切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (03) : 135 -138. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2023.03.002

论著

内镜逆行胰胆管造影术失败原因及后续治疗有效性的单中心、真实世界研究
赵宇, 张澍田()   
  1. 100050 首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院消化科
  • 收稿日期:2023-02-27 出版日期:2023-06-01
  • 通信作者: 张澍田
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重大科研仪器研制项目(82027801)

Analysis of ERCP failure and following salvage treatment: a real-world, single-center study

Yu Zhao, Shutian Zhang()   

  1. Department of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
  • Received:2023-02-27 Published:2023-06-01
  • Corresponding author: Shutian Zhang
引用本文:

赵宇, 张澍田. 内镜逆行胰胆管造影术失败原因及后续治疗有效性的单中心、真实世界研究[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(03): 135-138.

Yu Zhao, Shutian Zhang. Analysis of ERCP failure and following salvage treatment: a real-world, single-center study[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(03): 135-138.

目的

分析首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)操作失败的原因,并着重关注首次ERCP失败后不同补救治疗方式的有效性及复发情况,为ERCP失败后的治疗策略提供参考。

方法

收集首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院2020年6月1日至2022年9月1日行ERCP患者的临床资料及ERCP操作记录,并对失败原因及后续治疗措施的有效性进行统计分析。

结果

纳入ERCP操作2534例,其中失败57例,急诊ERCP失败率显著高于住院患者(6.19% vs 1.26%,P<0.01)。ERCP失败原因中,初学者(52.6%)及熟练者(31.3%)以乳头形态异常更常见,且相比于精通者组更容易失败(P<0.05);补救治疗措施中,再次ERCP(65%)及药物保守治疗(60%)的成功率显著低于PTCD(93.8%)组(P<0.05);PTCD(56.3%)及药物保守治疗(60%)的再次治疗率显著高于手术(0%)及超声内镜(0%)组(P<0.05);临床缓解方面,药物保守治疗缓解率(60%)显著低于再次ERCP(95%)组(P<0.05)。

结论

急诊ERCP不建议初学者施行,而ERCP失败后的治疗,目前建议采取更积极的补救措施,具备条件时可优先选择超声内镜或手术治疗。

Objective

To analyze the causes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)failure in Beijing Friendship Hospital with a specific focus on the effectiveness of different salvage treatments to provide evidence for the treatment strategy selection after ERCP failure.

Methods

The patients who underwent ERCP at Beijing Friendship Hospital from June 1, 2020 to September 1, 2022 were enrolled, and the reasons and salvage treatment of the failure cases were analyzed.

Results

A total of 2534 ERCP cases were included, of which 57 cases failed.The failure rate of emergency ERCP was significantly higher than that of inpatients(6.19% vs.1.26%, P<0.01).Noticeably, papilla abnormality-resulted ERCP failure was much more common in beginners(52.6%)and proficient doctors(31.3%), as compared to skilled doctors(P<0.05).In salvage treatment, the success rate of second-ERCP(65%)and medication-based treatment(60%)was significantly lower than that of percutaneous transhepatic cholangial drainage(PTCD)(93.8%)(P<0.05).The re-treatment rate of PTCD(56.3%)and medication-based treatment(60%)was significantly higher than that of surgery(0%)and endoscopic ultrasonography(0%)(P<0.05).The clinical remission rate of medication-based treatment(60%)was significantly lower than that of second-ERCP(95%)(P<0.05).

Conclusion

Emergency ERCP is not recommended for beginners.For the treatment of ERCP failure, more active salvage treatment are recommended, and endoscopic ultrasonography or surgical treatment should be given priority if applicable.

表1 不同组别医师内镜逆行胰胆管造影术失败统计[例(%)]
表2 不同组别医师内镜逆行胰胆管造影术失败原因统计(例)
表3 内镜逆行胰胆管造影术补救治疗措施有效性分析(例)
1
1 Mccune WS. ERCP at thirty years: an interview with Dr. William S. McCune (1909-1998)[J]. Gastroint Endosc, 1998, 48(6):643-644.
2
Cennamo V, Fuccio L, Zagari RM, et al. Can early precut implementation reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related complication risk? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Endoscopy, 2010, 42(5):381-388.
3
Alexander, Krumov, Katzarov, et al. How to measure quality in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2018, 6(13):265.
4
Ak ÇAykut H, Pala E, et al. Post-ERCP Complication Analysis of an Experienced Center[J]. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2022, 32(6):707-713.
5
Testoni P, Mariani A, Aabakken L, et al. Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline[J]. Endoscopy, 2016, 48(7):657-683.
6
Johnson G, Webster G, Boškoski I, et al. Curriculum for ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement[J]. Endoscopy, 202153(10):1071-1087.
7
Chen Q, Jin P, Ji X, et al. Management of difficult or failed biliary access in initial ERCP: A review of current literature[J]. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol, 201943(4):365-372.
8
Tsou YK, Pan KT, Lee MH, et al. Endoscopic salvage therapy after failed biliary cannulation using advanced techniques: A concise review. World J Gastroenterol, 202228(29):3803-3813.
9
El-Sherif Y, Hunt J, Suddle A, et al. Day case ′treat and transfer′ ERCP service under general anaesthesia[J]. Frontline Gastroenterol, 20189(4):317-322.
10
Han SY, Kim DU, Lee MW, et al. Acute distal common bile duct angle is risk factor for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in beginner endoscopist[J]. World J Clin Cases, 20208(1):20-28.
11
Artifon EL, Marson FP, Gaidhane M, et al. Hepaticogastrostomy or choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP: is there any difference? [J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 201581(4):950-959.
12
James TW, Fan YC, Baron TH. EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy as a portal to allow definitive antegrade treatment of benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 201888(3):547-554.
13
Sharaiha RZ, Khan MA, Kamal F, et al. Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in comparison with percutaneous biliary drainage when ERCP fails: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 201785(5):904-914.
14
Maruta S, Sugiyama H, Ogasawara S, et al. "Salvage techniques" are the key to overcome difficult biliary cannulation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography[J]. Sci Rep, 202212(1): 13627.
15
Albert JG, Finkelmeier F, Friedrich-Rust M, et al. Identifying indications for percutaneous (PTC) vs. endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided "rendezvous" procedure in biliary obstruction and incomplete endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) [J]. Z Gastroenterol, 2014, 52(10):1157-1163.
16
Turan AS, Jenniskens S, Martens JM, et al. Complications of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and biliary drainage, a multicenter observational study[J]. Abdom Radiol (NY), 202247(9):3338-3344.
17
Wang Y, Lyu Y, Li T, et al. Comparing Outcomes Following Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 202232(7):747-755.
[1] 衣晓丽, 胡沙沙, 张彦. HER-2低表达对乳腺癌新辅助治疗疗效及预后的影响[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 340-346.
[2] 王亚萍, 樊菁, 侯牛牛, 凌瑞. 肿瘤浸润性淋巴细胞在HER-2阳性早期乳腺癌中的临床意义[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 203-209.
[3] 张旺, 曹家兴, 刘九洋, 吴高松. 全身免疫炎症指数对乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效的预测价值及临床预测模型的构建[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 136-142.
[4] 冉秋燕, 付萍, 魏世蓉, 肖何, 徐琰, 赵连花. 乳腺癌新辅助全身治疗后病理完全缓解的预测因子:一项单中心回顾性研究[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 212-218.
[5] 张海涛, 康婵娟, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎效果观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 654-657.
[6] 郝璐, 袁野, 余向南, 李源, 曹阳, 陶凯雄, 王征, 王国斌. 直肠癌新辅助治疗后等待观察策略的研究现状及进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 584-588.
[7] 邹贵军, 袁新普, 马冰, 宋舟, 黄晓天, 曹震, 王麦换, 张朝军. 机器人经肛切除临床完全缓解的直肠癌一例[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(05): 311-314.
[8] 邹敏, 徐明, 吴伟强, 归明彬, 高峰. 低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗应用的焦点问题[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 363-371.
[9] 白中元, 张伟, 王雅婧, 冯永亮, 白文启, 李灵敏. 直肠癌新辅助治疗后病理完全缓解情况及预测因素分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 50-55.
[10] 劳烨芳, 何芮, 朱芮, 张晓辉, 朱春荣. 多学科诊治不可切除结肠癌肝转移病例报道并文献复习[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 516-520.
[11] 李桂贤. 胆管结石的优质手术室护理[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(01): 50-54.
[12] 隋金玲, 张爱萍, 许旭东. 右美托咪定复合瑞芬太尼在内镜逆行胰胆管造影术老年患者中的麻醉效果[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(06): 357-360.
[13] 张波, 姚怡, 张文刚, 柴宁莉, 令狐恩强. 胆道镜直视系统在胆胰"超级微创理念"中的诊疗价值[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2023, 10(04): 264-266.
[14] 杨婷, 邱晓珏, 陈青雅, 张宝晶, 王伟伟. 经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后胰腺炎预测模型的建立与评价[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2023, 10(03): 200-204.
[15] 贾卓奇, 李硕, 陈健, 张广健, 付军科. 新辅助治疗后胸腹腔镜下Ivor-Lewis食管胃结合部腺癌根治术1例并文献复习[J]. 中华胸部外科电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 111-116.
阅读次数
全文


摘要