Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 30, 2026
Endaural Endoscopic Atticoantrotomy Retrograde Mastoidectomy using a Constant Suction Bone-drilling Technique
Published on: May 23, 2021
Risk factors for perforation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in post-reconstruction intestinal
Shinichi Takano1, Mitsuharu Fukasawa2, Hiroko Shindo1
1First Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi 409-3898, Japan.
Background:
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with surgically altered anatomy has been a major challenge to gastrointestinal endoscopists with low success rates for reaching the target site as well as high complication rates. The knowledge of ERCP-related risk factors is important for reducing unexpected complications.
Aim:
To identify ERCP-related risk factors for perforation in patients with surgically altered anatomy.
Methods:
The medical records of 187 patients with surgically altered anatomy who underwent ERCP at our institution between April 2009 and December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. An analysis of patient data, including age, sex, type of reconstruction, cause of surgery, aim of ERCP, success rate of reaching target site, success rate of procedure, adverse events, type of scope, time to reach the target site, and duration of procedure, was performed. In patients with Billroth-II reconstruction, additional potential risk factors were the shape of the inserted scope and whether the anastomosis was antecolic or retrocolic.
Results:
All patients (n = 187) had surgical anatomy, such as Billroth-I (n = 22), Billroth-II (n = 33), Roux-en-Y (n = 54), Child, or Whipple reconstruction (n = 75). ERCP was performed for biliary drainage in 43 cases (23%), stone removal in 29 cases (16%), and stricture dilation of anastomosis in 59 cases (32%). The scope was unable to reach the target site in 17 cases (9%), and an aimed procedure could not be accomplished in 54 cases (29%). Adverse events were pancreatitis (3%), hyperamylasemia (10%), cholangitis (6%), cholestasis (4%), excessive sedation (1%), perforation (2%), and others (3%). Perforation occurred in three cases, all of which were in patients with Billroth-II reconstruction; in these patients, further analysis revealed loop-shaped insertion of the scope to be a significant risk for perforation (P = 0.01).
Conclusion:
Risk factors for perforation during ERCP in patients with surgically altered anatomy were Billroth-II reconstruction and looping of the scope during Billroth-II procedure.
Related Concept Videos
01:26Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
01:22Esophageal Perforation-I: Introduction
The location of esophageal perforation can vary, occurring anywhere along the esophagus....
01:23Anatomy of the Intestines
Small Intestines
The small intestine is an ~7 meter-long tube with an inner diameter of just 2.5 cm. Since most nutrients are absorbed here, the inner lining of the...
01:12Relative Risk
01:28Esophageal Perforation-II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
Clinical Manifestations:
02:16Transcription Factors