Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: utilisation and outcomes in a 10-year population-based cohort

Nayantara Coelho-Prabhu, Nilay D Shah, Holly Van Houten, Patrick S Kamath, Todd H Baron, Nayantara Coelho-Prabhu, Nilay D Shah, Holly Van Houten, Patrick S Kamath, Todd H Baron

Abstract

Objective: To determine utilisation of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); incidence of inpatient admissions for complications occurring within 30 days of ERCP and risk factors for procedural-related complications, in a population-based study.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Olmsted County, Minnesota.

Participants: All adult residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, who underwent ERCP from 1997 to 2006.

Interventions: Diagnostic and therapeutic ERCPs were assessed.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: Patient and procedural characteristics and complications within 30 days; and rates of ERCP utilisation and unplanned admissions and risk factors for admissions.

Results: In 10 years, 1072 ERCPs were performed on 827 individual patients. Average utilisation of ERCP was 83.1 ERCPs/100 000 persons/year, with an increase from 58 to 104.8 ERCPs/100 000 persons/year over time, driven by increases in therapeutic procedures. Within 30 days after 236 procedures, 62 admissions were definitely related to the index ERCP. The complication rate was 5.3%, including pancreatitis (26, 2.4%), infection/cholangitis (16, 1.5%), bleeding (15, 1.4%) and perforation (4, 0.37%). 30-day mortality was 2.4%, none of which was directly related to the ERCP or complications thereof. Risk factors identified through multivariate analysis to be associated with adverse events included: age <45 years (p=0.0498); body mass index ≥35 (p=0.0024); pancreatic duct cannulation (p=0.0026); outpatient procedure (p<0.0001); intraprocedure sphincterotomy bleeding (p<0.0001); difficulty grade (p=0.115) and patient's first ERCP (p=0.0394).

Limitations: Retrospective study.

Conclusions: Population utilisation of ERCP rose during the study period, specifically in therapeutic procedures. Admissions within 30 days of ERCP are common but often unrelated. Complications of ERCP remain infrequent and deaths quite unusual.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Utilisation characteristics of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic ultrasound and MR cholangiopancreatography in Olmsted County over a 10-year period.

References

    1. McCune WS, Shorb PE, Moscovitz H. Endoscopic cannulation of the ampulla of vater: a preliminary report. Ann Surg 1968;167:752–6.
    1. 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;62:1–8.
    1. 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.
    1. Bodger K, Bowering K, Sarkar S, et al. All-cause mortality after first ERCP in England: clinically guided analysis of hospital episode statistics with linkage to registry of death. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;74:825–33.
    1. Christensen M, Matzen P, Schulze S, et al. Complications of ERCP: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:721–31.
    1. Cotton PB, Garrow DA, Gallagher J, et al. Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;70:80–8.
    1. Glomsaker T, Soreide K, Hoff G, et al. Contemporary use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): a Norwegian prospective, multicenter study. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011;46:1144–51.
    1. Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G, et al. Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 1998;48:1–10.
    1. Sieg A, Hachmoeller-Eisenbach U, Eisenbach T. Prospective evaluation of complications in outpatient GI endoscopy: a survey among German gastroenterologists. Gastrointest Endosc 2001;53:620–7.
    1. Masci E, Toti G, Mariani A, et al. Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:417–23.
    1. Talley NJ, Jones M. Self-reported rectal bleeding in a United States community: prevalence, risk factors, and health care seeking. Am J Gastroenterol 1998;93:2179–83.
    1. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987;40:373–83.
    1. Ragunath K, Thomas LA, Cheung WY, et al. Objective evaluation of ERCP procedures: a simple grading scale for evaluating technical difficulty. Postgrad Med J 2003;79:467–70.
    1. Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc 1991;37:383–93.
    1. St Sauver JL, Grossardt BR, Leibson CL, et al. Generalizability of epidemiological findings and public health decisions: an illustration from the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Mayo Clin Proc 2012;87:151–60.
    1. Mazen Jamal M, Yoon EJ, Saadi A, et al. Trends in the utilization of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:966–75.
    1. Jencks SF, Williams MV, Coleman EA. Rehospitalizations among patients in the medicare fee-for-service program. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1418–28.
    1. Freeman ML. Understanding risk factors and avoiding complications with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2003;5:145–53.
    1. Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 1996;335:909–18.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する