Download PDF
Endoscopy 2002; 34(6): 483-488
DOI: 10.1055/s-2002-32004
Original Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Bedside Scoring System to Predict the Risk of Developing Pancreatitis Following ERCP

S.  Friedland 1 , R.  M.  Soetikno 1 , J.  Vandervoort 2 , H.  Montes 2 , T.  Tham 2 , D.  L.  Carr-Locke 2
  • 1 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
  • 2 Endoscopy Center, Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
Further Information

Publication History

26 July 2001

21 January 2002

Publication Date:
04 June 2002 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Background and Study Aims: Pancreatitis is the most common significant complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of the present study was to develop a simple scoring system that clinicians can use to predict the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
Patients and Methods: We analyzed a prospectively assembled database of 1835 ERCP procedures at a single referral hospital. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for pancreatitis and determine their relative contributions. From these results, a scoring system was constructed. The performance of the scoring system was assessed on the entire procedure database and in selected subgroups.
Results: Multivariate analysis yielded four risk factors: pain during the procedure, cannulation of the pancreatic duct (PD), previous post-ERCP pancreatitis, and number of cannulation attempts. Based on the regression model, the scoring system was: 4 points for pain, 3 points for PD cannulation, 2 points for a history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 1 - 4 points depending on the number of cannulation attempts. A total score of 1 - 4 points was associated with a low risk of pancreatitis (< 2 %), while a score of 5 - 8 points had an intermediate risk (7 %), and a score of 9 or above had a high risk (28 %).
Conclusions: This simple scoring system may enable clinicians to stratify patients into low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups for the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis. In addition, when patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction and patients who underwent minor papilla cannulation were analyzed separately, the scoring system was able to predict accurately the pancreatitis risk of these patients as well.

References

  • 1 Ostroff J W. The use of ERCP in pancreatic and biliary tract disease. In: Jacobson IM (ed) ERCP and its applications. Philadelphia; Lippincott-Raven 1998: 3-23
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Baillie J. Complications of ERCP. In: Jacobson IM (ed) ERCP and its applications. Philadelphia; Lippincott-Raven 1998: 37-54
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Ostroff J W, Shapiro H A. Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy. In: Jacobson IM (ed) ERCP: diagnostic and therapeutic applications. New York; Elsevier Science 1989: 61-73
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Sherman S, Lehman G A. Complications of ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy: management and prevention. In: Barkin JS, O'Phelan CA (eds) Advanced therapeutic endoscopy. New York; Raven Press 1990: 201-210
    Google Scholar
  • 5 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
  • 6 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
  • 7 Vaira D, D'Anna L, Ainley C. et al . Endoscopic sphincterotomy in 1000 consecutive patients.  Lancet. 1989;  ii 431-433
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Freeman M, Nelson D, Sherman S. et al . Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES): a prospective multicenter 30-day outcomes study [abstract].  Gastroenterology. 1994;  106 A338
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sherman S. ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy induced pancreatitis.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;  89 303-305
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Vandervoort J, Tham T CK, Wong R CK. et al . Identification of risk factors for ERCP-related pancreatitis [abstract].  Am J Gastroenterol. 1996;  91 A241
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Freeman M, Nelson D B, Sherman S. et al . Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.  N Engl J Med. 1996;  335 909-918
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sherman S, Lehman G, Earle J. et al . Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study [abstract].  Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;  45 A562
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Vandervoort J, Tham T CK, Wong R CK. et al . Prospective study of post-ERCP complications following diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP [abstract].  Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;  43 441
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cotton P B. Precut papillotomy: a risky technique for experts only.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1989;  35 578-579
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Norusis M J. SPSS Advanced Statistics 6.1. Chicago; SPSS, Inc. 444 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, Illinois, USA 1994
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Hosmer D W, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York; Wiley 1989
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Gregg J A. Function and dysfunction of the sphincter of Oddi. In: Jacobson IM (ed) ERCP: diagnostic and therapeutic applications. New York; Elsevier Science 1989: 139-170
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Chen Y K, Foliente R L, Santoro M J. et al . Endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis: increased risk associated with nondilated bile ducts and sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;  89 327-333
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sherman S, Ruffolo T A, Hawes R H, Lehman G. Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: a prospective series with emphasis on the increased risk associated with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction and nondilated bile ducts.  Gastroenterology. 1991;  101 1068-1075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kozarek R A, Ball T J, Patterson D J. et al . Endoscopic pancreatic duct sphincterotomy: indications, technique, and analysis of results.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;  40 592-598
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lehman G A, Sherman S, Nisi R, Hawes R. Pancreas divisum: results of minor papilla sphincterotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1993;  39 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Masci E, Toti G, Curioni S. et al . Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;  96 417-423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Freeman M L, DiSario J A, Douglas B N. et al . Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective, multicenter study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;  54 425-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 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
  • 25 Cavallini G, Tittobello A, Frulloni L. et al . Gabexate for the prevention of pancreatic damage related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.  N Engl J Med. 1996;  335 919-923
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Andriulli A, Leandro G, Grazia N. et al . Pharmacologic treatment can prevent pancreatic injury after ERCP: a meta-analysis.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;  51 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Hogan W J. Stenting the pancreas: is this the solution to post-ERCP pancreatitis?.  Gastroenterology. 1998;  115 1591-1594
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tarnasky P R, Palesch Y Y, Cunningham J T. et al . Pancreatic stenting prevents pancreatitis after biliary sphincterotomy in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.  Gastroenterology. 1998;  115 1518-1524
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Haber G B. Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;  51 100-103
    PubMedGoogle Scholar

R. Soetikno, M.D.

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · Stanford University School of Medicine

3801 Miranda Ave, GI 111 · Palo Alto, CA 94305 · USA ·

Fax: + 1-650-849-0255

Email: soetikno@stanford.edu

      >