Literature DB >> 16329019

Is the supine position as safe and effective as the prone position for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography? A prospective randomized study.

V Terruzzi1, F Radaelli, G Meucci, G Minoli.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is usually performed with the patient lying in the prone position, on the assumption that this position is optimal for cannulation of the papilla and for obtaining good-quality radiographic images. The supine position, however, may be more comfortable for the patient and may facilitate airway management, and this study aimed to compare the two positions in terms of procedure outcome, safety, and patient tolerance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients who were undergoing ERCP were randomized to start the procedure in either the prone position or the supine position. Patients under the age of 18 years, intubated patients, and those who had already undergone endoscopic sphincterotomy were excluded. The difficulty of cannulation was assessed using the Freeman score (1=one to five attempts; 2=six to 15 attempts; 3=more than 15 attempts; 4=failure of cannulation). Total procedure time, patient tolerance, willingness to undergo ERCP in the future, and procedure-related adverse cardiorespiratory events (oxygen desaturation, tachycardia, bradycardia) were also recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 34 patients were evaluated (21 men, 13 women; mean age 68, range 20-96), 17 patients in each group. Demographic and clinical features, and the indications for the procedure were similar for the two patient groups. The median Freeman score was significantly lower in the prone group compared with the supine group (1 vs. 3, P=0.0047, rank sum test). Biliary cannulation was achieved in all patients in the prone group, but was not achieved in five patients (29%) in the supine group (P=0.052). In four of these five patients, biliary cannulation was successfully achieved after turning the patient into the prone position. The percentage of patients unwilling to repeat the ERCP procedure in the future was higher in the supine group (29% vs. 6%, P=0.087); the mean tolerance score and mean total procedure time were similar in the two groups. Seven patients in the supine group experienced at least one adverse cardiorespiratory event, compared with only one patient in the prone group (41% vs. 6%, P=0.039).
CONCLUSIONS: ERCP performed with the patient in the supine position is technically more demanding for operators used to working with patients in the prone position and carries a greater risk of adverse cardiorespiratory events in nonintubated patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16329019     DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-870511

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  13 in total

1.  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the same session: feasibility and safety.

Authors:  Jin-Feng Zang; Chi Zhang; Jun-Ye Gao
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Radiation dose to patients during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  Jaume Boix; Vicente Lorenzo-Zúñiga
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-07-16

3.  Inpatient Choledocholithiasis Requiring ERCP and Cholecystectomy: Outcomes of a Combined Single Inpatient Procedure Versus Separate-Session Procedures.

Authors:  Monica Passi; Sumant Inamdar; David Hersch; Oonagh Dowling; Divyesh V Sejpal; Arvind J Trindade
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Efficacy and Safety of Propofol-Mediated Sedation for Outpatient Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

Authors:  Juliana F Yang; Priya Farooq; Kate Zwilling; Devi Patel; Ali A Siddiqui
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Safety and sedation-associated adverse event reporting among patients undergoing endoscopic cholangiopancreatography: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Thomas R McCarty; Kelly E Hathorn; David W Creighton; Mohd Amer AlSamman; Christopher C Thompson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  ERCP in total situs viscerum inversus.

Authors:  F Fiocca; G Donatelli; V Ceci; F Cereatti; F Romagnoli; L Simonelli; C Modini
Journal:  Case Rep Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-03-14

7.  Controversies in ERCP: Indications and preparation.

Authors:  Christoph F Dietrich; Noor L Bekkali; Sean Burmeister; Yi Dong; Simon M Everett; Michael Hocke; Andre Ignee; Wei On; Srisha Hebbar; Kofi Oppong; Siyu Sun; Christian Jenssen; Barbara Braden
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2022 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.275

8.  The efficacy and safety of the left lateral position for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  Tae Young Park; Sang Hyeon Choi; Young Joo Yang; Suk Pyo Shin; Chang Seok Bang; Ki Tae Suk; Gwang Ho Baik; Dong Joon Kim
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.485

9.  Impact of supine versus prone position on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography performance: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Osayande Osagiede; Gabriel A Bolaños; Jordan Cochuyt; Luisa M Cruz; Paul T Kröner; Frank J Lukens; Juan E Corral
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-02-26

10.  The difference in ocular lens equivalent dose to ERCP personnel between prone and left lateral decubitus positions: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon; Worawarut Janjeurmat; Anchali Krisanachinda; Wiriyaporn Ridtitid; Pradermchai Kongkam; Rungsun Rerknimitr
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2018-08-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.