Comparison of the results of early and elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with mild cholangitis
Öz
Aims: The optimal duration of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with mild cholangitis and when it should be performed is unclear. This study aimed to compare the results of patients with mild cholangitis who underwent early and elective ERCP.
Methods: This study was designed as a retrospective study to compare the results of elective (time from admission to ERCP>72 h) and early (time from admission to ERCP≤72 h) ERCP in patients with mild cholangitis according to the Tocyo 18 (TC18) guideline. The study included patients with naive papillae and mild cholangitis who underwent ERCP between February 2019 and 2023 at a single tertiary center’s gastroenterology clinic.
Results: A total of 432 mild cholangitis patients were included in our study. The mean age and ASA score of the elective ERCP group was slightly higher than the other group (respectively, p=0.039 and p=0.025). No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of technical and clinical success, mortality, ERCP-related adverse events, organ failure and intensive care unit admission. Length of hospital stay (LHS) was significantly (p<0.001) higher in the elective group compared to the early group.
Conclusion: Our study showed that in patients with mild cholangitis with uncertain optimal ERCP time, ERCP in the early or elective period had no significant effect on mortality and other adverse outcomes, but ERCP in the early period shortened the patients’ LHS duration.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Etik Beyan
Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee (date: 26.05.2021, approval number:26379996/74) and the study was conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Destekleyen Kurum
This research received no external funding.
Kaynakça
- 1. Attasaranya S, Fogel EL, Lehman GA. Choledocholithiasis, ascending cholangitis, and gallstone pancreatitis. Med Clin North Am. 2008;92(4):925-960. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2008.03.001
- 2. Kimura Y, Takada T, Kawarada Y, et al. Definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surg. 2007;14(1):15-26. doi: 10.1007/s00534-006-1152-y.
- 3. Tinusz B, Szapary L, Paladi B, et al. Short-course antibiotic treatment is not inferior to a long-course one in acute cholangitis: a systematic review. Digest Dis Sci. 2019;64(2):307-315. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5327-6
- 4. Gomi H, Solomkin JS, Schlossberg D, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):3-16. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.518
- 5. Hou LA, Laine L, Motamedi N, Shakian A, Lane C, Buxbaum J. Optimal timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in acute cholangitis. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2017;51(6):534-538. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000763
- 6. Hakuta R, Hamada T, Nakai Y, et al. No association of timing of endoscopic biliary drainage with clinical outcomes in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis. Digest Dis Sci. 2018;63(7):1937-1945. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5058-8
- 7. Miura F, Okamoto K, Takada T, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: initial management of acute biliary infection and flowchart for acute cholangitis. J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):31-40. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.509
- 8. Sugiura R, Naruse H, Yamamoto Y, et al. Very urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with early discharge in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2022;114(3):133-139. doi: 10.17235/reed.2021.7995/2021
- 9. Kiriyama S, Kozaka K, Takada T, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholangitis (with videos). J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):17-30. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.512
- 10. Sundararajan V, Henderson T, Perry C, Muggivan A, Quan H, Ghali WA. New ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(12):1288-1294. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.012
- 11. Owens WD, Felts JA, Spitznagel Jr EL. ASA physical status classifications: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiol. 1978;49(4):239-243. doi: 10.1097/00000542-197810000-00003
- 12. Cotton P, Lehman G, Vennes J, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37(3):383-393. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2
- 13. Lee F, Ohanian E, Rheem J, Laine L, Che K, Kim JJ. Delayed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with persistent organ failure in hospitalised patients with acute cholangitis. Alimentary Pharmacol Therapeut. 2015;42(2):212-220. doi: 10.1111/apt.13253
- 14. Huang YC, Whu CH, Lee MH, et al. Timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of acute cholangitis of different severity. World J Gastroenterol. 2022;28(38):5602. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i38.5602
- 15. Buxbaum JL, Buitrago C, Lee A, et al. ASGE guideline on the management of cholangitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;94(2):207-221. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.032
- 16. Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L, et al. Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endosc. 2019;51(05):472-491. doi: 10.1055/a-0862-0346
- 17. Du L, Cen M, Zheng X, et al. Timing of performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and inpatient mortality in acute cholangitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Translat Gastroenterol. 2020;11(3):e00158. doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000158
- 18. Iqbal U, Khara HS, Hu Y, et al. Emergent versus urgent ERCP in acute cholangitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(4):753-760. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019. 09.040
- 19. Lyu Y, Wang B, Ye S, Cheng Y. Impact of the Timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the treatment of acute cholangitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Surgic Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Techn. 2022;32(6):764. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000001110
Hafif kolanjitli hastalarda erken ve elektif endoskopik retrograd kolanjiyopankreatografi sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması
Öz
Amaçlar:
Hafif kolanjitli hastalarda endoskopik retrograd kolanjiyopankretografinin (ERCP) optimal süresi ve ne zaman yapılması gerektiği belirsizdir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, erken ve elektif ERCP yapılan hafif kolanjitli hastaların sonuçlarını karşılaştırmaktır.
Yöntemler:
Bu çalışma, Tocyo 18 (TC18) kılavuzuna göre hafif kolanjitli hastalarda elektif (başvurudan ERCP'ye kadar geçen süre>72 saat) ve erken (başvurudan ERCP'ye kadar geçen süre≤72 saat) ERCP sonuçlarını karşılaştırmak için retrospektif bir çalışma olarak tasarlanmıştır. Çalışmaya, Şubat 2019 ile 2023 tarihleri arasında tek bir üçüncü basamak merkezin gastroenteroloji kliniğinde ERCP yapılan naif papilla ve hafif kolanjit hastaları dahil edilmiştir.
Sonuçlar:
Çalışmamıza toplam 432 hafif kolanjit hastası dahil edildi. Elektif ERCP grubunun ortalama yaşı ve ASA skoru diğer gruptan biraz daha yüksekti (sırasıyla, p=0.039 ve p=0.025). İki grup arasında teknik ve klinik başarı, mortalite, ERCP ile ilişkili advers olaylar, organ yetmezliği ve yoğun bakım ünitesine yatış açısından anlamlı bir fark bulunmadı. Hastanede kalış süresi (LHS) elektif grupta erken gruba kıyasla anlamlı olarak (p<0.001) daha yüksekti.
Sonuç:
Çalışmamız, optimal ERCP zamanı belirsiz olan hafif kolanjitli hastalarda, erken veya elektif dönemde ERCP'nin mortalite ve diğer olumsuz sonuçlar üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi olmadığını, ancak erken dönemde ERCP'nin hastaların LHS süresini kısalttığını göstermiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- 1. Attasaranya S, Fogel EL, Lehman GA. Choledocholithiasis, ascending cholangitis, and gallstone pancreatitis. Med Clin North Am. 2008;92(4):925-960. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2008.03.001
- 2. Kimura Y, Takada T, Kawarada Y, et al. Definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surg. 2007;14(1):15-26. doi: 10.1007/s00534-006-1152-y.
- 3. Tinusz B, Szapary L, Paladi B, et al. Short-course antibiotic treatment is not inferior to a long-course one in acute cholangitis: a systematic review. Digest Dis Sci. 2019;64(2):307-315. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5327-6
- 4. Gomi H, Solomkin JS, Schlossberg D, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):3-16. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.518
- 5. Hou LA, Laine L, Motamedi N, Shakian A, Lane C, Buxbaum J. Optimal timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in acute cholangitis. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2017;51(6):534-538. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000763
- 6. Hakuta R, Hamada T, Nakai Y, et al. No association of timing of endoscopic biliary drainage with clinical outcomes in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis. Digest Dis Sci. 2018;63(7):1937-1945. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5058-8
- 7. Miura F, Okamoto K, Takada T, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: initial management of acute biliary infection and flowchart for acute cholangitis. J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):31-40. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.509
- 8. Sugiura R, Naruse H, Yamamoto Y, et al. Very urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with early discharge in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2022;114(3):133-139. doi: 10.17235/reed.2021.7995/2021
- 9. Kiriyama S, Kozaka K, Takada T, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018: diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholangitis (with videos). J Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sci. 2018;25(1):17-30. doi: 10.1002/jhbp.512
- 10. Sundararajan V, Henderson T, Perry C, Muggivan A, Quan H, Ghali WA. New ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(12):1288-1294. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.012
- 11. Owens WD, Felts JA, Spitznagel Jr EL. ASA physical status classifications: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiol. 1978;49(4):239-243. doi: 10.1097/00000542-197810000-00003
- 12. Cotton P, Lehman G, Vennes J, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37(3):383-393. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70740-2
- 13. Lee F, Ohanian E, Rheem J, Laine L, Che K, Kim JJ. Delayed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with persistent organ failure in hospitalised patients with acute cholangitis. Alimentary Pharmacol Therapeut. 2015;42(2):212-220. doi: 10.1111/apt.13253
- 14. Huang YC, Whu CH, Lee MH, et al. Timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of acute cholangitis of different severity. World J Gastroenterol. 2022;28(38):5602. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i38.5602
- 15. Buxbaum JL, Buitrago C, Lee A, et al. ASGE guideline on the management of cholangitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;94(2):207-221. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.032
- 16. Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L, et al. Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endosc. 2019;51(05):472-491. doi: 10.1055/a-0862-0346
- 17. Du L, Cen M, Zheng X, et al. Timing of performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and inpatient mortality in acute cholangitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Translat Gastroenterol. 2020;11(3):e00158. doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000158
- 18. Iqbal U, Khara HS, Hu Y, et al. Emergent versus urgent ERCP in acute cholangitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(4):753-760. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019. 09.040
- 19. Lyu Y, Wang B, Ye S, Cheng Y. Impact of the Timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the treatment of acute cholangitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Surgic Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Techn. 2022;32(6):764. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000001110
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Konular | Gastroenteroloji ve Hepatoloji |
| Bölüm | Research Articles [en] Araştırma Makaleleri [tr] |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 30 Nisan 2024 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 8 Şubat 2024 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 3 Nisan 2024 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2024 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dergimiz; TR-Dizin ULAKBİM, ICI World of Journal's, Index Copernicus, Directory of Research Journals Indexing (DRJI), General Impact Factor, Google Scholar, Researchgate, WorldCat (OCLC), CrossRef (DOI), ROAD, ASOS İndeks, Türk Medline İndeks, Eurasian Scientific Journal Index (ESJI) ve Türkiye Atıf Dizini'nde indekslenmektedir.
EBSCO, DOAJ, OAJI, ProQuest dizinlerine müracaat yapılmış olup, değerlendirme aşamasındadır.
Makaleler "Çift-Kör Hakem Değerlendirmesi”nden geçmektedir.
Üniversitelerarası Kurul (ÜAK) Eşdeğerliği: Ulakbim TR Dizin'de olan dergilerde yayımlanan makale [10 PUAN] ve 1a, b, c hariç uluslararası indekslerde (1d) olan dergilerde yayımlanan makale [5 PUAN].
Note: Our journal is not WOS indexed and therefore is not classified as Q.
You can download Council of Higher Education (CoHG) [Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YÖK)] Criteria) decisions about predatory/questionable journals and the author's clarification text and journal charge policy from your browser. About predatory/questionable journals and journal charge policy
Not: Dergimiz WOS indeksli değildir ve bu nedenle Q sınıflamasına dahil değildir.
Yağmacı/şüpheli dergilerle ilgili Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YÖK) kararları ve yazar açıklama metni ile dergi ücret politikası: Yağmacı/Şaibeli Dergiler ve Dergi Ücret Politikası