Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2015. Vol. 25. P. 97-106.
  2. Glomsaker T., Hoff G., Kvaloy J.T., et al. Patterns and predictive factors of complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography // Br J Surg. 2013. Vol.100. P. 373-380.
  3. Ryozawa S., Itoi T., Katanuma A. Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for endoscopic sphincterotomy // Digestive Endoscopy. 2018. Vol. 30. P. 149-173.
  4. Chandrasekhara V., Khashab M., Muthusamy V., et al. Adverse events associated with ERCP // Gastrointest Endoscopy. 2017. Vol. 85. №1. P. 32-47.
  5. Testoni P.A., Mariani A., Aabakken L., et al. Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline // Endoscopy. 2016. Vol.105 P. 753-780.
  6. Dumonceau J.M., Andriulli A., Elmunzer B.J., et al. Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - updated June 2014 // Endoscopy. 2014. Vol. 46. P. 799 - 815.
  7. Ding X., Zhang F., Wang Y. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Surgeon. 2015. Vol. 13. P. 218 - 229.
  8. Tanaka Y., Sato K., Tsuchida H., et al. A prospective randomized controlled study of endoscopic sphincterotomy with the endocut mode or conventional blended cut mode // J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015. Vol. 49. P. 127 - 131.
  9. Freeman M.L. Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Avoidance and management // Gastrointest. Endosc. Clin. N. Am. 2012. Vol. 22. P. 567-586.
  10. Kochar B., Akshintala V.S., Afghani E., et al. Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review by using randomized, controlled trials // Gastrointest Endoscopy 2015. Vol.81. P.143-159.
  11. Ромащенко П.Н., Филин А.А., Майстренко Н.А., Феклюнин А.А. Предикторы и профилактика осложнений транспапиллярных эндоскопических вмешательств // Вестник хирургии Казахстана. 2018. №1. С. 74.
  12. Halttunen J., Meisner S., Aabakken L. et al. Difficult cannulation as defined by a prospective study of the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) in 907 ERCPs // Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014. Vol. 49. P. 752 - 758.
  13. Lee T.H., Park S-H. Optimal Use of Wire-Assisted Techniques and Precut Sphincterotomy // Clin Endoscopy. 2016. Vol.49. P. 467-474.

Copyright (c) 2019 Romashchenko P.N., Filin A.A., Maistrenko N.A., Fekliunin A.A., Zherebtsov E.S.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies