ASGE guideline: Complications of EUS

Brian C. Jacobson, Douglas G. Adler, Raquel E. Davila, William K. Hirota, Jonathan A Leighton, Waqar A. Qureshi, Elizabeth Rajan, Marc J. Zuckerman, Robert D. Fanelli, Todd H. Baron, Douglas Orrick Faigel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

172 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

For the following points: (A), prospective controlled trials; (B), observational studies; (C), expert opinion. • EUS uses instruments that have different mechanical and optical properties than standard forward-viewing endoscopes and require special care in their use to minimize complications. (C) • Patients undergoing EUS by experienced endosonographers are not at increased risk for perforation compared with standard endoscopy. Lack of operator experience, advanced patient age, difficulty with esophageal intubation, and dilation of esophageal cancers may all be risk factors for perforation. (B) • Most complications of EUS are associated with performing FNAs. (B) • The risk of bacteremia after EUS-FNA is low. (A) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid lesions or lymph nodes do not require antibiotic prophylaxis. One exception may be transrectal FNA, although data supporting routine antibiotic use do not exist. (B) • Patients who undergo EUS-FNA of cystic lesions (pancreatic or mediastinal) are at increased risk of fever and possibly infectious complications. Antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted in this setting. (B) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of the pancreas have a 1% to 2% risk of pancreatitis. (B) • Clinically significant bleeding and bile peritonitis are rare complications of EUS-FNA. (B) • EUS-guided celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis carries a small risk of major complications, but the safety appears to be comparable with percutaneous celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis. (B).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)8-12
Number of pages5
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume61
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2005

Fingerprint

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
Guidelines
Celiac Plexus
Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Endoscopes
Expert Testimony
Esophageal Neoplasms
Bacteremia
Peritonitis
Intubation
Bile
Pancreatitis
Endoscopy
Observational Studies
Dilatation
Pancreas
Fever
Lymph Nodes
Hemorrhage
Anti-Bacterial Agents

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Jacobson, B. C., Adler, D. G., Davila, R. E., Hirota, W. K., Leighton, J. A., Qureshi, W. A., ... Faigel, D. O. (2005). ASGE guideline: Complications of EUS. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 61(1), 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4

ASGE guideline : Complications of EUS. / Jacobson, Brian C.; Adler, Douglas G.; Davila, Raquel E.; Hirota, William K.; Leighton, Jonathan A; Qureshi, Waqar A.; Rajan, Elizabeth; Zuckerman, Marc J.; Fanelli, Robert D.; Baron, Todd H.; Faigel, Douglas Orrick.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 61, No. 1, 01.2005, p. 8-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jacobson, BC, Adler, DG, Davila, RE, Hirota, WK, Leighton, JA, Qureshi, WA, Rajan, E, Zuckerman, MJ, Fanelli, RD, Baron, TH & Faigel, DO 2005, 'ASGE guideline: Complications of EUS', Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4
Jacobson BC, Adler DG, Davila RE, Hirota WK, Leighton JA, Qureshi WA et al. ASGE guideline: Complications of EUS. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2005 Jan;61(1):8-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4
Jacobson, Brian C. ; Adler, Douglas G. ; Davila, Raquel E. ; Hirota, William K. ; Leighton, Jonathan A ; Qureshi, Waqar A. ; Rajan, Elizabeth ; Zuckerman, Marc J. ; Fanelli, Robert D. ; Baron, Todd H. ; Faigel, Douglas Orrick. / ASGE guideline : Complications of EUS. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2005 ; Vol. 61, No. 1. pp. 8-12.
@article{af91b3d0169a48baa59111e41b1d83b8,
title = "ASGE guideline: Complications of EUS",
abstract = "For the following points: (A), prospective controlled trials; (B), observational studies; (C), expert opinion. • EUS uses instruments that have different mechanical and optical properties than standard forward-viewing endoscopes and require special care in their use to minimize complications. (C) • Patients undergoing EUS by experienced endosonographers are not at increased risk for perforation compared with standard endoscopy. Lack of operator experience, advanced patient age, difficulty with esophageal intubation, and dilation of esophageal cancers may all be risk factors for perforation. (B) • Most complications of EUS are associated with performing FNAs. (B) • The risk of bacteremia after EUS-FNA is low. (A) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid lesions or lymph nodes do not require antibiotic prophylaxis. One exception may be transrectal FNA, although data supporting routine antibiotic use do not exist. (B) • Patients who undergo EUS-FNA of cystic lesions (pancreatic or mediastinal) are at increased risk of fever and possibly infectious complications. Antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted in this setting. (B) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of the pancreas have a 1{\%} to 2{\%} risk of pancreatitis. (B) • Clinically significant bleeding and bile peritonitis are rare complications of EUS-FNA. (B) • EUS-guided celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis carries a small risk of major complications, but the safety appears to be comparable with percutaneous celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis. (B).",
author = "Jacobson, {Brian C.} and Adler, {Douglas G.} and Davila, {Raquel E.} and Hirota, {William K.} and Leighton, {Jonathan A} and Qureshi, {Waqar A.} and Elizabeth Rajan and Zuckerman, {Marc J.} and Fanelli, {Robert D.} and Baron, {Todd H.} and Faigel, {Douglas Orrick}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "8--12",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ASGE guideline

T2 - Complications of EUS

AU - Jacobson, Brian C.

AU - Adler, Douglas G.

AU - Davila, Raquel E.

AU - Hirota, William K.

AU - Leighton, Jonathan A

AU - Qureshi, Waqar A.

AU - Rajan, Elizabeth

AU - Zuckerman, Marc J.

AU - Fanelli, Robert D.

AU - Baron, Todd H.

AU - Faigel, Douglas Orrick

PY - 2005/1

Y1 - 2005/1

N2 - For the following points: (A), prospective controlled trials; (B), observational studies; (C), expert opinion. • EUS uses instruments that have different mechanical and optical properties than standard forward-viewing endoscopes and require special care in their use to minimize complications. (C) • Patients undergoing EUS by experienced endosonographers are not at increased risk for perforation compared with standard endoscopy. Lack of operator experience, advanced patient age, difficulty with esophageal intubation, and dilation of esophageal cancers may all be risk factors for perforation. (B) • Most complications of EUS are associated with performing FNAs. (B) • The risk of bacteremia after EUS-FNA is low. (A) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid lesions or lymph nodes do not require antibiotic prophylaxis. One exception may be transrectal FNA, although data supporting routine antibiotic use do not exist. (B) • Patients who undergo EUS-FNA of cystic lesions (pancreatic or mediastinal) are at increased risk of fever and possibly infectious complications. Antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted in this setting. (B) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of the pancreas have a 1% to 2% risk of pancreatitis. (B) • Clinically significant bleeding and bile peritonitis are rare complications of EUS-FNA. (B) • EUS-guided celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis carries a small risk of major complications, but the safety appears to be comparable with percutaneous celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis. (B).

AB - For the following points: (A), prospective controlled trials; (B), observational studies; (C), expert opinion. • EUS uses instruments that have different mechanical and optical properties than standard forward-viewing endoscopes and require special care in their use to minimize complications. (C) • Patients undergoing EUS by experienced endosonographers are not at increased risk for perforation compared with standard endoscopy. Lack of operator experience, advanced patient age, difficulty with esophageal intubation, and dilation of esophageal cancers may all be risk factors for perforation. (B) • Most complications of EUS are associated with performing FNAs. (B) • The risk of bacteremia after EUS-FNA is low. (A) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid lesions or lymph nodes do not require antibiotic prophylaxis. One exception may be transrectal FNA, although data supporting routine antibiotic use do not exist. (B) • Patients who undergo EUS-FNA of cystic lesions (pancreatic or mediastinal) are at increased risk of fever and possibly infectious complications. Antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted in this setting. (B) • Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of the pancreas have a 1% to 2% risk of pancreatitis. (B) • Clinically significant bleeding and bile peritonitis are rare complications of EUS-FNA. (B) • EUS-guided celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis carries a small risk of major complications, but the safety appears to be comparable with percutaneous celiac plexus blockade or neurolysis. (B).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=19944434146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=19944434146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4

DO - 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02393-4

M3 - Article

C2 - 15672049

AN - SCOPUS:19944434146

VL - 61

SP - 8

EP - 12

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 1

ER -