Sumant Inamdar1, Tyler M Berzin2, Divyesh V Sejpal1, Douglas K Pleskow2, Ram Chuttani2, Mandeep S Sawhney2, Arvind J Trindade3. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hofstra North Shore-Long Island Jewish School of Medicine, North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, New Hyde Park, New York. 2. The Center for Advanced Endoscopy, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hofstra North Shore-Long Island Jewish School of Medicine, North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, New Hyde Park, New York. Electronic address: arvind.trindade@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are limited data on the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during pregnancy, only data from observational series (approximately 350 cases) have been published. We aimed to evaluate the safety of ERCP in pregnant women by evaluating a large nationwide database. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-cohort study, collecting data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2008 through 2009. We compared data from pregnant women who underwent ERCP (n = 907) with those from nonpregnant women who underwent ERCP (controls, n = 2721). Complications related to ERCP were measured against the matched controls. Obstetric and fetal complications were measured against the national average of all obstetric admissions. RESULTS: ERCP-associated complications of perforation, infection, and bleeding were infrequent in both cohorts (P > .05). Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) occurred in 12% of pregnant women and in 5% of controls (P < .001). There was a significantly lower rate of PEP in teaching hospitals (9.6%) than in nonteaching hospitals (14.6%; P < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for developing PEP among pregnant women vs controls was 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.8). This risk of PEP was higher among nonteaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.3-5.2) than teaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.9). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy is an independent risk factor for PEP; PEP and PEP among pregnant women are each more prevalent in community hospitals than teaching centers. Proper precautions therefore should be considered for pregnant women undergoing ERCP, including transfer to a tertiary care center if appropriate.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are limited data on the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during pregnancy, only data from observational series (approximately 350 cases) have been published. We aimed to evaluate the safety of ERCP in pregnant women by evaluating a large nationwide database. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-cohort study, collecting data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2008 through 2009. We compared data from pregnant women who underwent ERCP (n = 907) with those from nonpregnant women who underwent ERCP (controls, n = 2721). Complications related to ERCP were measured against the matched controls. Obstetric and fetal complications were measured against the national average of all obstetric admissions. RESULTS: ERCP-associated complications of perforation, infection, and bleeding were infrequent in both cohorts (P > .05). Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) occurred in 12% of pregnant women and in 5% of controls (P < .001). There was a significantly lower rate of PEP in teaching hospitals (9.6%) than in nonteaching hospitals (14.6%; P < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for developing PEP among pregnant women vs controls was 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.8). This risk of PEP was higher among nonteaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.3-5.2) than teaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.9). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy is an independent risk factor for PEP; PEP and PEP among pregnant women are each more prevalent in community hospitals than teaching centers. Proper precautions therefore should be considered for pregnant women undergoing ERCP, including transfer to a tertiary care center if appropriate.
Authors: Tarek Sawas; Fateh Bazerbachi; Samir Haffar; Won K Cho; Michael J Levy; John A Martin; Bret T Petersen; Mark D Topazian; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Barham K Abu Dayyeh Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-11-07 Impact factor: 5.742