Safety of ERCP in patients with liver cirrhosis: a national database study

Abstract

Background and aims Given the limited data on the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with liver cirrhosis, we attempted to evaluate this question using a large national database.

Methods We conducted a matched case – control study using the 2010 National Inpatient Sample database in which four non-cirrhotic controls were matched randomly for every cirrhotic patient from the same 10-year age group. We compared adverse events and safety of inpatient ERCP between patients with (n = 3228) and without liver cirrhosis (controls, n = 12 912).

Results Of the 3228 cirrhotic patients, 2603 (80.6 %) had decompensated and 625 (19.4 %) had compensated disease. Post-procedure bleeding (2.1 % vs. 1.2 %, P < 0.01) was higher in patients compared to controls. On multivariable analysis, decompensated cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.7; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.2 – 3.2), compensated cirrhosis (aOR 2.2; 95 %CI 1.2 – 3.9), therapeutic ERCPs (aOR 1.4; 95 % CI 1.2 – 2.1), and biliary sphincterotomy (aOR 1.6; 95 %CI 1.1 – 2.1) were independently associated with increased risk of post-procedure bleeding. Performing ERCPs in large (aOR 0.5; 95 %CI 0.4 – 0.6) and medium (aOR 0.7; 95 %CI 0.6 – 0.9) sized hospitals was associated with a decreased risk of post-procedure bleeding. Biliary sphincterotomy (aOR 1.7; 95 %CI 1.2 – 2.3) and therapeutic ERCPs (aOR 1.1; 95 %CI 1.1 – 1.3) increased the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and pancreatic stent placement was associated with a decreased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (aOR 0.8; 95 %CI 0.7 – 0.9).

Conclusions Cirrhosis (both compensated and decompensated), performing therapeutic ERCPs and biliary sphincterotomy increase the risk of post-procedure bleeding. Performing ERCPs in large and medium sized hospitals may improve outcomes.

• References

• 1 NIH state-of-the-science statement on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for diagnosis and therapy. NIH Consens State Sci Statements 2002; 19: 1-26
• 2 Adler DG, Baron TH, Davila RE. et al. Standards of Practice Committee of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. ASGE guideline: the role of ERCP in diseases of the biliary tract and the pancreas. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 62: 1-8
• 3 Prat F, Tennenbaum R, Ponsot P. et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with liver cirrhosis. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 43: 127-131
• 4 Mosko JD, Nguyen GC. Increased perioperative mortality following bariatric surgery among patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 897-901
• 5 Adler DG, Haseeb A, Francis G. et al. Efficacy and safety of therapeutic ERCP in patients with cirrhosis: a large multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 353-359
• 6 Li DM, Zhao J, Zhao Q. et al. Safety and efficacy of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones in liver cirrhotic patients. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technol Med Sci 2014; 34: 612-615
• 7 de Franchis R. Evolving consensus in portal hypertension. Report of the Baveno IV consensus workshop on methodology of diagnosis and therapy in portal hypertension. J Hepatol 2005; 43: 167-176
• 8 Yadav D, O’Connell M, Papachristou GI. Natural history following the first attack of acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1096-1103
• 9 Inamdar S, Berzin TM, Sejpal DV. et al. Pregnancy is a risk factor for pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in a national cohort study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 107-114
• 10 Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR. et al. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 1998; 36: 8-27
• 11 Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 613-619
• 12 Southern DA, Quan H, Ghali WA. Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson/Deyo methods of comorbidity measurement in administrative data. Med Care 2004; 42: 355-360
• 13 Masci E, Toti G, Mariani A. et al. Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 417-423
• 14 Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G. et al. Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 1998; 48: 1-10
• 15 Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G. et al. Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 1781-1788
• 16 Dumonceau J-M, Andriulli A, Elmunzer BJ. et al. Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline – updated June 2014. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 799-815
• 17 Varadarajulu S, Kilgore ML, Wilcox CM. et al. Relationship among hospital ERCP volume, length of stay, and technical outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 338-347
• 18 Molodecky NA, Myers RP, Barkema HW. et al. Validity of administrative data for the diagnosis of primary sclerosing cholangitis: a population-based study. Liver Int 2011; 31: 712-720