Endoscopy 2018; 50(04): S69
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1637231
ESGE Days 2018 oral presentations
21.04.2018 – ERCP 3: Hot topics and post liver transplantation
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

DEVELOPMENT OF ERCP REGISTRY FOR QUALITY CONTROL AND BENCHMARKING

D Pécsi
1   University of Pécs, Insitute for Translational Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
S Gódi
2   University of Pécs, Department of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
F Pakodi
2   University of Pécs, Department of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
P Nagy
1   University of Pécs, Insitute for Translational Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
T Molnár
1   University of Pécs, Insitute for Translational Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
P Hegyi
1   University of Pécs, Insitute for Translational Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
,
Á Vincze
2   University of Pécs, Department of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, Pécs, Hungary
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 March 2018 (online)

Also available at
 

Aims:

Monitoring the efficacy and safety of invasive endoscopic procedures is crucial. One of the primary aims of our registry is to monitor relevant outcome data of ERCP.

Methods:

Hungarian experts in ERCP were invited at the initiation of the registry for discussion and consensus. A web-based case report form (https://ercp.tm-pte.org/) was developed and tested from January 2017 at our department.

Results:

ERCP related data of consecutive patients were collected prospectively after approval by the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee and after informed consent from the patients. The data from the first 400 procedures of 301 patients were analyzed to demonstrate the usability of the registry. Difficult biliary access was observed in 56 of 207 (27.1%) cases with native papilla, and 48 (85.7%) of them had successful biliary access at the first ERCP. Successful biliary cannulation was achieved in 93.8% of all procedures where the papilla was reached. Immediate complications were observed in 43 cases (10.75%), 19 mild (4.75%) and 2 (0.5%) moderate severe bleeding, 18 cases of hypoxia occurred (4.5%, all mild). Only 4 mild and 2 moderately severe post-ERCP pancreatitis developed (1.5%). Cholangitis was observed in 4 cases (1%), while late bleeding in 2 cases (0.5%, moderate severity). Follow-up was conducted 30 days after the ERCP by a telephone call and/or reviewing health care documentations to observe long-term outcome in 231 patients (76.3%). 16 patients (6.9%) died during this period, but only 1 (0.4%) death was related to the procedure (due to unresolved cholangitis). All other quality indicators can be monitored by using the ERCP registry.

Conclusions:

The ERCP registry is an essential tool for measuring quality indicators. The universal usage will allow benchmarking at individual, institutional and national level and will help in quality improvement. Effectivity, safety and impact on different pancreatobiliary disorders will be also measurable.