Download PDF
Endoskopie heute 2004; 17(4): 205-212
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-832467
Originalarbeit

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Duodenalperforation nach EST/EPT: Wann operieren?[*]

Duodenal Perforation after Endoscopic Sphincterotomy - Surgical Intervention: When and How?B. C. Manegold1
  • 1Sektion Endoskopie und Sonographie der Chirurgischen Universitätsklinik Mannheim(Sektionsleiter: Dr. Georg Kähler)
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
11 January 2005 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Duodenalperforation nach EST/EPT ist mit ca. 1 % eine nicht seltene, leider nicht ganz vermeidbare Komplikation. Sie wird bei deutlicher Manifestation eines retroperitonealen Luftaustrittes allein leicht übertherapiert. Bei versteckten, nicht wahrgenommenen Zeichen nimmt sie leicht einen tückischen Verlauf. Es wird zwischen kontinenter (gedeckter) und inkontinenter (offener) Perforation differenziert. Die Therapie wird weniger nach dem initialen klinischen Befund, mehr nach dem Verlauf in der Bildgebung (Sonographie und KM-CT) innerhalb der ersten 24 Stunden entschieden. Neben Beobachtung und konservativen Maßnahmen sind endoskopische Interventionen wie Re-ERCP mit nasobiliärer Ablaufsonde (kontinente Perforation) in hohem Maße erfolgversprechend, sofern sie baldmöglichst zum Einsatz kommen. Bei progredient kompliziertem Verlauf (inkontinente Perforation) muss frühzeitig, d. h. rechtzeitig vor Eintritt septischer Komplikationen operiert werden. Operation heißt: Gallenwegsrevision mit T-Drain und Drainage des Retroperitoneums. Eine Notfalloperation in der Sepsis hat eine hohe Mortalität und wäre bei sorgfältiger Befunderhebung, sorgfältiger Befundkontrolle und frühzeitigem chirurgischem Konsil in den meisten Fällen vermeidbar. Spätabszesse erfordern eine Spätintervention.

Abstract

EST/EPT is charged with a certain amount of duodenal perforations, ranging about 1 %, a complication not completely avoidable. Post-EST/EPT-perforation may be overtreated by overrating some impressive signs, such as obvious retroperitoneal or mediastinal air leakages. Otherwise, with more discrete or equivocal symptoms, duodenal perforation may be overlooked, undervalued and may take a disastrous course. There is a substantial therapeutic difference in continent and incontinent leakages. Definitive therapeutic decisions are not made by the initial clinical symptoms alone, but mainly by close observation of the clinical course and the change of findings in ultrasound and CT within the first 24 hours post EST/EPT. In continent perforations, conservative treatment and endoscopic interventions such as re-ERCP and nasobiliary drainages are highly effective, if they come to work as soon as possible. In cases of productive leakages and progressive complicative signs, it has to be operated upon urgently, before the onset of septic forebodings. Operation means open surgery with open revision of the CBD, T-tube-drain and retroperitoneal drainage, not the closure of the retroperitoneal leak at first hand. Emergency laparotomy in septic situations has a high mortality about 50 %, this should and could be avoided by careful investigation, strong clinical controls and early surgical consultation in all cases.

Schlüsselwörter

Duodenalperforation durch EST/EPT - endoskopische Therapie - chirurgische Therapie

Key words

Duodenal perfortation by EST/EPT - endoscopic therapy - surgical therapy

1 Nach einem Vortrag während des 34. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Endoskopie und bildgebende Verfahren (DGE-BV), München (18.-21.3.2004)

Literatur

  • 1 Aliperti G. Complications related to diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography.  Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Amer. 1996;  6 379-407
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Barthet M, Lesavre N, Desjeux A. et al . Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: results from a single tertiary referral center.  Endoscopy. 2002;  34 991-997
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bell R CW, van Stiegmann G, Goff J. et al . Decision for surgical management of perforation following endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Am Surgeon. 1991;  57 237-240
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Booth F VMCL, Doerr R J, Khalafi R S. et al . Surgical management of complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy with precut papillotomy.  Am J Surgery. 1990;  159 132-136
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Byrne P, Leung J WC, Cotton P B. Retroperitoneal perforation during duodenoscopic sphincterotomy.  Radiology. 1984;  150 383-384
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Chung R S, Sivak M V, Ferguson D R. Surgical decisions in the management of duodenal perforation complicating endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Am J Surgery. 1993;  165 700-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ciaccia D, Branch M S, Baillie J. Pneumomediastinum after endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1995;  90 475-477
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Classen M. Zurück in die Zukunft: Die erste endoskopische Papillotomie in Erlangen. Die Geschichte der Papillotomie. So war es!.  Min Invasiv Chir. 2004;  13 37-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cohen S A, Siegel J H, Kasmin F E. Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP.  Abdom Imaging. 1996;  21 385-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cotton P B, Lehman G, Vennes J. et al . Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;  37 383-393
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cotton P B. Outcomes of endoscopy procedures: struggling towards definitions.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;  40 514-518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 deVries J H, Duijm L EM, Dekker W. et al . CT before and after ERCP: detection of pancreatic pseudotumor, asymptomatic retroperitoneal perforation, and duodenal diverticulum.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;  45 231-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Diller R, Senninger N, Kautz G, Tübergen D. Stent migration necessitating surgical intervention.  Surg Endosc. 2003;  17 1803-1807
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Dunham F, Bourgeois N, Gelin M. et al . Retroperitoneal perforations following endoscopic sphincterotomy; clinical course and management.  Endoscopy. 1982;  14 92-96
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Enns R, Eloubeidi M A, Mergener K. et al . ERCP-related perforations: risk factors and management.  Endoscopy. 2002;  34 293-298
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fleischer D E, van de Mierop F, Eisen G M. et al . A new system for defining endoscopic complications emphasizing the measure of importance.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;  45 128-133
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Freeman M L, Nelson D B, Sherman S. et al . Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.  New Engl J Med. 1996;  335 909-918
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Freeman M L. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: a review.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 288-297
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Freeman M L. Adverse outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.  Reviews Gastroenterol Disorders. 2002;  2 147-168
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Genzlinger J L, McPhee M S, Fisher J K. et al . Significance of retroperitoneal air after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 1267-1270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Herman J B, Levine M S, Long W B. Portal venous gas as a complication of ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1995;  90 828-829
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Howard T J, Tan T, Lehman G A. et al . Classification and management of perforations complicating endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Surgery. 1999;  126 658-665
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Huibregtse K. Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy and their prevention.  New Engl J Med. 1996;  335 961-963
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Husain S, Garmager K, McPhee M S. et al . The significance of retroperitoneal air following endoscopic sphincterotomy (Abstract).  Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;  41 400
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Johlin F C, Tucker R D, Ferguson S. The effect of guidewires during electrosurgical sphincterotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1992;  38 536-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Jowell P S, Baillie J, Branch M S. et al . Quantitative assessment of procedural competence. A prospective study of training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography.  Ann Int Med. 1996;  125 983-989
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kaneko T, Akamatsu T, Shimodaira K. et al . Nonsurgical treatment of duodenal perforation by endoscopic repair using a clipping device.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  50 410-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kuhlman J E, Fishman E K, Milligan F D. et al . Complications of endoscopic retrograde sphincterotomy: computed tomographic evaluation.  Gastrointest.Radiol. 1989;  14 127-132
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Leese T, Neoptolemos J P, Carr-Locke D L. Successes, failures, early complications and their management following endoscopic sphincterotomy: results in 394 consecutive patients from a single centre.  Br J Surg. 1985;  72 215-219
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G. et al . Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  48 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Martin D F, Tweedle D EF. Retroperitoneal perforation during ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy: causes, clinical features and management.  Endoscopy. 1990;  22 174-175
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Neumann M, Friedl S, Egger K. et al . Prospektive Evaluierung einer Score-Card für die Beurteilung der diagnostischen ÖGD: Inter-Observer-Varianz.  Z Gastroenterol. 2002;  40 857-862
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Neoptolemos J P, Harvey M H, Slater N D. et al . Abdominal wall bile staining and biliscrotum after retroperitoneal perforation following endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Brit J Surg. 1984;  71 684
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Pannu H K, Fishman E K. Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography: spectrum of abnormalities demonstrated with CT.  RadioGraphics. 2001;  21 1441-1453
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Preetha M, Chung Y FA, Chan W H. et al . Surgical management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations.  ANZ J Surg. 2003;  73 1011-1014
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Ragunath K, Thomas L A, Cheung W Y. et al . Objective evaluation of ERCP procedures: a simple grading scale for evaluating technical difficulty.  Postgrad Med J. 2003;  79 467-470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Sahel J. Komplikationen nach endoskopischer Papillotomie - Ergebnisse einer internationalen Umfrage.  Leber Magen Darm. 1987;  6 364-370
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Sakata M, Yasuda K, Nakajima M. Duodenal perforation by manipulation of the duodenoscope during ERCP (Jap).  Endoscopia Digestiva. 2003;  15 1479-1480
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sarr M G, Fishman E K, Milligan F D. et al . Pancreatitis or duodenal perforation after peri-Vaterian therapeutic endoscopic procedures: diagnosis, differentiation, and management.  Surgery. 1986;  100 461-466
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Scarlett P Y, Falk G L. The management of perforation of the duodenum following endoscopic sphincterotomy: a proposal for selective therapy.  Aust N Z J Surg. 1994;  64 843-846
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Sebastian S, Byrne A T, Torreggiani W C. et al . Endoscopic closure of iatrogenic duodenal perforation during endoscopic ultrasound.  Endoscopy. 2004;  36 245
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Sherman S, Ruffolo T A, Hawes R H. et al . Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Gastroenterology. 1991;  101 1068-1075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Stapfer M, Selby R R, Stain C S. et al . Management of duodenal perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy.  Ann Surg. 2000;  232 191-198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Wicks A CB, Robertson G SM, Veitch P S. Structured training and assessment in ERCP has become essential for the Calman era.  Gut. 1999;  45 154-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Zissin R, Shapiro-Feinberg M, Oscadchy A. et al . Retroperitoneal perforation during endoscopic sphincterotomy: imaging findings.  Abdom Imaging. 2000;  25 279-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

1 Nach einem Vortrag während des 34. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Endoskopie und bildgebende Verfahren (DGE-BV), München (18.-21.3.2004)

Prof. Dr. B. C. ManegoldLeiter der Abt. f. Chirurg. Endoskopie a. D. 

Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3

68137 Mannheim

Phone: 06 21/3 83/35 44

Fax: 06 21/3 83/14 50

Email: Bernd.Christoph.Manegold@chir.ma.uni-heidelberg.de