Prospective multicenter quality assessment of endotherapy of biliary stones: Does center volume matter?

Endoscopy

Volumn 39, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 1076-1081

  Masci, Enzo ^a   Minoli, G ^b   Rossi, M ^a   Terruzzi, V ^b   Comin, U ^c   Ravelli, P ^d   Buffoli, F ^e   Lomazzi, A ^f   Dinelli, M ^f   Prada, A ^g   Zambelli, A ^h   Fesce, E ⁱ   Lella, F ^j   Fasoli, R ^k   Perego, E M ^l   Colombo, E ^m   Bianchi, G ⁿ   Testoni, P A ^a  

^a SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b VALDUCE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^c Magenta Hospital   (Italy)

^d Seriate Hospital   (Italy)

^e Poliambulanza Hospital   (Italy)

^f SAN GERARDO HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^g RHO HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^h Crema Hospital   (Italy)

ⁱ S Giuseppe Hospital   (Italy)

^j Zingonia Hospital   (Italy)

^k SAN CARLO BORROMEO HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^l Rehabilitation Institute of Pavia   (Italy)

^m Garbagnate Hospital   (Italy)

ⁿ Cremona Hospital   (Italy)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE; ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE; ANTICOAGULANT AGENT; BENZODIAZEPINE DERIVATIVE; BILIRUBIN; OPIATE PEPTIDE;

ACUTE PANCREATITIS; ADULT; AGED; ANAMNESIS; ANTICOAGULANT THERAPY; ARTICLE; BILIRUBIN BLOOD LEVEL; BLEEDING; CANNULATION; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM PERFORATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY; ENZYME BLOOD LEVEL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GALLSTONE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; ITALY; LITHOTRIPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MONOTHERAPY; MULTICENTER STUDY; NASOGASTRIC TUBE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SPHINCTEROTOMY; TRANSIENT ISCHEMIC ATTACK; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY, ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE; FEMALE; GALLSTONES; HUMANS; ITALY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROBABILITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPHINCTEROTOMY, ENDOSCOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 37448999376     PISSN: 0013726X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-966934     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Jowell PS, Biellie J, Branch S et al. Quantitative assessment of procedural competence: a prospective study of training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 983-989
2. Roston AD, Jacobson IM. Evaluation of the pattern of liver tests and yield of cholangiography in symptomatic choledocolithiasis: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 1997; 45: 394-399
3. Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 909-918
4. Johanson JF, Cooper G, Eisen GM et al. for the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Outcomes Research Committee. Quality assessment of ERCP. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 165-169
5. Keats AS. The ASA classifications of physical status: recapitulation. Anesthesiology 1978; 49: 239-243
6. Cotton PB. Income and outcome metrics for the objective evaluation of ERCP and alternative methods. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56 (Suppl 6): S283-S290
7. Katz D, Nikfarjam M, Sfakioyaki A, Christophi C. Selective endoscopic cholangiography for the detection of common bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 1045-1049
8. Prat F, Meduri B, Ducot B et al. Prediction of common bile duct stones by non invasive tests. Ann of Surg 1999; 229: 362-368
9. Schutz SM, Abbott RM. Grading ERCPs by degree of difficulty: a new concept to produce more meaningful outcome data. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 535-539
10. Brotman M, Allen JI, Bickston SJ et al. AGA Task force on Quality in Practice. A national overview and implications for GI practice. Gastroenterology 2005; 129: 361-369
11. Costamagna G, Tringali A, Shah SH et al. Long-term follow-up of patients after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocolithiasis, and risk factors for recurrences. Endoscopy 2002; 34: 273-279
12. Lai K-H, Lo GH, Lin CK et al. Do patients with recurrent choledocolithiasis after endoscopic sphincterotomy benefit from regular follow-up? Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55: 523-526
13. Lisen GM, Degarmo P, Brodner R, Lieberman DA. Can the ASA grade predict the risk of endoscopic complications? Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: AB 142
14. Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G et al. Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 1998; 48: 1-10
15. Christensen M, Matzen P, Schulze S, Rosemberg J. Complications of ERCP; a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 721-731
16. Johanson JF. Quality and outcomes management in gastroenterology. Gastroenterol Clin N Am 1997; 26: 859-871
17. Baron TH, Peterson BT, Mergener K, Amitabh C. Quality indicators for endoscopic cholangiopancreaotography. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 892-897
18. Tham TCK, Carr-Locke DL, Collins JSA. Endoscopic sphincterotomy in the young patient: is there cause for concern? Gut 1997; 40: 687-700
19. Yaradarajula S, Kilgure MI, Wilcox CM, Eloubeldi MA. Relationship among hospital ERCP volume, length of stay and technical outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 338-350
20. Williams EJ, Taylor S, Fairclough P et al. Are we meeting the standards set for endoscopy? Results of a large-scale prospective survey of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatograph practice. Gut 2007; 58: 821-829
21. Naylor G, Gatta L, Butler A et al. Setting up a Quality Assurance Program in Endoscopy. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 701-708
22. Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ, de Groen PT. Utility of webbased assessment of patient satisfaction with endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 1061-1021