AIM: To compare the outcomes between double-guidewire technique (DGT) and transpancreatic precut sphincterotomy (TPS) in patients with difficult biliary cannulation. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized study conducted in single tertiary referral hospital in Korea. Between January 2005 and September 2010. A total of 71 patients, who bile duct cannulation was not possible and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved, were randomized into DGT (n = 34) and TPS (n = 37) groups. DGT or TPS was done for selective biliary cannulation. We measured the technical success rates of biliary cannulation, median cannulation time, and procedure related complications. RESULTS: The distribution of patients after randomization was balanced, and both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics, except the higher percentage of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage in the DGT group (55.9% vs 13.5%, P < 0.001). Successful cannulation rate and mean cannulation times in DGT and TPS groups were 91.2% vs 91.9% and 14.1 ± 13.2 min vs 15.4 ± 17.9 min, P = 0.732, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups. The overall incidence of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis was 38.2% vs 10.8%, P < 0.011 in the DGT group and the TPS group; post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group. But the overall incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia was no significant difference between the two groups; DGT group vs TPS group: 14.7% vs 16.2%, P < 1.0. CONCLUSION: When free bile duct cannulation was difficult and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved, DGT and TPS facilitated biliary cannulation and showed similar success rates. However, post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To compare the outcomes between double-guidewire technique (DGT) and transpancreatic precut sphincterotomy (TPS) in patients with difficult biliary cannulation. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized study conducted in single tertiary referral hospital in Korea. Between January 2005 and September 2010. A total of 71 patients, who bile duct cannulation was not possible and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved, were randomized into DGT (n = 34) and TPS (n = 37) groups. DGT or TPS was done for selective biliary cannulation. We measured the technical success rates of biliary cannulation, median cannulation time, and procedure related complications. RESULTS: The distribution of patients after randomization was balanced, and both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics, except the higher percentage of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage in the DGT group (55.9% vs 13.5%, P < 0.001). Successful cannulation rate and mean cannulation times in DGT and TPS groups were 91.2% vs 91.9% and 14.1 ± 13.2 min vs 15.4 ± 17.9 min, P = 0.732, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups. The overall incidence of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis was 38.2% vs 10.8%, P < 0.011 in the DGT group and the TPS group; post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group. But the overall incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia was no significant difference between the two groups; DGT group vs TPS group: 14.7% vs 16.2%, P < 1.0. CONCLUSION: When free bile duct cannulation was difficult and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved, DGT and TPS facilitated biliary cannulation and showed similar success rates. However, post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group.
Authors: Y Gotoh; K Tamada; T Tomiyama; S Wada; A Ohashi; Y Satoh; T Higashizawa; T Miyata; K Ido; K Sugano Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: M L Freeman; D B Nelson; S Sherman; G B Haber; M E Herman; P J Dorsher; J P Moore; M B Fennerty; M E Ryan; M J Shaw; J D Lande; A M Pheley Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-09-26 Impact factor: 91.245
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: 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