Zusammenfassung
Die endoskopisch retrograde Cholangiopankreatikographie (ERCP) hat sich seit ihrer Etablierung Anfang der 1970er Jahre von einer primär diagnostischen Prozedur zu einem überwiegend therapeutischen Verfahren entwickelt. Diagnostisch werden heutzutage von wenigen Ausnahmen abgesehen komplikationsärmere Alternativen wie Endosonographie (EUS) und Magnetresonanz-Cholangiopankreatikographie (MRCP) eingesetzt. Die therapeutische ERCP ist eine der invasivsten endoskopischen Untersuchungstechniken mit einem Komplikationsrisiko von bis zu 10 %. Es dominiert die Post-ERCP-Pankreatitis, gefolgt von Cholangitis, Cholezystitis, Blutung und Perforation. Risikofaktoren für Komplikationen und prophylaktische Maßnahmen werden in diesem Artikel erörtert.
Abstract
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) has developed from a primary diagnostic procedure at the time of establishment in the beginning of the 1970s to a mainly therapeutic procedure nowadays. Less complicated investigations, such asendoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) are now the preferred diagnostic alternatives apart from a few exceptions. Therapeutic ERCP is one of the most invasive endoscopic procedures and is associated with a complication risk of up to 10 %. Post-ERCP pancreatitis is the dominating complication followed by cholangitis, cholecystitis, hemorrhage and perforation. The risk factors and prophylaxis of complications are discussed in this article.
Literatur
Rabenstein T, Hahn EG (2002) Post-ERCP pancreatitis: new momentum. Endoscopy 34: 325–329 (Review)
Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S et al (1996) Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 335: 909–918
Freeman ML (2012) Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: avoidance and management. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 22: 567–586
Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL et al (2006) Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 101: 139–147
Cotton PB, Lehman GA, Vennes J et al (1991) Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc 37: 383–393
Ell C, Rabenstein T, Ruppert T et al (1995) 20 Jahre endoskopische Papillotomie – Analyse der Erlanger Erfahrungen bei 2752 Patienten. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 120: 163–167
Rabenstein T, Roggenbuck S, Framke B et al (2002) Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: can heparin prevent acute pancreatitis after ERCP? Gastrointest Endosc 55: 476–483
Elmunzer BJ, Scheiman JM, Lehman GA et al (2012) A randomized trial of rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. N Engl J Med 366: 1414–1422
Rabenstein T, Fischer B, Wiessner V et al (2004) Low-molecular-weight heparin does not prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 59: 606–613
Rabenstein T, Schneider HT, Hahn EG, Ell C (1998) 25 years of endoscopic sphincterotomy in Erlangen: assessment of experience in the treatment of 3498 patients. Endoscopy 30(Suppl 2): A194–A201
Dumonceau JM, Andriulli A, Deviere J et al (2010) European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline: prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopy 42: 503–515
Rabenstein T, Schneider HT, Nicklas M et al (1999) The impact of skill and experience of the endoscopist on the outcome of endoscopic sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 50: 628–636
Rabenstein T, Schneider HT, Bulling D et al (2000) Assessment of risk factors of endoscopic sphincterotomy techniques: a prospective series with emphasis on the decreased risk of post-EST pancreatitis by low-dose anticoagulation. Endoscopy 32: 10–19
Rabenstein T, Hahn EG (2002) Post-ERCP pancreatitis: is the endoscopist’s experience the major risk factor? JOP 3: 177–187
Abdel Aziz AM, Lehman GA (2007) Pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. World J Gastroenterol 13: 2655–2668
Cennamo V, Fuccio L, Zagari RM et al (2009) Can a wire-guided cannulation technique increase bile duct cannulation rate and prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis?: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol 104: 2343–2350
Choudhary A, Puli S, Ibdah J, Bechtold M (2009) Guidewire use for prevention of post ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc 69: AB305
Cheung J, Tsoi KK, Quan W-L et al (2009) Guidewire versus conventional contrast cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic reviewand meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 70: 1211–1219
Rabenstein T, Ruppert T, Schneider HT et al (1997) Benefits and risks of needle-knife papillotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 46: 207–211
Cennamo V, Fuccio L, Zagari RM et al (2010) Can early precut implementation reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography-related complication risk? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endoscopy 42: 381–388
Gong B, Hao L, Bie L et al (2010) Does precut technique improve selective bile duct cannulation or increase post-ERCP pancreatitis rate? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 24: 2670–2680
Mazaki T, Masuda H, Takayama T (2010) Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 42: 842–853
Sofuni A, Magucki H, Mukai T et al (2011) Endoscopic pancreatic duct stents reduce the incidence of post-endoscopicretrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 9: 851–858
Choudhary A, Bechtold ML, Arif M et al (2011) Pancreatic stents for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 73: 275–282
Andriulli A, Clemente R, Solmi L et al (2002) Gabexate or somatostatin administration before ERCP in patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Gastrointest Endosc 56: 488–495
Seta T, Nogucki Y (2011) Protease inhibitors for preventing complications associated with ERCP: an updated meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 73: 700–706
Yoo KS, Huh KR, Kim KO et al (2011) Nafamostat mesilate for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Pancreas 40: 181–186
Park KT, Kang DH, Choi CW et al (2011) Is high-dose nafamostat mesilate effective for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis, especially in high-risk patients? Pancreas 40: 1215–1219
Zheng M, Chen Y, Yang X et al (2007) Gabexate in the prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Gastroenterol 7: 6
Chen S, Shi H, Zou X, Luo H (2010) Role of ulinastatin in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: the emperor’s new clothes or Aladdin’s magic lamp? Pancreas 39: 1231–1237
Chen B, Fan T, Wang CH (2010) A meta-analysis for the effect of prophylactic GTN on the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis and on the successful rate of cannulation of bile ducts. BMC Gastroenterol 10: 85
Bai Y, Xu C, Yang X et al (2009) Glyceryl trinitrate for prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Endoscopy 41: 690–695
Bang UC, Nojgaard C, Andersen PK, Matzen P (2009) Meta-analysis: nitroglycerin for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 29: 1078–1085
Murray B, Carter R, Imrie C et al (2003) Diclofenac reduces the incidence of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. Gastroenterology 124: 1786–1791
Pezzilli R, Morselli-Labate AM, Corinaldesi R (2010) NSAIDs and acute pancreatitis: a systematic review. Pharmaceuticals 3: 558–571
Cheon YK, Cho KB, Watkins JL et al (2007) Efficacy of diclofenac in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis in predominantly high-risk patients: a randomized double-blind prospective trial. Gastrointest Endosc 66: 1126–1132
Ding X, Chen M, Huang S et al (2012) Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for prevention of post-ERCPpancreatitis: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 76: 1152–1159
Elmunzer BJ, Higgins PDR, Saini SD et al (2013) Does rectal indomethacin eliminate the need for prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in patients undergoing high-risk ERCP? Post hoc efficacy and cost-benefit analyses using prospective clinical trial data. Am J Gastroenterol 108: 410–415
Akbar A, Abu Dayyeh BK, Baron TH et al (2013) Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are superior to pancreatic duct stents in preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a network meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 11: 778–783
Rabenstein T, Bachmann A, Radespiel-Tröger M, Schneider HT (2012) Risikofaktoren für Infektionen. Endheu 25: 235–243
Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G et al (1998) Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a pospectivemulticenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 48: 1–10
Rabenstein T, Ell C, Schneider HT et al (1998) Clinical significance of risk factor analysis for complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 127: 411
Vila JJ, Artifon EL, Otoch JP (2012) Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications: how can they be avoided? World J Gastrointest Endosc 4: 241–246
Brand M, Bizos D, O’Farrell P Jr (2010) Antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10: CD007345
Kwak MS, Jang ES, Ryu JK et al (2013) Risk factors of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography bacteremia. Gut Liver 7: 228–233
Kahaleh M, Freeman M (2012) Prevention and management of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications. Clin Endosc 45: 305–312
Anderson DJ, Shimpi RA, McDonald JR et al (2008) Infectious complications following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an automated surveillance system for detecting postprocedure bacteremia. Am J Infect Control 36: 592–594
Davis AJ, Kolios G, Alveyn CG, Robertson DA (1998) Antibiotic prophylaxis for ERCP: a comparison of oral ciprofloxacin with intravenous cephazolin in the prophylaxis of high-risk patients. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 12: 207–211
Aumeran C, Poincloux L, Souweine B et al (2010) Multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae outbreak after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Endoscopy 42: 895–899
Harris A, Chan AC, Torres-Vierra C (1999) Metaanalysis of antibiotic prophylaxis in ERCP. Endoscopy 31: 718–724
Bai Y, Gao F, Gao J et al (2009) Prophylactic antibiotics cannot prevent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-induced cholangitis: a meta-analysis. Pancreas 38: 126–130
Jethwa P, Breuning E, Bhati C et al (2007) The microbiological impact of pre-operative biliary drainage on patients undergoing hepato-biliary-pancreatic (HPB) surgery. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 25: 1175–1180
Ngu W, Jones M, Neal CP et al (2013) Preoperative biliary drainage for distal biliary obstruction and post-operative infectious complications. ANZ J Surg 83: 280–286
Morris-Stiff G, Tamijmarane A, Tan YM et al (2011) Pre-operative stenting is associated with a higher prevalence of post-operative complications following pancreatoduodenectomy. Int J Surg 9: 145–149
Howard TJ, Tan T, Lehman GA et al (1999) Classification and management of perforations complicating endoscopic sphincterotomy. Surgery 126: 658–663
Salminen P, Laine S, Gullichsen R (2008) Severe and fatal complications after ERCP: analysis of 2555 procedures in a single experienced center. Surg Endosc 22: 1965–1970
Alfieri S, Rosa F, Cina C et al (2013) Management of duodeno-pancreato-biliary perforations after ERCP: outcomes from an Italian tertiary referral center. Surg Endosc 27: 2005–2012
Kim J, Lee SH, Paik WH et al (2012) Clinical outcomes of patients who experienced perforation associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Surg Endosc 26(11): 3293–3300
Enns R, Eloubeidi MA, Mergener K et al (2002) ERCP-related perforations: risk factors and management. Endoscopy 34: 293–298
Baron TH, Gostout CJ, Herman L (2000) Hemoclip repair of a sphincterotomy-induced duodenal perforation. Gastrointest Endosc 52: 566–568
Palm J, Saarela A, MäkelÄ J (2007) Safety of Erlangen precut papillotomy – an analyses of 1044 consecutive ERCP examinations in a single institution. J Clin Gastroenterol 41: 528–533
Manes G, Di Giorgio P, Repici A et al (2009) An analysis of factors associated with the development of complications in patients undergoing precut sphincterotomy: a prospective, controlled, randomized, multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 104: 2412–2417
Masci E, Mariani A, Curioni S, Testoni A (2003) Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopicretrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy 35: 830–834
Christensen M, Matzen P, Schulze S, Rosenberg J (2004) Complications of ERCP: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 60: 721–773
Freeman ML (2002) Adverse outcomes of ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 56(6 Suppl): S273–S282
Schmidt H, Drossel R, HUschner W et al (2001) Risken und Komplikationen der endoskopischen Papillotomie – Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Studie. Endo Heute 14: 163–173
Barthet M, Lesavre N, Desjeux A et al (2002) Complications of endoscopic spincterotomy: results from a single tertiary referral center. Endoscopy 34: 991–997
Mirjalili SA, Stringer SD (2011) The arterial supply of the major duodenal papilla and its relevance to endoscopic sphincterotomy. Endoscopy 43: 307–311
Verma D, Kapadia A, Adler DG (2007) Pure versus mixed electrosurgical current for endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: a meta-analysis of adverse outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 66: 283–290
Abdel Samie A, Theilmann L (2013) Endoscopic procedures in patients under clopidogrel/dual antiplatelet therapy: to do or not to do? J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 22: 33–36
Fuchs ES, Jakobs R (2012) Elektive endoskopische Eingriffe unter oraler Antikoagulation oder Thrombozyteninhibierung. Endo Heute 25: 119–125
Shah JN, Marson F, Binmoeller KF (2010) Temporary self-expandable metal stent placement for treatment of post-sphincterotomy bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 72: 1274–1278
Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien
Interessenkonflikt. T. Rabenstein und H.J. Schulz geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rabenstein, T., Schulz, H. Komplikationen nach ERCP. Gastroenterologe 9, 222–236 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11377-014-0873-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11377-014-0873-8