Advertisement

Common Endoscopic Complications: Recognition and Management

  • Scott MelvinEmail author
  • Jeffrey Hazey
Chapter

Abstract

Diagnostic and therapeutic upper and lower endoscopy, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), represents relatively non-invasive modalities as a diagnostic tool and to deliver therapy. Some complications are the result of endoscopy irrespective of the procedure while many complications are unique to upper endoscopy, lower endoscopy, and ERCP. As a general rule, complication rates increase with endoscopic therapeutic interventions. We describe general complications of endoscopy and outline those complications and management unique to each specific modality.

Keywords

Bile Duct Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Conscious Sedation Esophageal Perforation Endoscopic Sphincterotomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Selected Readings

  1. 1.
    Arrowsmith J, Gerstman B, Fleisher D, et al. Results from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/U.S. Food and Drug Administration collaborative study on complication rates and drug use during gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37:421–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASGE recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis for endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;42(6):630.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marks J. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy. In: Ponsky J, editor. Complications of endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery. prevention and management. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1997. p. 13–28.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Silvis S, Nebel O, Rogers G, et al. Endoscopic complications. Results of the 1974 American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Survey. JAMA. 1976;235:928.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reed W, Kilkenny J, Dias C, et al. A prospective analysis of 3525 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed by surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2004;18:11–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bokemeyer B, Bock H, Huppe D, et al. Screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer prevention: results from a German online registry on 269000 cases. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;21:650–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rathgaber S, Wick T. Colonoscopy completion and complication rates in a community gastroenterology practice. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:556–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lqbal C, Chun Y, Farley D. Colonoscopic perforations: a retrospective review. J Gastrointest Surg. 2005;9:1229–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freeman M. Adverse outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: avoidance and management. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am. 2003;13:775–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Freeman M. Understanding risk factors and avoiding complications with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Current Gastroenterol Rep. 2003;5:145–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freeman M, Nelson D, Sherman S, et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:909–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G, et al. Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of proscpective studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:1781–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations