Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ERCP in Children, Pregnant Patients, and the Elderly

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advanced Pancreaticobiliary Endoscopy

  • 989 Accesses

Abstract

Although most commonly performed in adults for a variety of reasons, ERCP is also frequently required in special patient subsets. The three most common special patient subsets are children, pregnant patients, and elderly patients (often defined as patients over 60 or 65 years of age). ERCP tools, techniques, and procedures can be different in these patients given their special needs. This chapter will review the role of ERCP in these special patient subgroups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Stinton LM, Myers RP, Shaffer EA. Epidemiology of gallstones. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2010;39:157–69. vii.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, et al. Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011–2012. JAMA. 2014;311:806–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Lightdale JR, Acosta R, et al. Modifications in endoscopic practice for pediatric patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79:699–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jang JY, Yoon CH, Kim KM. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pancreatic and biliary tract disease in Korean children. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:490–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Otto AK, Neal MD, Slivka AN, et al. An appraisal of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for pancreaticobiliary disease in children: our institutional experience in 231 cases. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2536–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Durakbasa CU, Balik E, Yamaner S, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in children and adolescents: experience in a single institution. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2008;18:241–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hukkinen M, Koivusalo A, Lindahl H, et al. Increasing occurrence of choledochal malformations in children: a single-center 37-year experience from Finland. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014;49:1255–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Paris C, Bejjani J, Beaunoyer M, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is useful and safe in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2010;45:938–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hiramatsu T, Itoh A, Kawashima H, et al. Usefulness and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in children with pancreaticobiliary maljunction. J Pediatr Surg. 2015;50:377–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Otto AK, Neal MD, Mazariegos GV, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is safe and effective for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreaticobiliary disease following abdominal organ transplant in children. Pediatr Transplant. 2012;16:829–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Issa H, Al-Haddad A, Al-Salem AH. Diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP in the pediatric age group. Pediatr Surg Int. 2007;23:111–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Poddar U, Thapa BR, Bhasin DK, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the management of pancreaticobiliary disorders in children. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2001;16:927–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng CL, Fogel EL, Sherman S, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in children: a large series report. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2005;41:445–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Varadarajulu S, Wilcox CM, Hawes RH, et al. Technical outcomes and complications of ERCP in children. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:367–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Troendle DM, Abraham O, Huang R, et al. Factors associated with post-ERCP pancreatitis and the effect of pancreatic duct stenting in a pediatric population. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(6):1408–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giefer MJ, Kozarek RA. Technical outcomes and complications of pediatric ERCP. Surg Endosc 2015.Dec;29(12):3543-50.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sun HL, Han B, Zhai HP, et al. Rectal NSAIDs for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surgeon. 2014;12:141–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaddu R, Bhattacharya D, Metriyakool K, et al. Propofol compared with general anesthesia for pediatric GI endoscopy: is propofol better? Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;55:27–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dar AQ, Shah ZA. Anesthesia and sedation in pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a review. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;2:257–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Halvorson L, Halsey K, Darwin P, et al. The safety and efficacy of therapeutic ERCP in the pediatric population performed by adult gastroenterologists. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:3611–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Green JA, Scheeres DE, Conrad HA, et al. Pediatric ERCP in a multidisciplinary community setting: experience with a fellowship-trained general surgeon. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:2187–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kieling CO, Hallal C, Spessato CO, et al. Changing pattern of indications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in children and adolescents: a twelve-year experience. World J Pediatr. 2014;11:154–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim Y, Hyun JJ, Lee JM, et al. Anomalous union of the pancreaticobiliary duct without choledochal cyst: is cholecystectomy alone sufficient? Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014;399:1071–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Terui K, Hishiki T, Saito T, et al. Pancreas divisum in pancreaticobiliary maljunction in children. Pediatr Surg Int. 2010;26:419–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Coelho DE, Ardengh JC, Lima-Filho ER, et al. Different clinical aspects of Wirsungocele: case series of three patients and review of literature. Acta Gastroenterol Latinoam. 2011;41:230–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lutzak GD, Gluck M, Ross AS, et al. Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy in patients with santoriniceles reduces pain and improves quality of life. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:2075–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bloom DE, Chatterji S, Kowal P, et al. Macroeconomic implications of population ageing and selected policy responses. Lancet. 2015;385:649–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Fritz E, Kirchgatterer A, Hubner D, et al. ERCP is safe and effective in patients 80 years of age and older compared with younger patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:899–905.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Katsinelos P, Paroutoglou G, Kountouras J, et al. Efficacy and safety of therapeutic ERCP in patients 90 years of age and older. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:417–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Katsinelos P, Kountouras J, Chatzimavroudis G, et al. Outpatient therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is safe in patients aged 80 years and older. Endoscopy. 2011;43:128–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yun DY, Han J, Oh JS, et al. Is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography safe in patients 90 years of age and older? Gut Liver. 2014;8:552–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Kounis NG, Zavras GM, Papadaki PJ, et al. Electrocardiographic changes in elderly patients during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Can J Gastroenterol. 2003;17:539–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fisher L, Fisher A, Thomson A. Cardiopulmonary complications of ERCP in older patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:948–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Riphaus A, Stergiou N, Wehrmann T. Sedation with propofol for routine ERCP in high-risk octogenarians: a randomized, controlled study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1957–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nakamura K, Yamaguchi Y, Hasue T, et al. The usefulness and safety of carbon dioxide insufflation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in elderly patients: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Hepatogastroenterology. 2014;61:2191–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Oh MJ, Kim TN. Prospective comparative study of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of large bile duct stones in patients above 45 years of age. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:1071–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Jin PP, Cheng JF, Liu D, et al. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs endoscopic sphincterotomy for retrieval of common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:5548–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Park JS, Kim TN, Kim KH. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for treatment of large bile duct stones does not increase the risk of post-procedure pancreatitis. Dig Dis Sci. 2014;59:3092–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hong WD, Zhu QH, Huang QK. Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus endoprostheses in the treatment of large or multiple common bile duct stones. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:240–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Han J, Moon JH, Koo HC, et al. Effect of biliary stenting combined with ursodeoxycholic acid and terpene treatment on retained common bile duct stones in elderly patients: a multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:2418–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lee TH, Han JH, Kim HJ, et al. Is the addition of choleretic agents in multiple double-pigtail biliary stents effective for difficult common bile duct stones in elderly patients? A prospective, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74:96–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Di Giorgio P, Manes G, Grimaldi E, et al. Endoscopic plastic stenting for bile duct stones: stent changing on demand or every 3 months. A prospective comparison study. Endoscopy. 2013;45:1014–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kwon SK, Lee BS, Kim NJ, et al. Is cholecystectomy necessary after ERCP for bile duct stones in patients with gallbladder in situ? Korean J Intern Med. 2001;16:254–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Ingoldby CJ, el-Saadi J, Hall RI, et al. Late results of endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones in elderly patients with gall bladders in situ. Gut. 1989;30:1129–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Cui ML, Cho JH, Kim TN. Long-term follow-up study of gallbladder in situ after endoscopic common duct stone removal in Korean patients. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1711–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Weber DM. Laparoscopic surgery: an excellent approach in elderly patients. Arch Surg. 2003;138:1083–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. McAlister VC, Davenport E, Renouf E. Cholecystectomy deferral in patients with endoscopic sphincterotomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:CD006233.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Di Mauro D, Faraci R, Mariani L, et al. Rendezvous technique for cholecystocholedochal lithiasis in octogenarians: is it as effective as in younger patients, or should endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy be preferred? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014;24:13–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Zippi M, Traversa G, Pica R, et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) performed in patients with Periampullary duodenal diverticula (PAD). Clin Ter. 2014;165:e291–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Tyagi P, Sharma P, Sharma BC, et al. Periampullary diverticula and technical success of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1342–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Fogel EL, Sherman S, Lehman GA. Increased selective biliary cannulation rates in the setting of periampullary diverticula: main pancreatic duct stent placement followed by pre-cut biliary sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:396–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Myung DS, Park CH, Koh HR, et al. Cap-assisted ERCP in patients with difficult cannulation due to periampullary diverticulum. Endoscopy. 2014;46:352–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ustundag Y, Karakaya K, Aydemir S. Biliary cannulation facilitated by endoscopic clip assistance in the setting of intra-diverticular papilla. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2009;20:279–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Katsinelos P, Chatzimavroudis G, Tziomalos K, et al. Impact of periampullary diverticula on the outcome and fluoroscopy time in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2013;12:408–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ko CW, Beresford SA, Schulte SJ, et al. Incidence, natural history, and risk factors for biliary sludge and stones during pregnancy. Hepatology. 2005;41:359–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Wang HH, Afdhal NH, Wang DQ. Estrogen receptor alpha, but not beta, plays a major role in 17beta-estradiol-induced murine cholesterol gallstones. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:239–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Abu-Hayyeh S, Papacleovoulou G, Lovgren-Sandblom A, et al. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy levels of sulfated progesterone metabolites inhibit farnesoid X receptor resulting in a cholestatic phenotype. Hepatology. 2013;57:716–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Valdivieso V, Covarrubias C, Siegel F, et al. Pregnancy and cholelithiasis: pathogenesis and natural course of gallstones diagnosed in early puerperium. Hepatology. 1993;17:1–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Freeman ML. Adverse outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: avoidance and management. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2003;13:775–98. xi.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Lowe SA. Diagnostic radiography in pregnancy: risks and reality. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;44:191–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Tang SJ, Mayo MJ, Rodriguez-Frias E, et al. Safety and utility of ERCP during pregnancy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:453–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Fine S, Beirne J, Delgi-Esposti S, et al. Continued evidence for safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during pregnancy. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;6:352–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Yang J, Zhang X, Zhang X. Therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography among pregnant women with severe acute biliary pancreatitis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23:437–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Gupta R, Tandan M, Lakhtakia S, et al. Safety of therapeutic ERCP in pregnancy—an Indian experience. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2005;24:161–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tham TC, Vandervoort J, Wong RC, et al. Safety of ERCP during pregnancy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:308–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Oto A, Ernst R, Ghulmiyyah L, et al. The role of MR cholangiopancreatography in the evaluation of pregnant patients with acute pancreaticobiliary disease. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:279–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Simmons DC, Tarnasky PR, Rivera-Alsina ME, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in pregnancy without the use of radiation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190:1467–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Daas AY, Agha A, Pinkas H, et al. ERCP in pregnancy: is it safe? Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2009;5:851–5.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Shelton J, Linder JD, Rivera-Alsina ME, et al. Commitment, confirmation, and clearance: new techniques for nonradiation ERCP during pregnancy (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:364–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Chong VH, Jalihal A. Endoscopic management of biliary disorders during pregnancy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2010;9:180–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Uradomo L, Pandolfe F, Aragon G, et al. SpyGlass cholangioscopy for management of choledocholithiasis during pregnancy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2011;10:107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Brent RL. Counseling patients exposed to ionizing radiation during pregnancy. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2006;20:198–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Shergill AK, Ben-Menachem T, et al. Guidelines for endoscopy in pregnant and lactating women. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:18–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Othman MO, Stone E, Hashimi M, et al. Conservative management of cholelithiasis and its complications in pregnancy is associated with recurrent symptoms and more emergency department visits. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:564–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Sethi S, Thosani N, Banerjee S. Radiation-free ERCP in pregnancy: a “sound” approach to leaving no stone unturned. Dig Dis Sci. 2015;60:2604–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Vohra S, Holt EW, Bhat YM, et al. Successful single-session endosonography-based endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography without fluoroscopy in pregnant patients with suspected choledocholithiasis: a case series. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2014;21:93–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gastroenterology and Hepatology Section, Department of Internal Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Mohamed O. Othman M.B.Bch & Waqar A. Qureshi M.D.

Authors
  1. Mohamed O. Othman M.B.Bch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Waqar A. Qureshi M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Waqar A. Qureshi M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

    Douglas G. Adler

Video Legends

This clip shows the removal of multiple large stones with balloon extraction following endoscopic sphincterotomy and balloon dilation of the sphincter of Oddi (MP4 13528 kb).

Double wire method to access the CBD in a case of difficult cannulation. The firstl wire kept going into the PD so is left in place and a second wire aids in both selecting the access of the CBD and blocking re-entry into the PD (MP4 11457 kb).

Here the ampulla os is inside a diverticulum and difficult to cannulate with a standard 0.035 wire. A loop tip wire enables entry into the CBD and an endoscopic sphincterotomy and plastic stent placement are then performed (MP4 11523 kb).

A precut sphincterotomy is performed here with small upward cuts from the os along the axis of the CBD following frequent attempts to advance the wire. Once access is gained, dye is injected to confirm entry into the CBD and then an ES is completed (MP4 13393 kb).

In this video clip, an endoscopic sphincterotomy is performed over a wire and then the spyglass cholangioscope is advanced into the biliary tree. Some blood is seen over an ulcerated mass. Towards the end of the video, a forceps is introduced to biopsy this area (MP4 16757 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Othman, M.O., Qureshi, W.A. (2016). ERCP in Children, Pregnant Patients, and the Elderly. In: Adler, D. (eds) Advanced Pancreaticobiliary Endoscopy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26854-5_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26854-5_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26852-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26854-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation