Pancreaticobiliary and duodenal perforations after periampullary endoscopic procedures: Diagnosis and management

Javairiah Fatima, Todd H. Baron, Mark D. Topazian, Scott G. Houghton, Corey W. Iqbal, Beverly J. Ott, David R. Farley, Michael B. Farnell, Michael G. Sarr

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

85 Scopus citations


Objective: To review our experience with management of pancreaticobiliary and duodenal (PB/D) perforations after periampullary endoscopic interventions. Although pancreaticobiliary and duodenal perforations after periampullary endoscopic procedures are rare, their management has not been well described. Patients: Individuals who experienced pancreaticobiliary and duodenal perforations. Main Outcome Measures: Comorbidities, interventions performed, mechanism/site of perforation, management, and hospital morbidity/mortality. Results: Seventy-five perforations (0.6%) occurred in 12 427 procedures; 20 perforations (27%) occurred during biliary stricture dilatation, 18 (24%) during diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and 15 (20%) during management of choledocholithiasis. Perforations were caused by guidewire insertion in 24 patients (32%), sphincterotomy in 11 (15%), passage of the endoscope in 8 (11%), or stent migration in 7 (9%) and were identified during the index procedure in 45 patients (60%). Delayed presentations included pain in 33 patients (44%), leukocytosis in 26 (35%), and/or fever in 13 (17%) and were diagnosed using computed tomography in 19 patients (25%) and abdominal radiography in 10 (13%); 9 cases (12%) were diagnosed more than 24 hours after the procedure. Indications for operative treatment were gaping duodenal perforations and perforations in patients with surgically altered anatomy. Indications for nonoperative management included contained bile duct perforations and focal duodenal perforations. Management was nonoperative in 53 patients (71%) and operative in 22 (29%). Patients with duodenal perforations, higher American Society of Anesthesia status (P<.01 each), and older age (mean±SEM, 65±4 vs 55±2 years; P=.02) were more likely to require operative management. Hospital stay (mean±SEM, 16±4 vs 4±1 days; P<.05) and mortality (13% vs 4%; P<.05) were greater in operative patients (P<.05 each). Conclusions: Most (70%) pancreaticobiliary and duodenal perforations secondary to periampullary endoscopic interventions can be managed nonoperatively. Most biliary perforations can be managed nonoperatively; a requirement for operative treatment increases the mortality rate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)448-454
Number of pages7
JournalArchives of Surgery
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2007

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Pancreaticobiliary and duodenal perforations after periampullary endoscopic procedures: Diagnosis and management'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this