Respiratory support with nasal high flow without supplemental oxygen in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography under moderate sedation: a prospective, randomized, single-center clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Nasal high flow (NHF) may reduce hypoxia and hypercapnia during an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedure under sedation. The authors tested a hypothesis that NHF with room air during ERCP may prevent intraoperative hypercapnia and hypoxemia. METHODS: In the prospective, open-label, single-center, clinical trial, 75 patients undergoing ERCP performed with moderate sedation were randomized to receive NHF with room air (40 to 60 L/min, n = 37) or low-flow O2 via a nasal cannula (1 to 2 L/min, n = 38) during the procedure. Transcutaneous CO2, peripheral arterial O2 saturation, a dose of administered sedative and analgesics were measured. RESULTS: The primary outcome was the incidence of marked hypercapnia during an ERCP procedure under sedation observed in 1 patient (2.7%) in the NHF group and in 7 patients (18.4%) in the LFO group; statistical significance was found in the risk difference (-15.7%, 95% CI -29.1 - -2.4, p = 0.021) but not in the risk ratio (0.15, 95% CI 0.02 - 1.13, p = 0.066). In secondary outcome analysis, the mean time-weighted total PtcCO2 was 47.2 mmHg in the NHF group and 48.2 mmHg in the LFO group, with no significant difference (-0.97, 95% CI -3.35 - 1.41, p = 0.421). The duration of hypercapnia did not differ markedly between the two groups either [median (range) in the NHF group: 7 (0 - 99); median (range) in the LFO group: 14.5 (0 - 206); p = 0.313] and the occurrence of hypoxemia during an ERCP procedure under sedation was observed in 3 patients (8.1%) in the NHF group and 2 patients (5.3%) in the LFO group, with no significant difference (p = 0.674). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory support by NHF with room air did not reduce marked hypercapnia during ERCP under sedation relative to LFO. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of hypoxemia between the groups that may indicate an improvement of gas exchanges by NHF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: jRCTs072190021 . The full date of first registration on jRCT: August 26, 2019.

Real-life patency of plastic biliary stents in the pandemic era: is stent removal after 6 months safe and effective?

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic conditioned the optimal timing of some endoscopic procedures. ESGE guidelines recommend replacement or removal of the plastic biliary stents within 3-6 months to reduce the risk of complications. Our aim was to analyse the outcomes of patients who had delayed plastic biliary stent removal following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the pandemic era. METHODS: Retrospective study including consecutive ERCPs with plastic biliary stent placement between January 2019 and December 2021. Delayed removal was defined as presence of biliary stent >6 months after ERCP. The evaluated outcomes were stent migration, stent dysfunction, obstructive jaundice, cholangitis, acute pancreatitis, hospitalization, and biliary pathology-related mortality. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty ERCPs were included, 56.7% male patients, with a mean age of 69.4 ± 15.7 years. Indications for plastic biliary stent insertion were choledocholithiasis (72.5%), benign biliary stricture (20.0%), and post-cholecystectomy fistula (7.5%). Delayed stent removal occurred in 32.5% of the cases. The median time to stent removal was 3.5 ± 1.3 months for early removal and 8.6 ± 3.1 months for delayed removal. Patients who had delayed stent removal did not have a significantly higher frequency of stent migration (20.5 vs 11.1%, p = 0.17), stent dysfunction (17.9 vs 13.6%, p = 0.53), hospitalization (17.9 vs 14.8%, p = 0.66), obstructive jaundice (2.6 vs 0.0%, p = 0.33), cholangitis (10.3 vs 13.6%, p = 0.77), acute pancreatitis (0.0 vs 1.2%, p = 1.0), or biliary pathology-related mortality (2.6 vs 1.2%, p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed plastic biliary stent removal does not seem to have a negative impact on patients' outcomes. In the current pandemic situation, while scheduled endoscopic procedures may have to be postponed, elective removal of plastic biliary stents can be safely deferred.

Biodegradable biliopancreatic stents could help conserve health care resources during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Considering limited resources for follow-up due to COVID-19, we used biodegradable stents (BPBS) for a range of biliopancreatic diseases. AIMS: This observational multicenter study aimed to evaluate technical safety and give first insights into clinical utility. METHODS: Technical success, clinical success, and necessity of follow-up visits for BPBS placed at three Austrian tertiary care hospitals between April 2020 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: 63 stents were deployed in 60 patients. Main indications were prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP; n = 30/63; 48%) and bridging of prolonged waiting times to cholecystectomy (n = 21/63; 33%). Median time to surgery was 47 days (range: 136 days). The technical success rate was 94% (n = 59/63; 95% CI [0.84, 0.98]). Technical difficulties primarily arose with dislocations. Clinical success was achieved in 90% (n = 57/63; 95% CI [0.80, 0.96]). Clinical failure despite successful deployment was caused by papillary bleeding (1 patient) and cholestasis (1 patient). Both required reinterventions. No follow-up visits were needed in 97% of cases (n = 57/59; 95% CI [0.88, 1.00]). CONCLUSION: Biodegradable stents could help conserve health care resources without compromising treatment standards for PEP prophylaxis, which is particularly valuable in times of restricted resources. First insights into feasibility as bridging to cholecystectomy indicate a favorable safety profile.

Lockdown period during SARS COVID-19 endemic outbreak in Taiwan did not cause an increase of the complications nor mortality of patients received endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019, known as a widespread, aerosol spreading disease, has affected >549 000 000 people since 2019. During the lockdown period, dramatic reduction of elective endoscopic procedures, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, had been reported worldwide, leading to delayed diagnosis and treatment. Nevertheless, whether patients' hospital stays and complication rate of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during the lockdown period were influenced by the pandemic still remains controversial. METHODS: Patients who diagnosed with obstructive jaundice and acute cholangitis in the lockdown period, May 16 to July 26, 2021, were compared to the same prepandemic period in 2019. RESULTS: A total of 204 patients in 2019 and 168 patients in 2021 were diagnosed with acute biliary cholangitis or obstructive jaundice, and 82 of the patients in 2019 and 77 patients in 2021 underwent ERCP ( p = 0.274). Patients whose quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score was ≥ 2 occurred more during the lockdown period than during the normal period (24/77, 31.1% vs 12/82, 14.6%; p = 0.013). The initial laboratory data, including, total bilirubin (4.12 in 2021 vs 3.08 mg/dL in 2019; p = 0.014), gamma-glutamyl transferase (378 in 2021 vs 261 U/L in 2019; p = 0.009), and alkaline phosphatase (254 in 2021 vs 174 U/L in 2019; p = 0.002) were higher during the lockdown period compared to 2019. Hospital stay was statistically significant longer in the lockdown period (11 days [7.00-22.00] in 2021 vs 8 days in 2019 [6.00-12.00]; p value = 0.02). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA ≥ 2 (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.837, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.471-10.003; p = 0.006), and malignant etiology (HR = 2.932, 95% CI = 1.271-6.765; p = 0.012) were the statistically significant factors for a prolonged hospital stay, which was defined as hospital stay >21 days. ERCP-related complications and mortality rate were not statistically different between the two periods. CONCLUSION: Patients from May 16 to July 26, 2021, the lockdown period, had longer hospital stays and higher biliary tract enzyme levels, which indicated more severe disease. Nevertheless, ERCP could be safely and successfully performed even during the medical level 3 alert lockdown period without causing an increase in procedure-related complications and mortality.

Biliary stents are forgotten more frequently in elderly patients

Background/aim: Plastic biliary stents that remain in situ for more than 12 months, called forgotten biliary stents (FBSs), can cause complications such as cholangitis, stent migration, stent occlusion, and perforation. Materials and methods: The medical records of patients who underwent ERCP procedures from December 2016 to December 2020 were analysed retrospectively. Data on patient characteristics, indications for ERCP and stenting, stent types, stenting duration, complications, and causes of FBSs were obtained from the hospital's database. Results: A total of 48 cases with FBSs were analysed. The mean age (SD) of the patients was 71.23 years (±12.165), the male-to-female ratio was 23/25 (0.92), and the mean stenting duration was 27.12 months (range: 12­84 months). The most common indication for biliary stenting was irretrievable choledochal stones (40/48). Stone formation (79%) and proximal stent migration (26.4%) were the most frequent complications. The patients in the FBS group were significantly older than those from whom stents were removed in a timely manner (71.23 vs. 62.43 years, p < 0.001). Endoscopic treatment was possible in all cases; surgery was not required in any case. The most common cause of FBSs cited by patients was not having been informed about the need for long-term management of their stents (n = 14, 29.2%) Conclusion: FBSs are potentially problematic particularly in elderly patients. Communication with the patient to remind them of the need for stent management is important for preventing FBSs.

Risk evaluation of duodenoscope-associated infections in the Netherlands calls for a heightened awareness of device-related infections: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The risk of exogenous infections from endoscopic procedures is often cited as almost negligible (1 infection in 1.8 million procedures); however, this risk is based on older literature and does not seem to match the number of infectious outbreaks due to contaminated duodenoscopes reported after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Using Dutch data, we aimed to estimate the minimum risk of duodenoscope-associated infection (DAI) and colonization (DAC) in patients undergoing ERCP. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified all DAI outbreaks in the Netherlands reported between 2008 and 2019. Included cases were confirmed by molecular matching of patient and duodenoscope cultures. Risk ratios were calculated based on the total number of ERCPs performed during the study period. RESULTS: Three outbreaks were reported and published between 2008 and 2018, including 21 confirmed DAI cases and 52 confirmed DAC cases. The estimated number of ERCPs performed during the same period was 181 209-227 006. The calculated minimum estimated DAI risk was approximately 0.01 % and the minimum estimated DAC risk was 0.023 %-0.029 %. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated risk of DAI in Dutch ERCP practice was at least 180 times higher than previously published risk estimates. The actual risk is likely to be (much) higher due to underreporting of infections caused by multidrug-resistant organisms and sensitive bacteria. Greater awareness by healthcare personnel involved in endoscopy and endoscope cleaning is required, as well as innovative technical solutions to contain and ultimately eliminate DAIs.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a single center experience.

BACKGROUND: the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on several aspects of health care services worldwide. The aim of the study was to determine its influence on the case volume, success rate and complication rate of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHOD: all patients who underwent ERCP one-year before and after applying COVID-19 safety measures at the Qena University Hospital were included. Data were collected from the patients' records, analyzed and compared. RESULTS: a total of 250 patients underwent ERCP between April 1st, 2019 and March 31st, 2021, and the mean age of participants was 52 ± 18 years. There was a 5 % increase in case volume after applying COVID-19 safety measures (128 vs 122) and the total procedure time was significantly shorter (42 vs 46 minutes, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the overall success rate and complication rate. Procedure success significantly correlated with cannulation attempts and total procedure time in both groups, and serum bilirubin and cannulation time in the pre-COVID-19 patients and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) in post-COVID patients. ERCP-related complications significantly correlated with cannulation attempts in both groups, and ALP, international normalized ratio (INR), cannulation time and total procedure time in pre-COVID-19 patients, and platelet count and amylase in post-COVID patients. Two patients were confirmed COVID-19 cases at the time of ERCP; therapeutic targets were achieved in both with a smooth post-ERCP recovery. Three out of nine ERCP team members caught a mild to moderate COVID-19 infection and recovered after receiving proper management. CONCLUSION: our result show that there was no negative impact of using COVID-19 safety measures and precautions on the case-volume, indications, overall outcome or complication rate of ERCP.

Management of our endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography cases during the pandemic process.

AIM: Endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) is a technique in which endoscope and radiological imaging are used in combination in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases related to the pancreaticobiliary system. Our aim in this study is to discuss all aspects of approach strategies to ERCP patients whose operation is mandatory during the pandemic period, to draw the future perspective and to summarize the measures that the surgical team should take in terms of their own health and public health. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the pandemic period between 14 March and 31 December 2020, we accepted 270 patients to our ERCP unit. We made our analysis regarding the management of these cases under COVID-19 pandemic conditions. We presented our patients' form of application, application complaints, COVID- 19 contact stories, pre-procedure preparations, and our prevention methods to prevent COVID-19 transmission of the patient and healthcare team during the procedure, and post-procedure patient follow-up methods, and the management of our COVID-19-positive patients before the procedure. FINDINGS: ERCP was applied to 270 patients. The COVID-19 test of 13 patients was positive before the procedure and they were taken to our COVID-19 isolated service. There was no problem in the anesthesia of patients who had positive COVID-19 PCR test and subsequently underwent ERCP. There was no difference in the discharge time after the ERCP procedure. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected the management and safety of ERCP units. ERCP procedures should be performed by determining the urgency of patients so that their treatment needs are not delayed. Postponing cases without planning can develop an increased workload in centers offering ERCP, and this situation can lead to further delays or negative consequences.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects of Enhanced Personal Protective Equipment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Personal protective equipment (PPE) decreases the risk of disease contagion, and because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced PPE (EPPE) is widely used during endoscopic procedures including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of EPPE on ERCP success parameters compared to standard PPE (SPPE). METHODS: ERCP procedures were evaluated retrospectively and ERCP outcomes were compared for similar time periods as before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary outcomes were cannulation time, number of cannulation attempts, cannulation success rate, difficult cannulation rate, undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rate, ERCP-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty ERCP procedures were examined. One hundred and fifty-nine procedures were excluded due to missing data, previous sphincterotomy or altered anatomy. Of the final eligible sample size of 221 ERCPs, 93 were performed using SPPE and 128 were performed under EPPE. Indications of ERCP and demographic parameters were similar between groups. The majority of the ERCP cases included were for benign biliary obstruction of common bile duct stones (88.7%). No significant differences were detected in overall technical success (91.4% vs 92.2%, p = 0.832), cannulation success rates (94.6% vs 96.8%, p = 0.403), cannulation times (median times of both groups were 3 min, p = 0.824), difficult cannulation rates (37.6% vs 33.6%, p = 0.523), undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rates (29% vs 22.7%, p = 0.593), number of cannulation attempts (2.80 vs 2.71, p = 0.731), ERCP-related adverse events (9.7% vs 10.9%, p = 0.762), and length of hospital stay (6.63 vs 6.92 days, p = 0.768) between SPPE and EPPE groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Biliary obstructions of common bile duct stones were the major indication of ERCP in the current study. The use of EPPE had no negative effects on ERCP performance in this patient group. ERCP can be effectively performed under EPPE.