Affiliation:
1. Research, Audit and Academic Surgery Royal Australasian College of Surgeons Adelaide South Australia Australia
2. The Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology The Queen Elizabeth Hospital Adelaide South Australia Australia
3. School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Adelaide Adelaide South Australia Australia
4. Discipline of Surgery The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University of Adelaide Adelaide South Australia Australia
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a commonly performed procedure worldwide. The aim of this study was to examine cases of mortality after ERCP to identify clinical incidents that are potentially preventable, to improve patient safety.MethodsThe Australian and New Zealand Audit of Surgical Mortality provides an independent and externally peer‐reviewed audit of surgical mortality pertaining to potentially avoidable issues. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data within this database was performed for the 8‐year audit period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2016. Clinical incidents were identified by assessors through first‐ or second‐line review, and thematically coded into periprocedural stages. These themes were then qualitatively analysed.ResultsThere were 58 potentially avoidable deaths following ERCP, with 85 clinical incidents. Preprocedural incidents were most common (n = 37), followed by postprocedural (n = 32) and then intraprocedural (n = 8). Communication issues occurred across the periprocedural period (n = 8). Preprocedural incidents included delay to procedure, inadequate resuscitative management, decision to perform procedure and inadequate assessment. Intraprocedural incidents comprised technical factors and inadequate support. Postprocedural incidents involved inappropriate treatment, delay in definitive surgical treatment or in recognizing complications, inappropriate second‐line intervention and inadequate assessment. Communication incidents comprised inadequate documentation, failure to escalate care and poor inter‐clinician communication.ConclusionCauses of mortality following ERCP are wide‐ranging, and reviewing clinical incidents associated with potentially avoidable mortality can serve to inform and educate practitioners. In collating a subset of cases in which procedure‐related mortality was deemed avoidable, a series of cautionary tales about ERCP is presented that may provide cues to practitioners on improving patient safety and inform future surgical practice.