Suppr超能文献

巴西一家三级医疗中心的内镜逆行胰胆管造影术:关注新的风险因素、并发症及质量指标

ERCP PERFORMANCE IN A TERTIARY BRAZILIAN CENTER: FOCUS ON NEW RISK FACTORS, COMPLICATIONS AND QUALITY INDICATORS.

作者信息

Borges Alana Costa, Almeida Paulo César de, Furlani Stella Maria Torres, Cury Marcelo de Sousa, Pleskow Douglas K

机构信息

Zilda Arns Hospital and Maternity, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Fortaleza, CE, Brasil.

State University of Ceará, Center for Health Sciences, Fortaleza, CE, Brasil.

出版信息

Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2018 Jun 21;31(1):e1348. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020180001e1348.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

ERCP can lead to complications, which can be prevented by the recognition of risk factors.

AIM

To identify these risk factors, with quality evaluation.

METHODS

Retrospective study in a Brazilian hospital in 194 patients, excluding surgically altered anatomy.

RESULTS

211 ERCPs were performed: 97.6% were therapeutic, 83.4% were started by trainees, with deep cannulation rate of 89.6%. Precut was needed in 16.6% of the ERCPs and classic sphincterotomy in 67.3%, with 75.4% of ductal clearance at single session and 8.0% of technical failure. Inacessible papillas ocurred in 2.5% of cases. There were 2.5% of late complications and 16% of early complications. Multivariate analysis identified six predictors for early complications: fistulotomy precut (OR=3.4, p=0.010), difficult cannulation (OR=21.5, p=0.002), attending's procedural time (OR=2.4, p=0.020), choledocholithiasis (adjusted OR=1.8, p=0.015), cannulation time (adjusted OR=3.2, p=0.018) and ERCP duration (adjusted OR=2.7, p=0.041).

CONCLUSION

Six risk factors for post-ERCP complications were identified. ERCP duration and cannulation time are suggested as new potential quality indicators.

摘要

背景

内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)可导致并发症,识别危险因素可预防这些并发症。

目的

识别这些危险因素并进行质量评估。

方法

对巴西一家医院的194例患者进行回顾性研究,排除手术改变的解剖结构。

结果

共进行了211例ERCP:97.6%为治疗性操作,83.4%由实习生启动,深度插管率为89.6%。16.6%的ERCP需要进行预切开,67.3%需要进行经典括约肌切开术,单次操作胆管清除率为75.4%,技术失败率为8.0%。2.5%的病例出现乳头难以插管。晚期并发症发生率为2.5%,早期并发症发生率为16%。多因素分析确定了早期并发症的六个预测因素:预切开瘘管切开术(比值比[OR]=3.4,p=0.010)、插管困难(OR=21.5,p=0.002)、主治医生操作时间(OR=2.4,p=0.020)、胆总管结石(校正OR=1.8,p=0.015)、插管时间(校正OR=3.2,p=0.018)和ERCP持续时间(校正OR=2.7,p=0.041)。

结论

确定了ERCP术后并发症的六个危险因素。建议将ERCP持续时间和插管时间作为新的潜在质量指标。

相似文献

1
ERCP PERFORMANCE IN A TERTIARY BRAZILIAN CENTER: FOCUS ON NEW RISK FACTORS, COMPLICATIONS AND QUALITY INDICATORS.
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2018 Jun 21;31(1):e1348. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020180001e1348.
3
Quality indicators, including complications, of ERCP in a community setting: a prospective study.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Sep;70(3):457-67. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.11.022. Epub 2009 May 30.
5
Early precut fistulotomy for biliary access: time to change the paradigm of "the later, the better"?
Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Oct;80(4):634-641. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.03.014. Epub 2014 May 6.
6
Risk factors for complications after performance of ERCP.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Nov;56(5):652-6. doi: 10.1067/mge.2002.129086.
7
Early precut sphincterotomy for difficult biliary access to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized trial.
Endoscopy. 2016 Jun;48(6):530-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-102250. Epub 2016 Mar 18.
8
Needle-knife papillotomy and fistulotomy improved the treatment outcome of patients with difficult biliary cannulation.
Surg Endosc. 2016 Dec;30(12):5506-5512. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4914-x. Epub 2016 Apr 29.
9
ERCP procedures in a Finnish community hospital: a retrospective analysis of 1207 cases.
Scand J Surg. 2012;101(1):45-50. doi: 10.1177/145749691210100109.

引用本文的文献

1
CHOLECYSTECTOMY WITH INTRAOPERATIVE ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY: DOES THE ORDER MATTER?
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2024 Aug 19;37:e1816. doi: 10.1590/0102-6720202400023e1816. eCollection 2024.
2
Use of diffusion-weighted imaging in the noninvasive diagnostic of obstructed biliary ducts.
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 Jan;46(1):268-279. doi: 10.1007/s00261-020-02636-x. Epub 2020 Jul 14.

本文引用的文献

2
Appropriate time for selective biliary cannulation by trainees during ERCP--a randomized trial.
Endoscopy. 2015 Aug;47(8):688-95. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1391564. Epub 2015 Mar 6.
3
Quality indicators for ERCP.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jan;81(1):54-66. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.056. Epub 2014 Dec 2.
4
Competence development in ERCP: the learning curve of novice trainees.
Endoscopy. 2014 Nov;46(11):949-55. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377930. Epub 2014 Sep 10.
5
Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol. 2014 Feb 15;5(1):1-10. doi: 10.4291/wjgp.v5.i1.1.
7
Association of procedure length on outcomes and adverse events of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2014 May;2(2):140-4. doi: 10.1093/gastro/gou009. Epub 2014 Mar 12.
9
Quality evaluation through self-assessment: a novel method to gain insight into ERCP performance.
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan;5(1):10-16. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2013-100334. Epub 2013 Jul 18.
10
Intraprocedural quality in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov;108(11):1696-704; quiz 1705. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.217. Epub 2013 Jul 23.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验