Plecic Nemanja, Malenkovic Ana, Begovic Aleksa, Pavlovic Aleksandra, Bulajic Milutin, Bulajic Mirko, Đukic Vladimir, Milanovic Miljan, Savic Predrag, Panic Nikola
Digestive Endoscopy Department, University Clinic "Dr Dragisa Misovic-Dedinje", 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.
Department of Digestive Endoscopy, Ospedale Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, 00186 Rome, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2024 Dec 24;14(1):1. doi: 10.3390/jcm14010001.
Perforations represent rare but serious complications in ERCP. Although several therapeutic algorithms have been proposed to properly address these potentially life-threatening events, there is still no clear consensus on their management. We conducted a single-center retrospective study in order to assess the incidence of ERCP-related perforations and their management, as well as clinical outcomes. The hospital's electronic database was searched in order to identify all the patients who developed ERCP-related perforations in the period 1 October 2018-30 June 2023. Perforations were classified according to the Stapfer classification. Conservative management included frequent abdominal examinations, the monitoring of vital signs, white blood cell count, complete bowel rest, nasogastric tube placement, and the administration of intravenous fluids and antibiotics. Endoscopic management included biliary stent placement and/or closing observed defects with clips. We recorded eight (1.29%) cases of ERCP-related perforations out of the 619 procedures conducted. We observed six (75%) Stapfer type II and two (25%) type IV perforations. In all but one patient (87.5%), the indication for ERCP was bile duct stones. Seven patients (87.5%) were subjected to sphincterotomy (87.5%) and three (37.5%) to "pre-cuts". All but one patient was treated conservatively (87.5%), with two of them-in which type II perforations were recognized intraprocedurally-also receiving endoscopic treatment with stent placement. On the day of ERCP, one patient with a type II perforation was operated on; suturing of the duodenum followed by duodenal exclusion was applied. Management was successful in all the patients, with a mean hospitalization time of 16.6 ± 4.78 days. Conservative and endoscopic management appear to be associated with good outcomes in Stapfer type II perforations. Nevertheless, an individual multidisciplinary approach involving endoscopists and a hepatobiliary surgeon is essential in order to properly guide the treatment.
穿孔是内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)中罕见但严重的并发症。尽管已经提出了几种治疗方案来妥善处理这些可能危及生命的情况,但在其管理方面仍未达成明确共识。我们进行了一项单中心回顾性研究,以评估ERCP相关穿孔的发生率、处理方法以及临床结果。检索了医院的电子数据库,以确定在2018年10月1日至2023年6月30日期间发生ERCP相关穿孔的所有患者。穿孔根据Stapfer分类法进行分类。保守治疗包括频繁的腹部检查、生命体征监测、白细胞计数、完全肠道休息、放置鼻胃管以及静脉输液和使用抗生素。内镜治疗包括放置胆管支架和/或用夹子封闭观察到的缺损。在进行的619例手术中,我们记录到8例(1.29%)ERCP相关穿孔病例。我们观察到6例(75%)Stapfer II型穿孔和2例(25%)IV型穿孔。除1例患者外,所有患者(87.5%)ERCP的指征均为胆管结石。7例患者(87.5%)接受了括约肌切开术,3例(37.5%)接受了“预切开”。除1例患者外,所有患者均接受了保守治疗(87.5%),其中2例在术中被识别为II型穿孔的患者还接受了内镜下支架置入治疗。在ERCP当天,1例II型穿孔患者接受了手术;进行了十二指肠缝合,随后进行了十二指肠切除术。所有患者的治疗均成功,平均住院时间为16.6±4.78天。对于Stapfer II型穿孔,保守治疗和内镜治疗似乎都能带来良好的结果。然而,为了正确指导治疗,由内镜医师和肝胆外科医生组成的个体化多学科方法至关重要。