ArticleCureus2025
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-Related Duodenal Perforation: Management Challenges and Lessons From a Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Duodenal perforation is a rare but harmful complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Early diagnosis and appropriate management are critical to reduce morbidity and mortality. Four patients, aged 36 to 56 years, underwent ERCP for biliary obstruction due to choledocholithiasis or postoperative biliary stricture. Symptom onset ranged from 12 to 40 hours post-ERCP. Imaging revealed retroperitoneal air, periduodenal fluid collections, or free intraperitoneal air. Three patients were initially managed conservatively. Two of them subsequently required delayed surgical intervention due to clinical deterioration. One patient was treated non-operatively throughout the hospital stay but did not recover; the family declined surgery. Another patient underwent early operative management based on overt signs of generalized peritonitis and pneumoperitoneum. Duodenal perforation was classified as Stapfer type II in three cases and type I in one case. This case series highlights the clinical variability and diagnostic challenges associated with ERCP-related duodenal perforations. Accurate classification using the Stapfer system and timely diagnosis with contrast-enhanced CT are crucial in guiding management. While conservative treatment may be effective in selected patients, delayed recognition or clinical deterioration often necessitates surgical intervention. Concomitant complications, such as acute pancreatitis, necrotizing cholecystitis, liver cirrhosis, or ampullary bleeding, can affect the clinical picture of perforation and worsen the overall prognosis. Aggressive drainage and enteral feeding via jejunostomy contributed positively to local control of pancreatic inflammation and promoted duodenal healing. Prompt diagnosis and multidisciplinary approach strategies are key to optimizing outcomes in ERCP-related duodenal perforations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.