Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: how to avoid and manage them.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a therapeutic procedure used to treat problems associated with biliary and pancreatic diseases. The benefits of ERCP over surgical treatment are well documented; however, complications including infection, pancreatitis, hemorrhage, and perforation can occur even in expert hands. Several factors, such as patient selection, skill of the operator, and the complexity of the procedure, can add to the intrinsic risks of ERCP This review outlines the current knowledge regarding ERCP complications and solutions for improved outcomes.

Bowel preparation with split-dose polyethylene glycol before colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a commonly used bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Unfortunately, the standard large-volume solution may reduce patient compliance. Split-dosing of PEG has been studied in various randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). However, results have been conflicting. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the role of split-dose PEG versus full-dose PEG for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. DESIGN: Multiple databases were searched (January 2011). RCTs on adults comparing full-dose and split-dose of PEG for bowel preparation before colonoscopy were included and analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of quality of bowel preparation, preparation compliance, willingness to repeat the same preparation, and side effects by using odds ratio (OR) by fixed and random-effects models. SETTING: Literature search. PATIENTS: Per RCTs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Satisfactory bowel preparation, willingness to repeat same bowel preparation, patient compliance, and side effects. RESULTS: Five trials met inclusion criteria (N = 1232). Split-dose PEG significantly increased the number of satisfactory bowel preparations (OR 3.70; 95% CI, 2.79-4.91; P < .01) and willingness to repeat the same preparation (OR 1.76; 95% CI, 1.06-2.91; P = .03) compared with full-dose PEG. Split-dose PEG also significantly decreased the number of preparation discontinuations (OR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28-0.98; P = .04) and nausea (OR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.79; P < .01) compared with full-dose PEG. LIMITATIONS: Limited number of studies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a split-dose PEG for bowel preparation before colonoscopy significantly improved the number of satisfactory bowel preparations, increased patient compliance, and decreased nausea compared with the full-dose PEG.

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a medical emergency requiring urgent endoscopy and diagnosis. However, adequate visualization is a necessity. Studies have been performed evaluating the efficacy of erythromycin infusion prior to endoscopy to improve visibility and therapeutic potential of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with varied results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed comparing the efficacy of erythromycin infusion prior to endoscopy in acute UGIB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multiple databases were searched. Meta-analysis for the effect of erythromycin prior to endoscopy in UGIB was analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of visualization of gastric mucosa, need for second endoscopy, and units of blood transfused using odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD). RESULTS: Four studies (N = 269) met the inclusion criteria. Erythromycin prior to endoscopy in UGIB demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in visualization of the gastric mucosa (OR 4.89; 95% CI 2.85-8.38, p < 0.01), a decrease in the need for a second endoscopy (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.24-0.74, p < 0.01), and a trend for less units of blood transfused (WMD -0.48; 95% CI -0.97 to 0.01, p = 0.05) with erythromycin as compared with no erythromycin. CONCLUSIONS: Erythromycin infusion prior to endoscopy in acute UGIB significantly improves visualization of gastric mucosa while decreasing the need for a second endoscopy. Based upon these results, erythromycin should be strongly considered prior to endoscopy in patients with UGIB.

Pancreatic stents for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis is a common complication of ERCP. Several randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the use of pancreatic stents in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis with varying results. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to assess the role of prophylactic pancreatic stents for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. DESIGN: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, and recent abstracts from major conference proceedings were searched. RCTs and retrospective or prospective, nonrandomized studies comparing prophylactic stent with placebo or no stent for post-ERCP pancreatitis were included for the meta-analysis and systematic review. Standard forms were used to extract data by 2 independent reviewers. The effect of stents (for RCTs) was analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of post-ERCP pancreatitis, hyperamylasemia, and grade of pancreatitis. Separate analyses were performed for each outcome by using the odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean difference. Random- or fixed-effects models were used. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed by calculating I(2) measure of inconsistency. SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis of patients undergoing pancreatic stent placement for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing ERCP. INTERVENTIONS: Pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis, hyperamylasemia, and complications after pancreatic stent placement. RESULTS: Eight RCTs (656 subjects) and 10 nonrandomized studies met the inclusion criteria (4904 subjects). Meta-analysis of the RCTs showed that prophylactic pancreatic stents decreased the odds of post-ERCP pancreatitis (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.38; P<.01). The absolute risk difference was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.8%-17.8%). The number needed to treat was 8 (95% CI, 6-11). Stents also decreased the level of hyperamylasemia (WMD, -309.22; 95% CI, -350.95 to -267.49; P≤.01). Similar findings were also noted from the nonrandomized studies. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size of some trials, different types of stents used, inclusion of low-risk patients in some studies, and lack of adequate study of long-term complications of pancreatic stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic stent placement decreases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia in high-risk patients.

Enteral feeding within three hours after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, tube feedings have been delayed after gastrostomy placement to the next day and up to 24 hours postprocedure. However, results from various randomized clinical trials (RCTs) indicate earlier feeding may be an option. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to analyze the effect of earlier feedings (≤3 h) after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. METHODS: Various medical databases and recent abstracts from major conference proceedings were searched (8/09). Only RCTs on adult subjects that compared early (≤3 h) versus delayed or next-day feedings after PEG placement were included. Meta-analysis was performed using pooled estimates of complications, death ≤72 hours, and significant increases in the number of postprocedural gastric residual volume during day 1 using odds ratio (OR) with the fixed and random effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed by calculating the I2 measure of inconsistency. RevMan 5.0 was utilized for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Five studies (N=355) met the inclusion criteria. No significant differences were noted between early (≤3 h) and delayed or next day feedings for patient complications [OR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39-1.53; P=0.47], death in ≤72 hours (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.18-1.99; P=0.40), and number of significant gastric residual volume during day 1 (OR 1.46; 95% CI, 0.75-2.84; P=0.27). No publication bias and no significant heterogeneity were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Early tube feeding ≤3 hours after PEG placement has no significant differences to delayed or next-day feeding in respect to complications, death in ≤72 hours, or number of significant gastric residual volumes at day 1.

Transfer of care communication: improving communication during inter-facility patient transfer.

Patient care during inter-facility transfer depends not only on the expertise provided by the receiving facility, but also on timely and accurate patient information received from the transferring institution. Our prospective study quantified compliance with inter-facility transfer communication and revealed an opportunity for improvement. Introduction of a simple written template to enhance communication between providers improved the quality of transfer information.