Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2020; 08(01): E59-E63
DOI: 10.1055/a-0967-4718
Original article
Owner and Copyright © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2020

Endoscopic management of iatrogenic EUS-related duodenal perforations with over-the-scope clips

Hicham El bacha
1   Medecine B, Hôpital ibn-sina, Mohamed V University, Rabat, Morocco
,
Frederic Prat
2   Gastroenterology Department, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 19 March 2019

accepted after revision 17 June 2019

Publication Date:
08 January 2020 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Iatrogenic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) perforations are life-threatening adverse event and to date, surgery has been the main treatment for them. The aim of this study was to assess feasibility and safety of conservative treatment with over-the-scope clips (OTSC).

Patients and methods We performed a retrospective study, including iatrogenic EUS duodenal perforation with conservative endoscopic management from 2011 to August 2018. Patients who initial had surgical management were excluded.

Results In 8504 EUS procedure occurred, 13 perforations occurred (0.15 %). Eleven patients were included in the study, all women. Mean patient age was 75 years (range 68 – 88). Eighth of 11 perforations (72.7 %) were due to a radial probe and three of 11 (27.3 %) were due to a curvilinear probe. Eleven procedures (100 %) were performed as diagnostic. Defect size ranged from 10 to 15 mm. All procedures were successful. Three of eleven patients (27 %) had a stay in intensive care unit for less than 72 hours and length of total hospital stay ranged from 3 to 22 days.

Conclusion Conservative endoscopic treatment of Iatrogenic EUS perforation, with OTSC is feasible, efficient and safe.

 

  • References

  • 1 Tse F, Liu L, Barkun AN. et al. EUS: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 235-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Moutinho-Ribeiro P, Peixoto A, Macedo G. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound: to be one traveler in converging roads. GE Port J Gastroenterol 2018; 25: 138-145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wan J, Ouyang Y, Yu C. et al. Comparison of EUS with MRCP in idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 1180-1188e9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jenssen C, Alvarez-Sánchez MV, Napoléon B. et al. Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography: Assessment of safety and prevention of complications. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 4659-4676
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Jenssen C, Faiss S, Nürnberg D. Complications of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions – results of a survey among German centers. Z Gastroenterol 2008; 46: 1177-1184
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Raut CP, Grau AM, Staerkel GA. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with presumed pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2003; 7: 118-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Benson ME, Byrne S, Brust DJ. et al. EUS and ERCP complication rates are not increased in elderly patients. Dig Dis Sci 2010; 55: 3278-3283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Attila T, Faigel DO. Endoscopic ultrasound in patients over 80 years old. Dig Dis Sci 2011; 56: 3065-3071
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lachter J. Fatal complications of endoscopic ultrasonography: A look at 18 cases. Endoscopy 2007; 39: 747-750
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Carrara S, Arcidiacono PG, Mezzi G. et al. Pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: Complication rate and clinical course in a single centre. Dig Liver Dis 2010; 42: 520-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Paspatis GA, Dumonceau JM, Barthet M. et al. Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 693-711
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Holmer C, Mallmann CA, Musch MA. et al. Surgical management of iatrogenic perforation of the gastrointestinal tract: 15 years of experience in a single center. World J Surg 2017; 41: 1961-1965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Baron TH, Wong Kee Song LM. et al. A comprehensive approach to the management of acute endoscopic perforations (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 838-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Haider S, Kahaleh M. The use of endoscopic clipping devices in the treatment of iatrogenic duodenal perforation. Gastroenterol Hepatol(NY) 2010; 6: 660-661
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Liu Y, Wang D, Li Z. Endoscopic closure for EUS and ERCP related duodenal perforation by endoclips. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016; 2016: 1051597
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Choi WJ, Park J-J, Park J. et al. Effects of the temporary placement of a self-expandable metallic stent in benign pyloric stenosis. Gut Liver 2013; 7: 417-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Banerjee S, Barth BA. ASGE Technology Committee. et al. Endoscopic closure devices. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 244-251
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Angsuwatcharakon P, Prueksapanich P, Kongkam P. et al. Efficacy of the Ovesco Clip for closure of endoscope related perforations. Diagn Ther Endosc 2016; 2016: 9371878
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Brodie M, Gupta N, Jonnalagadda S. Failed attempt at duodenal perforation closure with over-the-scope clip. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1271-1272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar