Journals / Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology / 2016 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2

Assessment of the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography grading system: A prospective study from a tertiary care center

Pages
187–191
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Because of the increased rates of failure and complications in more difficult cases, the procedures should be performed by experienced endoscopists in advanced centers

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/Aims: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) grading system was proposed but has not been fully evaluated with prospective clinical studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the ERCP difficulty grading system for predicting success and adverse event rates related to the procedure.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Because of the increased rates of failure and complications in more difficult cases, the procedures should be performed by experienced endoscopists in advanced centers
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background/Aims: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) grading system was proposed but has not been fully evaluated with prospective clinical studies. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the ERCP difficulty grading system for predicting success and adverse event rates related to the procedure. Materials and Methods: A total of 1057 ERCP procedures performed on 752 patients were included in the present study. The complexity grades of the procedures were recorded according to the ASGE grading system. Specific complications of ERCP (pancreatitis, cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation) were also defined and graded. Results: The procedure difficulty was determined as 1st degree in 153 patients (14.4%), 2nd degree in 498 patients (47.1%), 3rd degree in 271 (25.6%), and 4th degree in 135 patients (12.7%). The success rate for the entire procedures was 88.4%. The success rate for 1st degree procedures was 99.3%, 97.2% for 2nd degree procedures, 86.7% for 3rd degree procedures, and 46.7% for 4th degree procedures (p<0.005). When the difficulty of the procedures increased from 1 to 4, the adverse event rates increased from 1.3% to 10.4%. Conclusion: The findings support the evidence that the difficulty degrees of ERCP procedures can help predict the success and complication rates of the procedure. Because of the increased rates of failure and complications in more difficult cases, the procedures should be performed by experienced endoscopists in advanced centers

🔖

Cite This Article

TORUN, S., PARLAK, E., YILDIZ, H., DİŞİBEYAZ, S., ÖDEMİŞ, B., BEYAZIT, Y., ŞAŞMAZ, N., KAYAÇETİN, E. (2016). Assessment of the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography grading system: A prospective study from a tertiary care center. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2, 187–191. https://ajindex.com/articles/409355

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. McCune WS, Shorb PE, Moscovitz H. Endoscopic cannulation of the ampulla of Vater: a preliminary report. Ann Surg 1968; 167: 752-6. [CrossRef] Prat F, Malak NA, Pelletier G, et al. Biliary symptoms and complica- tions more than 8 years after endoscopic sphincterotomy for cho- ledocholithiasis. Gastroenterology 1996; 110: 894-9. [CrossRef] Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G, et al. Incidencerates of post- ERCP complications: a systematicsurvey of prospectivestudies. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 1781-8. [CrossRef] Vezakis A, Fragulidis G, Polydorou A. Endoscopic retrograde chol- angiopancreatography-related perforations: Diagnosis and man- agement. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 7: 1135-41.
  2. Szary NM, Al-Kawas FH. Complications of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: How to Avoid and Manage Them. Gastroenterol Hepatol (NY) 2013; 9: 496-504.
  3. Kapral C, Mühlberger A, Wewalka F, Duller C, Knoflach P, Schreiber F. Quality assessment of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopan- creatography: results of a running nationwide Austrian bench marking Project after 5 years of implementation. Eur J Gastroen- terol Hepatol 2012; 24: 1447-54. [CrossRef] Rabenstein T, Schneider HT, Nicklas M, et al. Impact of skill and experi- ence of the endoscopist on the outcome of endoscopic sphincter- otomy techniques. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 50: 628-36. [CrossRef] Harewood GC, Baron TH. An assessment of the learning curve for precut biliary sphincterotomy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1708- 12. [CrossRef] Cotton PB, Eisen G, Romagnuolo J, et al. Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: results of an ASGE working party. Gas- trointest Endosc 2011; 73: 868-74. [CrossRef] Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L, et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-54. [CrossRef] Schutz MS, Abbott RM. Grading ERCPs by degree of difficulty: a new concept to produce more meaningful outcome data. Gas- trointest Endosc 2000; 51: 535-9. [CrossRef] Ragunath K, Thomas LA, Cheung WY, Duane PD, Richards DG. Objec- tive evaluation of ERCP procedures: a simple grading scale for evalu- ating technical difficulty. Postgrad Med J 2003; 79: 467-70. [CrossRef] Zuber-Jerger I, Endlicher E, Kullmann F. A new grading system to evaluate the risk of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatog- raphy. J Gastroenterol 2009; 44: 160-5. [CrossRef]