Digestive perforations related to endoscopy procedures: a local management charter based on local evidence and experts’ opinion

Abstract

Background and study aims Perforations are a known adverse event of endoscopy procedures; a proposal for appropriate management should be available in each center as recommended by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The objective of this study was to establish a charter for the management of endoscopic perforations, based on local evidence.

Patients and methods Patients were included if they experienced partial or complete perforation during an endoscopic procedure between 2008 and 2018 (retrospectively until 2016, then prospectively). Perforations (size, location, closure) and management (imagery, antibiotics, surgery) were analyzed. Using these results, a panel of experts was asked to propose a consensual management charter.

Results A total of 105 patients were included. Perforations occurred mainly during therapeutic procedures (91, 86.7%). Of the perforations, 78 (74.3 %) were diagnosed immediately and managed during the procedure; 69 of 78 (88.5 %) were successfully closed. Closures were more effective during therapeutic procedures (60 of 66, 90.9 %) than during diagnostic procedures (9 of 12, 75.0 %, P = 0.06). Endoscopic closure was effective for 37 of 38 perforations (97.4 %) < 0.5 cm, and for 26 of 34 perforations (76.5 %) ≥ 0.5 cm (P < 0.05). For perforations < 0.5 cm, systematic computed tomography (CT) scan, antibiotics, or surgical evaluation did not improve the outcome. Four of 105 deaths (3.8 %) occurred after perforation, one of which was attributable to the perforation itself.

Conclusions Detection and closure of perforations during endoscopic procedure had a better outcome compared to delayed perforations; perforations < 0.5 cm had a very good prognosis and CT scan, surgeon evaluation, or antibiotics are probably not necessary when the endoscopic closure is confidently performed. This work led to proposal of a local management charter.

• References

• 1 Pedersen L, Sorensen N, Lindorff-Larsen K. et al. Colonoscopy adverse events: are we getting the full picture?. Scand J Gastroenterol 2020; 55: 979-987
• 2 Benazzato L, Zorzi M, Antonelli G. et al. Colonoscopy-related adverse events and mortality in an Italian organized colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 501-508
• 3 Yu JX, Lin JL, Oliver M. et al. Trends in EMR for nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 124-131.e4
• 4 Akintoye E, Kumar N, Aihara H. et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2016; 4: E1030-E1044
• 5 Penz D, Ferlitsch A, Waldmann E. et al. Impact of adenoma detection rate on detection of advanced adenomas and endoscopic adverse events in a study of over 200,000 screening colonoscopies. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 135-141
• 6 Rabeneck L, Paszat LF, Hilsden RJ. et al. Bleeding and perforation after outpatient colonoscopy and their risk factors in usual clinical practice. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1899-1906.e1
• 7 Bielawska B, Day AG, Lieberman DA. et al. Risk factors for early colonoscopic perforation include non-gastroenterologist endoscopists: a multivariable analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 85-92
• 8 Paspatis GA, Dumonceau J-M, Barthet M. et al. Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 693-711
• 9 Burgess NG, Bassan MS, McLeod D. et al. Deep mural injury and perforation after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection: a new classification and analysis of risk factors. Gut 2017; 66: 1779-1789
• 10 Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y. et al. A prospective, multicenter study of 1111 colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissections (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 1217-1225
• 11 Farhat S, Chaussade S, Ponchon T. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in a European setting. A multi-institutional report of a technique in development. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 664-670
• 12 Chung I-K, Lee JH, Lee S-H. et al. Therapeutic outcomes in 1000 cases of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric neoplasms: Korean ESD Study Group multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 1228-1235
• 13 Derbyshire E, Hungin P, Nickerson C. et al. Colonoscopic perforations in the English National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 861-870
• 14 Voermans RP, Le Moine O, von Renteln D. et al. Efficacy of endoscopic closure of acute perforations of the gastrointestinal tract. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10: 603-608
• 15 Magdeburg R, Sold M, Post S. et al. Differences in the endoscopic closure of colonic perforation due to diagnostic or therapeutic colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 2013; 48: 862-867
• 16 Jovanovic I, Zimmermann L, Fry LC. et al. Feasibility of endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic colon perforation occurring during colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 550-555
• 17 de’Angelis N, Di Saverio S, Chiara O. et al. 2017 WSES guidelines for the management of iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation. World J Emerg Surg 2018; 13: 5
• 18 Minami S, Gotoda T, Ono H. et al. Complete endoscopic closure of gastric perforation induced by endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer using endoclips can prevent surgery (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 596-601
• 19 Pissas D, Ypsilantis E, Papagrigoriadis S. et al. Endoscopic management of iatrogenic perforations during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal polyps: a case series. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2015; 8: 176-181
• 20 Takamaru H, Saito Y, Yamada M. et al. Clinical impact of endoscopic clip closure of perforations during endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 494-502.e1
• 21 Byeon J-S. Colonic perforation: can we manage it endoscopically?. Clin Endosc 2013; 46: 495-499
• 22 Magdeburg R, Collet P, Post S. et al. Endoclipping of iatrogenic colonic perforation to avoid surgery. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 1500-1504
• 23 Pioche M, Bertrand G, Rivory J. Endoscopic perforation during ERM or ESD: who should take care of the patient?. Endosc Int Open 2018; 06: E313-E314
• 24 Baron TH, Wong Kee Song LM, Zielinski MD. et al. A comprehensive approach to the management of acute endoscopic perforations (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 838-859
• 25 Tamiya Y, Nakahara K, Kominato K. et al. Pneumomediastinum is a frequent but minor complication during esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy 2009; 42: 8-14
• 26 Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Kakushima N. et al. Successful nonsurgical management of perforation complicating endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasms. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 1001-1006
• 27 Maeda Y, Hirasawa D, Fujita N. et al. Mediastinal emphysema after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: its prevalence and clinical significance: mediastinal emphysema after esophageal ESD. Digest Endosc 2011; 23: 221-226
• 28 Shin YJ, Kim YH, Lee KH. et al. CT findings of post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome and colonic perforation in patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy. Clin Radiol 2016; 71: 1030-1036
• 29 Anderson ML, Pasha TM, Leighton JA. Endoscopic perforation of the colon: lessons from a 10-year study. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 3418-3422
• 30 Paspatis GA, Arvanitakis M, Dumonceau J-M. et al. Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement – Update 2020. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 792-810