AIM: To investigate the technical success and clinical complication rate of a cannulated pancreatic duct with guidewire for biliary access. METHODS: During a five-year study period, a total of 2843 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Initial biliary cannulation method consisted of single-guidewire technique (SGT) for up to 5 attempts, followed by double-guidewire technique (DGT) when repeated unintentional pancreatic duct cannulation had taken place. Pre-cut papillotomy technique was reserved for when DGT had failed or no pancreatic duct cannulation had been previously achieved. Main outcome measurements were defined as biliary cannulation success and post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complication rate. RESULTS: SGT (92.3% success rate) was characterized by statistically significant enhanced patient outcome compared to either the DGT (43.8%, P < 0.001), pre-cut failed DGT (73%, P < 0.001) or pre-cut as first step method (80.6%, P = 0.002). Pre-cut as first step method offered a statistically significantly more favorable outcome compared to the DGT (P < 0.001). The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis did not differ in a statistically significant manner between either method (SGT: 5.3%, DGT: 6.1%, Pre-cut failed DGT: 7.9%, Pre-cut as first step: 7.5%) or with patients' gender. CONCLUSION: Although DGT success rate proved not to be superior to SGT or pre-cut papillotomy, it is considered highly satisfactory in terms of safety in order to avoid the risk of a pre-cut when biliary therapy is necessary in difficult-to-cannulate cases.
AIM: To investigate the technical success and clinical complication rate of a cannulated pancreatic duct with guidewire for biliary access. METHODS: During a five-year study period, a total of 2843 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Initial biliary cannulation method consisted of single-guidewire technique (SGT) for up to 5 attempts, followed by double-guidewire technique (DGT) when repeated unintentional pancreatic duct cannulation had taken place. Pre-cut papillotomy technique was reserved for when DGT had failed or no pancreatic duct cannulation had been previously achieved. Main outcome measurements were defined as biliary cannulation success and post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complication rate. RESULTS: SGT (92.3% success rate) was characterized by statistically significant enhanced patient outcome compared to either the DGT (43.8%, P < 0.001), pre-cut failed DGT (73%, P < 0.001) or pre-cut as first step method (80.6%, P = 0.002). Pre-cut as first step method offered a statistically significantly more favorable outcome compared to the DGT (P < 0.001). The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis did not differ in a statistically significant manner between either method (SGT: 5.3%, DGT: 6.1%, Pre-cut failed DGT: 7.9%, Pre-cut as first step: 7.5%) or with patients' gender. CONCLUSION: Although DGT success rate proved not to be superior to SGT or pre-cut papillotomy, it is considered highly satisfactory in terms of safety in order to avoid the risk of a pre-cut when biliary therapy is necessary in difficult-to-cannulate cases.
Authors: Alberto Herreros de Tejada; Jose Luis Calleja; Gonzalo Díaz; Virginia Pertejo; Jesús Espinel; Guillermo Cacho; Javier Jiménez; Isabel Millán; Fernando García; Luis Abreu Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2009-06-27 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: S Maeda; H Hayashi; O Hosokawa; K Dohden; M Hattori; M Morita; E Kidani; N Ibe; S Tatsumi Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Everson L A Artifon; Paulo Sakai; José E M Cunha; Bhawna Halwan; Shinichi Ishioka; Atul Kumar Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-06-20 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Jo Vandervoort; Roy M Soetikno; Tony C K Tham; Richard C K Wong; Angelo P Ferrari; Henry Montes; Alfred D Roston; Adam Slivka; David R Lichtenstein; Frederick W Ruymann; Jacques Van Dam; Mike Hughes; David L Carr-Locke Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Su Jin Kim; Dae Hwan Kang; Hyung Wook Kim; Cheol Woong Choi; Su Bum Park; Byeong Jun Song; Young Mi Hong Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-05-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Anthony T DeBenedet; B Joseph Elmunzer; Sean T McCarthy; Grace H Elta; Philip S Schoenfeld Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 10.864