Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging Findings of Complications After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and Biliary Stenting

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Imaging Complications of Gastrointestinal and Biliopancreatic Endoscopy Procedures

  • 830 Accesses

Abstract

Albeit generally safe procedures, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and biliary stenting are associated with a non-negligible morbidity and occasional mortality. Due to the number and complexity of operative ERCPs currently performed, radiologists are increasingly faced with imaging investigation of suspected post-procedural complications. Timely diagnosis and optimal management require a combination of clinical and laboratory data with imaging appearances, aiming to triage those occurrences that require prolonged hospitalisation and interventional or surgical treatment.

Multidetector CT plays a pivotal role in the elucidation of post-ERCP complications and is warranted in case of suspicious intraprocedural events, physical signs or laboratory abnormalities. In selected patients MRI allows to image pancreatitis and abnormal collections without use of ionising radiation.

This chapter reviews with several imaging examples the commonest complications occurring after ERCP with or without biliary stenting. Knowledge of procedural details, an appropriate CT acquisition technique and familiarity with normal and abnormal imaging appearances are needed to diagnose and grade oedematous or necrotic pancreatitis, haemorrhages, duodenal perforation, iatrogenic infections and stent-related complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Anderson MA, Fisher L, Jain R et al (2012) Complications of ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 75:467–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Glomsaker T, Hoff G, Kvaloy JT et al (2013) Patterns and predictive factors of complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Br J Surg 100:373–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kapral C, Duller C, Wewalka F et al (2008) Case volume and outcome of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a nationwide Austrian benchmarking project. Endoscopy 40:625–630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Silviera ML, Seamon MJ, Porshinsky B et al (2009) Complications related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a comprehensive clinical review. J Gastrointest Liver Dis 18:73–82

    Google Scholar 

  5. Tonolini M, Pagani A, Bianco R (2015) Cross-sectional imaging of common and unusual complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Insights Imag 6:323–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dumonceau JM, Andriulli A, Elmunzer BJ et al (2014) Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - updated June 2014. Endoscopy 46:799–815

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pezzilli R, Romboli E, Campana D et al (2002) Mechanisms involved in the onset of post-ERCP pancreatitis. JOP 3:162–168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pfau PR, Mosley RG, Said A et al (2006) Comparison of the effect of non-ionic and ionic contrast agents on pancreatic histology in a canine model. JOP 7:27–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Johnson GK, Geenen JE, Johanson JF et al (1997) Evaluation of post-ERCP pancreatitis: potential causes noted during controlled study of differing contrast media. Midwest Pancreaticobiliary Study Group. Gastrointest Endosc 46:217–222

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Goebel C, Hardt P, Doppl W et al (2000) Frequency of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with iopromid or iotrolan: a randomized trial. Eur Radiol 10:677–680

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. George S, Kulkarni AA, Stevens G et al (2004) Role of osmolality of contrast media in the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a metanalysis. Dig Dis Sci 49:503–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sheu Y, Furlan A, Almusa O et al (2012) The revised Atlanta classification for acute pancreatitis: a CT imaging guide for radiologists. Emerg Radiol 19:237–243

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zaheer A, Singh VK, Qureshi RO et al (2013) The revised Atlanta classification for acute pancreatitis: updates in imaging terminology and guidelines. Abdom Imaging 38:125–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Saddala P, Ramanathan S, Tirumani SH et al (2015) Complications of minimally invasive procedures of the abdomen and pelvis: a comprehensive update on the clinical and imaging features. Emerg Radiol 22:283–294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pannu HK, Fishman EK (2001) Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: spectrum of abnormalities demonstrated with CT. Radiographics 21:1441–1453

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wax BN, Katz DS, Badler RL et al (2006) Complications of abdominal and pelvic procedures: computed tomographic diagnosis. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 35:171–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Woods RW, Akshintala VS, Singh VK et al (2014) CT severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis: results from a single tertiary medical center. Abdom Imaging 39:1162–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller FH, Keppke AL, Dalal K et al (2004) MRI of pancreatitis and its complications: part 1, acute pancreatitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1637–1644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. de Freitas TF, Schraibman V, Ardengh JC et al (2014) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging indicates the severity of acute pancreatitis. Abdom Imaging 40:265–271

    Google Scholar 

  20. Horton KM, Jeffrey RB Jr, Federle MP et al (2009) Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: the potential role of 64 MDCT and 3D imaging in the diagnosis. Emerg Radiol 16:349–356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jaeckle T, Stuber G, Hoffmann MH et al (2008) Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: value of MDCT. Abdom Imaging 33:285–293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. So YH, Choi YH, Chung JW (2012) Selective embolization for post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding: technical aspects and clinical efficacy. Korean J Radiol 13:73–81

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Katsinelos P, Kountouras J, Chatzimavroudis G (2010) Endoscopic hemostasis using monopolar coagulation for postendoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding refractory to injection treatment. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 20:84–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsou YK, Lin CH, Liu NJ (2009) Treating delayed endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced bleeding: epinephrine injection with or without thermotherapy. World J Gastroenterol 15:4823–4828

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Maleux G, Bieden J, Laenen A et al (2014) Embolization of post-biliary sphincterotomy bleeding refractory to medical and endoscopic therapy: technical results, clinical efficacy and predictors of outcome. Eur Radiol 24:2779–2786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Avgerinos DV, Llaguna OH, Lo AY et al (2009) Management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: related duodenal perforations. Surg Endosc 23:833–838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim J, Lee SH, Paik WH et al (2012) Clinical outcomes of patients who experienced perforation associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Surg Endosc 26:3293–3300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Machado NO (2012) Management of duodenal perforation post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. When and whom to operate and what factors determine the outcome? A review article. JOP 13:18–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Miller R, Zbar A, Klein Y et al (2013) Perforations following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a single institution experience and surgical recommendations. Am J Surg 206:180–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Paspatis GA, Dumonceau JM, Barthet M et al (2014) Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 46:693–711

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Polydorou A, Vezakis A, Fragulidis G et al (2011) A tailored approach to the management of perforations following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy. J Gastrointest Surg 15:2211–2217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rabie ME, Mir NH, Al Skaini MS et al (2013) Operative and non-operative management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-associated duodenal injuries. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95:285–290

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Stapfer M, Selby RR, Stain SC et al (2000) Management of duodenal perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy. Ann Surg 232:191–198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kodali S, Monkemuller K, Kim H et al (2015) ERCP-related perforations in the new millennium: a large tertiary referral center 10-year experience. United Eur Gastroenterol J 3:25–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sartelli M, Viale P, Catena F et al (2013) 2013 WSES guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections. World J Emerg Surg 8:3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Mosler P (2011) Diagnosis and management of acute cholangitis. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 13:166–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hong MJ, Kim WS, Kin HC et al (2012) Comparison of the clinical characteristics and imaging findings of acute cholangitis with and without biliary dilatation. Br J Radiol 85:e1219–e1225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Catalano OA, Sahani DV, Forcione DG et al (2009) Biliary infections: spectrum of imaging findings and management. Radiographics 29:2059–2080

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Menu Y, Vuillerme MP (2002) Non-traumatic abdominal emergencies: imaging and intervention in acute biliary conditions. Eur Radiol 12:2397–2406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Watanabe Y, Nagayama M, Okumura A et al (2007) MR imaging of acute biliary disorders. Radiographics 27:477–495

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. van Boeckel PG, Vleggaar FP, Siersema PD (2009) Plastic or metal stents for benign extrahepatic biliary strictures: a systematic review. BMC Gastroenterol 9:96

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Matlock J, Freeman ML (2005) Endoscopic therapy of benign biliary strictures. Rev Gastroenterol Disord 5:206–214

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Judah JR, Draganov PV (2007) Endoscopic therapy of benign biliary strictures. World J Gastroenterol 13:3531–3539

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Siriwardana HP, Siriwardena AK (2005) Systematic appraisal of the role of metallic endobiliary stents in the treatment of benign bile duct stricture. Ann Surg 242:10–19

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Catalano O, De Bellis M, Sandomenico F et al (2012) Complications of biliary and gastrointestinal stents: MDCT of the cancer patient. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:W187–W196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pagani A, Tonolini M (2014) EuroRAD Case 11665. Post-ERCP acute duodenal haemorrhage. doi:10.1594/EURORAD/CASE.11665:Available at: URL: http://www.eurorad.org/case.php?id=11665

  47. Tonolini M (2012) EuroRAD Case 10384. Spectrum of complications following biliary stent positioning. doi:10.1594/EURORAD/CASE.10384:Available at: URL: http://www.eurorad.org/case.php?id=10384

  48. Rigiroli F, Tonolini M, Pagani A (2014) EuroRAD Case 11409. Imaging diagnosis and surgical triage of post-therapeutic ERCP perforation. doi:10.1594/EURORAD/CASE.11409:Available at: URL: http://www.eurorad.org/case.php?id=11409

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology Department, “Luigi Sacco” University Hospital, Via G.B. Grassi 74, Milano, 20157, Italy

    Massimo Tonolini MD & Alessandra Pagani

Authors
  1. Massimo Tonolini MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandra Pagani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Massimo Tonolini MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, Milan, Italy

    Massimo Tonolini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tonolini, M., Pagani, A. (2016). Imaging Findings of Complications After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and Biliary Stenting. In: Tonolini, M. (eds) Imaging Complications of Gastrointestinal and Biliopancreatic Endoscopy Procedures. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31211-8_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31211-8_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31209-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31211-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation