Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search

Complications Of ERCP.

Michelle A. Anderson, L. Fisher, Rajeev Jain, J. Evans, Vasundhara Appalaneni, T. Ben-Menachem, Brooks D. Cash, G. Anton Decker, Dayna S. Early, Robert D. Fanelli, D. Fisher, N. Fukami, Joo Ha Hwang, S. Ikenberry, Terry L. Jue, Khalid M. Khan, Mary Lee Krinsky, Phyllis M. Malpas, John T. Maple, Ravi N. Sharaf, Amandeep K. Shergill, Jason A. Dominitz
Published 2012 · Medicine

Cite This
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
Share
d ( t s f t c s n d i a s a This is one of a series of position statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. This document is an update of a previous ASGE publication.1 In preparing this document, a search of the medical iterature was performed using PubMed. Additional refernces were obtained from the bibliographies of the identied articles and from recommendations of expert consulants. When limited or no data exist from well-designed rospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large eries and reports from recognized experts. Position stateents are based on a critical review of the available data nd expert consensus at the time that the document was rafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed o clarify aspects of this document, which may be revised s necessary to account for changes in technology, new ata, or other aspects of clinical practice. This document is intended to be an educational device o provide information that may assist endoscopists in roviding care to patients. This position statement is not a ule and should not be construed as establishing a legal tandard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requirng, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical ecisions in any particular case involve a complex analsis of the patient’s condition and available courses of ction. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an ndoscopist to take a course of action that varies from this osition statement. Since its introduction in 1968, ERCP has become a comonly performed endoscopic procedure.2 The diagnostic nd therapeutic utility of ERCP has been well demonstrated or a variety of disorders, including the management of choedocholithiasis, the diagnosis and management of biliary nd pancreatic neoplasms, and the postoperative manageent of biliary perioperative complications.3-5 The evolution of the role of ERCP has occurred simultaneously with that of other diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, most notably magnetic resonance imaging/MRCP, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (with or without intraoperative cholangiography), and EUS. For endoscopists to accurately assess the clinical appropriateness of ERCP, it is important to have a thorough
This paper references
10.1016/S0016-5107(98)70121-X
Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.
S. Loperfido (1998)
10.1016/S0016-5107(02)70025-4
Adverse outcomes of ERCP.
M. Freeman (2002)
10.1016/j.gie.2009.09.041
The role of endoscopy in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis.
J. Maple (2010)
10.1016/S0016-5107(91)70740-2
Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus.
P. Cotton (1991)
10.1053/GE.2003.V57.AMGE030576633
Complications of ERCP.
J. Mallery (2003)
10.1056/NEJM199609263351301
Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.
M. Freeman (1996)
10.1016/S0016-5107(04)00353-0
Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comprehensive review.
M. Freeman (2004)
10.1016/J.GIE.2007.02.029
Informed consent for GI endoscopy.
M. Zuckerman (2007)
10.1016/S0016-5107(88)71332-2
Endoscopic Cannulation of the Ampulla of Vater: A Preliminary Report
W. S. Mccune (1968)
10.1067/MGE.2001.117550
Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective, multicenter study.
M. Freeman (2001)
10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02169-8
Complications of ERCP: a prospective study.
M. Christensen (2004)
10.1016/S0016-5107(02)70112-0
Risk factors for complications after performance of ERCP.
J. Vandervoort (2002)
10.1055/S-2000-138
Analysis of the risk factors associated with endoscopic sphincterotomy techniques: preliminary results of a prospective study, with emphasis on the reduced risk of acute pancreatitis with low-dose anticoagulation treatment.
T. Rabenstein (2000)
10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.039
Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years.
P. Cotton (2009)
10.1016/S1052-5157(03)00103-X
Current management of postoperative complications and benign biliary strictures.
G. Costamagna (2003)
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01279.x
Incidence Rates of Post-ERCP Complications: A Systematic Survey of Prospective Studies
A. Andriulli (2007)
10.1016/S0002-9270(00)02387-X
Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.
E. Masci (2001)
10.1016/S0016-5107(03)01994-1
The role of endoscopy in the evaluation and treatment of patients with pancreaticobiliary malignancy.
T. Baron (2003)
10.1016/j.gie.2008.11.022
Quality indicators, including complications, of ERCP in a community setting: a prospective study.
Joshua B Colton (2009)
10.1055/S-2002-35834
Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: results from a single tertiary referral center.
M. Barthet (2002)
10.1097/01.mpg.0000177311.81071.13
Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Children: A Large Series Report
Chi-Liang Cheng (2005)
10.1055/S-2007-966723
Risk factors for complication following ERCP; results of a large-scale, prospective multicenter study.
E. Williams (2007)



This paper is referenced by
10.1055/a-0835-5900
Comparison between a rotatable sphincterotome and a conventional sphincterotome for selective bile duct cannulation.
A. Kurita (2019)
10.2478/v10039-011-0012-4
Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and their risk factors.
M. Kostrzewska (2011)
10.1159/000258374
Biliary Sphincterotomy Techniques
Gianpiero Manes (2010)
10.1007/978-3-662-45194-6_4
Endoskopische retrograde Cholangiopankreatikographie
Rudolf Mennigen (2016)
10.1016/J.GIE.2006.02.019
Quality indicators for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
T. Baron (2006)
10.1016/j.cld.2009.02.010
The hospitalized patient with abnormal liver function tests.
C. O'brien (2009)
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications
E. Koçak (2010)
10.4103/AZMJ.AZMJ_70_18
Association of Helicobacter pylori infection with somatostatin deficiency and its relation to post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis
M. El-Ziny (2018)
Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): A look at the local evidence
A. P. Ramírez (2010)
10.1038/ncpgasthep0844
Is primary precut endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy safe and effective?
D. Carr-Locke (2007)
with or without Ulterior Papillotomy. Series of Cases
J. Figueroa (2015)
Competence and quality assessment: the future of training in GI endoscopy
Vivian E. Ekkelenkamp (2014)
PERFECT OR FAILED ERCP: WHAT MAKES THE DIFFERENCE?
J. Špičák (2015)
Definition and classification of post-ERCP pancreatitis
A. Thaker (2015)
Factores de riesgo predictores para complicaciones post-colangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica
Alan Mijail Langarica Zárate (2016)
History of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis and Acute Pancreatitis as Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis.
Eiji Funatsu (2017)
10.1155/2016/9687052
Pancreatic Stenting Reduces Post-ERCP Pancreatitis and Biliary Sepsis in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized, Controlled Study
H. Yin (2016)
10.1016/J.RGMX.2012.04.012
Colangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica en un hospital regional del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2002-2011: factores de riesgo y complicaciones
G. A. Reyes-Moctezuma (2012)
Complications related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a comprehensive clinical review.
M. Silviera (2009)
10.1016/B978-1-4160-6189-2.00040-8
Complications of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Michael B. Kimmey (2010)
10.1016/j.gie.2013.01.023
Precut needle-knife sphincterotomy in advanced endoscopy fellowship.
Constantinos P. Anastassiades (2013)
Aplicación de una escala pronóstica para complicaciones postcolangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica
Alan Mijail Langarica Zárate (2016)
10.1556/OH.2012.29449
[Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: to whom, when and how to perform?].
L. Czakó (2012)
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00950.x
Pharmacotherapy for the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis
Erina N. Foster (2007)
10.1109/EHB.2015.7391451
Telemedicine — A possible quality indicator for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography?
Gheorghe G Balan (2015)
10.1016/j.clinre.2018.07.005
The reasonable drainage option after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for the treatment of choledocholithiasis.
Lin-Kang Xiao (2018)
10.1016/j.gie.2016.03.018
Devices and techniques for ERCP in the surgically altered GI tract.
B. Enestvedt (2016)
10.1097/SLE.0000000000000543
Two Biliary Cannulation Techniques for ERCP in Patients With Intradiverticular Papilla: A Retrospective Review
L. Huang (2018)
10.3748/wjg.v19.i5.631
Prophecy about post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: from divination to science.
S. Moon (2013)
Significance of C-reactive Protein in the Endoscopic Retrograd Cholangiopancreatography Related Pancreatitis
Mete Akin (2016)
10.1016/S1499-3872(13)60063-6
Impact of periampullary diverticula on the outcome and fluoroscopy time in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
P. Katsinelos (2013)
10.1097/SLE.0000000000000603
Fluoroscopy Dose and Time Characteristics During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)
Aslam R Syed (2019)
See more
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar