Comparative Study Between Biliary Covered Self-expandable Metal Stent and Conventional Endoscopic Bile Drainage Treatment in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-related Stapfer Type II Retroperitoneal Perforations

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2024 Mar 12

PMID 38470865

Authors

Jun Heo

Min Kyu Jung

Jieun Lee

Dong Wook Lee

Chang Min Cho

Jung Guen Cha

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Perforation is one of the most serious complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Conventional nonsurgical endoscopic treatments including intravenous antibiotic administration and plastic endoscopic biliary drainage are generally approved for the treatment of ERCP-related Stapfer type II perforation (perivaterian type). Biliary covered metal stent placement has recently been reported to have favorable outcomes in ERCP-related Stapfer type II perforations. We aimed to compare the outcomes of conventional endoscopic bile drainage and biliary covered self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion in patients with Stapfer type II perforation.

Methods: Medical records of patients who underwent ERCP at Kyungpook National University Hospital in Daegu from 2011 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed.

Results: A total of 8,402 ERCP procedures were performed in our hospital. Sixty-six ERCP-related perforations (0.78%) were identified. Among them, 37 patients (56.1%) who had Stapfer type II perforations were enrolled. Thirteen and twenty-four patients received biliary covered SEMS insertion and conventional endoscopic bile drainage treatments, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the clinical success rate (92.3% vs. 91.7%, p = 1.000), hospital stay (9.46 ± 5.97 vs. 13.9 ± 13.2 days, p = 0.258), and post-ERCP-related fasting time (5.4 ± 3.4 vs 4.3 ± 3.0 days, p = 0.305). Complications including bleeding, post-ERCP pancreatitis, fever, and death were not significantly different between the two groups. The conventional endoscopic bile drainage group took less time for ERCP than the SEMS group (11.5 ± 5.2 vs. 18.5 ± 11.2 min, p = 0.013).

Conclusions: Compared with the conventional endoscopic bile drainage treatment method, biliary covered SEMS did not improve patient outcomes in ERCP-related Stapfer type II perforations.

References

Bozbiyik O, Cetin B, Gumus T, Tekin F, Uguz A . Fully covered self-expandable metal stent for intraprocedural or late-diagnosed Type-II endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations. BMC Gastroenterol. 2022; 22(1):385. PMC: 9375919. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02466-9. View

Stapfer M, Selby R, Stain S, Katkhouda N, Parekh D, Jabbour N . Management of duodenal perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy. Ann Surg. 2000; 232(2):191-8. PMC: 1421129. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200008000-00007. View

Charlson M, Pompei P, Ales K, MacKenzie C . A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40(5):373-83. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8. View

Bor R, Fabian A, Szucs M, Balint A, Rutka M, Toth T . Comparison of therapeutic efficacy and treatment costs of self-expandable metal stents and plastic stents for management of malignant biliary obstruction. BMC Gastroenterol. 2023; 23(1):41. PMC: 9933253. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-023-02668-9. View

Williams E, Taylor S, Fairclough P, Hamlyn A, Logan R, Martin D . Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large-scale, prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy. 2007; 39(9):793-801. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-966723. View

Baron T, Wong Kee Song L, Zielinski M, Emura F, Fotoohi M, Kozarek R . A comprehensive approach to the management of acute endoscopic perforations (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 76(4):838-59. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.476. View

Motomura Y, Akahoshi K, Gibo J, Kanayama K, Fukuda S, Hamada S . Immediate detection of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related periampullary perforation: fluoroscopy or endoscopy?. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20(42):15797-804. PMC: 4229546. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i42.15797. View

Odemis B, Oztas E, Kuzu U, Parlak E, Disibeyaz S, Torun S . Can a Fully Covered Self-Expandable Metallic Stent be Used Temporarily for the Management of Duodenal Retroperitoneal Perforation During ERCP as a Part of Conservative Therapy?. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016; 26(1):e9-e17. DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000240. View

Enns R, Eloubeidi M, Mergener K, Jowell P, Branch M, Pappas T . ERCP-related perforations: risk factors and management. Endoscopy. 2002; 34(4):293-8. DOI: 10.1055/s-2002-23650. View

10.

Banks P, Bollen T, Dervenis C, Gooszen H, Johnson C, Sarr M . Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut. 2012; 62(1):102-11. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302779. View

11.

Alfieri S, Rosa F, Cina C, Tortorelli A, Tringali A, Perri V . Management of duodeno-pancreato-biliary perforations after ERCP: outcomes from an Italian tertiary referral center. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27(6):2005-12. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2702-9. View

12.

Assalia A, Suissa A, Ilivitzki A, Mahajna A, Yassin K, Hashmonai M . Validity of clinical criteria in the management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography related duodenal perforations. Arch Surg. 2007; 142(11):1059-64. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.142.11.1059. View

13.

Kumbhari V, Sinha A, Reddy A, Afghani E, Cotsalas D, Patel Y . Algorithm for the management of ERCP-related perforations. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 83(5):934-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.09.039. View

14.

Machado N . Management of duodenal perforation post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. When and whom to operate and what factors determine the outcome? A review article. JOP. 2012; 13(1):18-25. View

15.

Youngelman D, Marks J, Ponsky T, Ponsky J . Comparison of bile duct pressures following sphincterotomy and endobiliary stenting in a canine model. Surg Endosc. 1997; 11(2):126-8. DOI: 10.1007/s004649900313. View

16.

Cotton P, Lehman G, Vennes J, GEENEN J, Russell R, Meyers W . Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991; 37(3):383-93. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2. View