[Management of perforations as adverse events of ERCP plus ES. Personal experience].
INTRODUCTION. ERCP has brought real progress in the study and treatment of pancreatic and biliary diseases, because of its ambivalence as diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. Among its complications, perforations occur in fewer than 1% of patients, but are associated with a mortality rate of 16% -18%.


METHODS
CASE 1- F, 89 years old with obstructive jaundice by choledocholithiasis submitted to ERCP plus ES, during which occurs type II lesion; the partial removing of stones from choledochus during the procedure allow us to opt for a conservative treatment, with resolution on post-ERCP day 12. CASE 2- F, 53 years old with recurring cholangitis and post-cholecystectomy stenosis of choledochus already treated by stenting; for the occurrence of type I lesion during ERCP, the patient undergoes surgery in emergency with healing in postoperative day 23. CASE 3- M, 84 years old with lithiasic cholecystitis, obstructive jaundice, lung emphysema and ischemic heart disease; after percutaneous cholecystostomy in emergency, we attempt to ERCP with evidence of type I lesion. Because of comorbility, we opt for a conservative treatment, not resolving, and then proceed to surgery. Exitus for cardio-respiratory complications. CASE 4- M, 89 years old with obstructive jaundice; ERCP is suspended for respiratory complications and then a PTC is perform; during it we note a type IV lesion, which is treated conservatively with resignation in day 12. CASE 5- F, 68 years old with cholecystitis and choledocholithiasis; during ERCP plus SE a type II lesion occurs with worsening signs of acute abdomen. Because of clinical conditions and the impossibility of carrying out stones from choledochus by endoscopy, we opt for a surgical treatment in emergency. Exitus for respiratory complications.


CONCLUSIONS
Because of the controversy exists on what should be the management of perforations as adverse events of ERCP plus ES (immediate surgery or conservative therapy), we can only hope an eclectic approach based on the anatomical and clinical peculiarity of each case.
Angiò
L G
LG
Università degli Studi di Messina, Facoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia, Scuola di Specializzazione in Chirurgia Generale 1.
Sfuncia
G
G
Viggiani
P
P
Faro
G
G
Bonsignore
A
A
Licursi
M
M
Soliera
M
M
Galati
M
M
Putortì
A
A
D000006:Abdomen, Acute / Q000601:surgery; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D017734:Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000293:injuries*; D002760:Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde / Q000009:adverse effects*; D002761:Cholangitis / Q000601:surgery; D002764:Cholecystitis / Q000601:surgery; D042883:Choledocholithiasis / Q000601:surgery; D015897:Comorbidity; D004386:Duodenum / Q000293:injuries*; D004630:Emergencies; D017809:Fatal Outcome; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007416:Intestinal Perforation / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000209:etiology*; D007431:Intraoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000601:surgery; D012008:Recurrence; D012188:Retropneumoperitoneum / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy; D016717:Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic / Q000009:adverse effects*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed