Digestive perforations related to endoscopy procedures: a local management charter based on local evidence and experts' opinion
- PMID: 35433214
- PMCID: PMC9010098
- DOI: 10.1055/a-1783-8424
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.
The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
-
- 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. - PubMed
-
- Benazzato L, Zorzi M, Antonelli G. Colonoscopy-related adverse events and mortality in an Italian organized colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopy. 2021;53:501–508. - PubMed
-
- 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. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources