What predicts failed cannulation and therapy at ERCP? Results of a large-scale multicenter analysis

Study background and aims: Predicting outcome at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains difficult. Our aim was to identify the risk factors for failed ERCP.

Patients and methods: A prospective multicenter study of ERCP was performed in 66 hospitals across England. Data on 4561 patients were collected using a structured questionnaire completed at the time of ERCP.

Results: In total 3209 patients had not had an ERCP prior to the study period. Considering their first ever ERCP, 2683 (84 %) were successfully cannulated, 2241(70 %) had all intended therapy completed, 360 (11 %) had some intended therapy completed, and 608 (19 %) were considered to have had a failed procedure. For first ever ERCP, factors associated with incomplete procedure (odds ratio and 95 % confidence interval) were: Billroth surgery (9.2, 3.2 – 26.7), precutting (2.0, 1.6 – 2.7), common bile duct (CBD) stone size and number (3.2, 2.1 – 4.8 for multiple, large stones), interventions in the pancreatic duct (3.4, 1.6 – 7.0), and CBD stenting (2.8, 2.2 – 3.5). Analysis of the 1352 patients who had undergone an ERCP prior to the study period indicated previous failed ERCP was also predictive of incomplete therapy (1.5, 1.1 – 2.1). The modified Schutz score correlated with ERCP completion, as did the Morriston score, even when modified to include only variables measurable before the procedure.

Conclusion: This study confirms that patient- and procedure-based variables are key predictors of technical success and validates current methods of rating ERCP difficulty. Of note, a correlation between outcome and institutional factors, such as unit and endoscopist caseload, was not demonstrated.

• References

• 1 Baron TH, Petersen BT, Mergener K et al. Quality indicators for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 29-34
• 2 Available at http://olympusamerica.com/oai_pressDetails.asp?pressNo=539 ERCP quality outcomes ASGE website. Accessed 19/7/2010
• 3 Available at http://www.grs.nhs.uk/ Accessed 19/7/2010
• 4 Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37: 383-93
• 5 Schutz SM, Abbott RM. Grading ERCPs by degree of difficulty: a new concept to produce more meaningful outcome data. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 535-9
• 6 Ragunath K, Thomas LA, Cheung WY et al. Objective evaluation of ERCP procedures: a simple grading scale for evaluating technical difficulty. Postgrad Med J 2003; 79: 467-70
• 7 Williams EJ, Taylor S, Fairclough P et al. Are we meeting the standards set for endoscopy? Results of a large-scale prospective survey of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatograph practice.. Gut 2007; 56: 821-9
• 8 Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR. The risk of determining risk with multivariable models. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 201-10
• 9 Available at http://www.asahq.org/clinical/physicalstatus.htm Accessed 18/7/2010
• 10 Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L et al. Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 1998; 351: 159-61
• 11 Tham TC, Lichtenstein DR, Vandervoort J et al. Role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 1998; 47: 50-6
• 12 Geron N, Reshef R, Shiller M et al. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the laparoscopic era. Surg Endosc 1999; 13: 452-6
• 13 Perissat J, Huibregtse K, Keane FB et al. Management of bile duct stones in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 799-810
• 14 Koo KP, Traverso LW. Do preoperative indicators predict the presence of common bile duct stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?. Am J Surg 1996; 171: 495-9
• 15 Arregui ME, Davis CJ, Arkush AM et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction or laparoscopic choledochoscopy and electrohydraulic lithotripsy for management of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 1992; 6: 10-15
• 16 Kapral C, Duller C, Wewalka F et al. Case volume and outcome of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a nationwide Austrian benchmarking project. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 625-630
• 17 Masci E, Minoli G, Rossi M et al. Prospective multicenter quality assessment of endotherapy of biliary stones: does center volume matter?. Endoscopy 2007; 39: 1076-1081
• 18 Colton JB, Curran CC. Quality indicators, including complications, of ERCP in a community setting: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 457-466
• 19 Madahotri R, Vaughn J, Barkun A et al. Analyzing ERCP practice by a modified degree of difficulty scale: A multicenter database analysis. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000; 95: 2480 (A236)
• 20 Boix J, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Moreno de Vega V et al. Identification of significant difficulty of selective deep cannulation by a simple predictive model: an endoscopic scale for teaching ERCP. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 1678-1685
• 21 Kim HJ, Choi HS, Park JH et al. Factors influencing the technical difficulty of endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 1154-60
• 22 Rajnakova A, Goh PM, Ngoi SS et al. ERCP in patients with periampullary diverticulum. Hepatogastroenterology 2003; 50: 625-628
• 23 Straja D, Marincaş M, Alecu M et al. Juxtapapillary duodenal diverticula early and late clinical and therapeutical implications. Chirurgia (Bucur) 2009; 104: 687-696
• 24 Panteris V, Vezakis A, Filippou G et al. Influence of juxtapapillary diverticula on the success or difficulty of cannulation and complication rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 903-910
• 25 Tyagi P, Sharma P, Sharma BC et al. Periampullary diverticula and technical success of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Surg Endosc 2009; 23: 1342-1345
• 26 Boix J, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Ananos F et al. Impact of periampullary duodenal diverticula at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a proposed classification of periampullary duodenal diverticula. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2006; 16: 208-211
• 27 Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 909-918
• 28 Rabenstein T, Schneider HT, Bulling D et al. 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. Endoscopy 2000; 32: 10-19
• 29 Freeman ML, DiSario JA, Nelson DB et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 54: 425-434
• 30 Chatterjee SRC, Dwarakanath AD, Barton R et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography practice in district general hospitals in North East England: a Northern Regional Endoscopy Group (NREG) study. J R Coll Physicians Edinb 2011; 41: 109-113
• 31 Cotton PB. Income and outcome metrics for the objective evaluation of ERCP and alternative methods. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 283-290
• 32 Available at http://www.bsg.org.uk/pdf_word_docs/ercp_stakeholders_08.doc Accessed: 19 July 2010