| Literature DB >> 28250900 |
Yuji Sakai1, Toshio Tsuyuguchi1, Nobuto Hirata1, So Nakaji1, Kenji Shimura1, Takao Nishikawa1, Tatsuya Fujimoto1, Tetsuya Hamano1, Takayoshi Nishino1, Osamu Yokosuka1.
Abstract
AIM: To examine the result of the use of 0.025-inch guidewire (GW) VisiGlide2TM as the first choice in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related procedures without selecting the patient in a multicenter prospective study.Entities:
Keywords: 0.025-inch guidewire; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopic sphincterotomy
Year: 2017 PMID: 28250900 PMCID: PMC5311476 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v9.i2.77
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc
Figure 10.025-inch guidewire VisiGlide2TM. The tip of hydrophilic coating is flexible.
Figure 2Comparison between 0.025-inch guidewire VisiGlide2TM, 0.025-inch guidewire VisiGlideTM, and 0.035 inch guidewire. Although it has thinness of 0.025-inch (0.63 mm), its special processing method ensures rigidity equivalent to that of 0.035 inch (0.89 mm). GW: Guidewire.
Figure 3Result of use of 0.025-inch guidewire VisiGlide2TM in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as the first choice. ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; TPPP: Transpancreatic precut papillotomy; PTGBD: Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage; GW: Guidewire.
Figure 4Although it has thinness of 0.025-inch (0.63 mm), its special processing method ensures rigidity equivalent to that of 0.035 inch (0.89 mm). A: 0.025-inch guidewire (GW) VisiGlide2TM placed in the bile duct (arrow)/pancreatic duct (arrow head). The visibility is good under endoscopy; B: 0.025-inch GW VisiGlide2TM placed in the bile duct (arrow)/pancreatic duct (arrow head). The visibility is good under radiography.
Patients’ background and disease background
| Sex | 122 males | 113 males | NS | |
| 80 females | 81 females | |||
| Age | 72.871 ± 11.403 (36-98) | 70.834 ± 11.824 (38-95) | NS | |
| Disease | Bile duct stone | 113 | 103 | NS |
| Cholangiocarcinoma | 31 | 26 | NS | |
| Chronic pancreatitis | 14 | 18 | NS | |
| Pancreatic cancer | 18 | 16 | NS | |
| Gallbladder cancer | 3 | 6 | NS | |
| Hepatolithiasis | 1 | 5 | NS | |
| Metastatic biliary obstruction | 5 | 5 | NS | |
| IPMN | 3 | 4 | NS | |
| Benign biliary stenosis | 4 | 3 | NS | |
| Acute cholecystitis | 5 | 3 | NS | |
| PSC | 2 | 2 | NS | |
| Postoperative bile leakage | 1 | 1 | NS | |
| Pancreaticobiliary maljunction | 1 | 1 | NS | |
| Duodenal papillary cancer | 1 | 1 | NS | |
| Target region | Bile duct | 190 | 180 | NS |
| Pancreatic duct | 12 | 14 | NS | |
| Stenosed lesion | Present | 90 | 77 | NS |
| Absent | 112 | 117 | NS | |
| Procedure | Scheduled ERCP | 157 | 155 | NS |
| Emergency | 45 | 39 | NS | |
| Purpose | Diagnosis | 10 | 14 | NS |
| Diagnosis + treatment | 15 | 9 | NS | |
| Treatment | 177 | 171 | NS | |
| Papillary treatment | None | 80 | 81 | NS |
| Post EST | 110 | 101 | NS | |
| Post EPST | 12 | 12 | NS |
IPMN: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm; PSC: Primary sclerosing cholangitis; EST: Endoscopic sphincterotomy; EPST: Endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; NS: Not significant.
Accomplishment rate of procedure and procedural time
| Success rate | 97.5 (197/202)% | 92.3 (180/195)% | 0.034 |
| Procedural time (min) | 23.930 ± 16.207 (4-65) | 31.285 ± 19.122 (4-117) | 0.0001 |
Figure 5Placement of metallic stent using 0.025-inch guidewire VisiGlide2TM. It was possible to break through the stenosis, to induce delivery and to place stents only with this guidewire.
Papillary treatment
| EST | 67 | 100 (67/67)% | 67 | 100 (67/67)% | NS |
| EST + EPLBD | 3 | 100 (3/3)% | 5 | 100 (5/5)% | NS |
| EPST | 3 | 100 (3/3)% | 3 | 100 (3/3)% | NS |
| EPBD | 1 | 100 (1/1)% | 4 | 100 (4/4)% | NS |
| Total | 74 | 100 (74/74)% | 79 | 100 (79/79)% | NS |
EST: Endoscopic sphincterotomy; EPLBD: Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation; EPST: Endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy; EPBD: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation; NS: Not significant.
Procedure conducted after insertion into the bile duct and pancreatic duct
| ENBD | 60 | 98.3 (59/60)% | 51 | 100 (51/51)% | NS |
| ENPD | 5 | 100 (5/5)% | 3 | 100 (3/3)% | NS |
| ENGBD | 5 | 80.0 (4/5)% | 1 | 100 (1/1)% | NS |
| EGBS | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | 1 | 0 (0/1)% | NS |
| EBS | 95 | 100 (95/95)% | 78 | 100 (78/78)% | NS |
| EPS | 30 | 100 (30/30)% | 22 | 100 (22/22)% | NS |
| EML | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | NS |
| Placement of MS | 12 | 100 (12/12)% | 8 | 100 (8/8)% | NS |
| Lithotomy | 88 | 100 (88/88)% | 69 | 100 (69/69)% | NS |
| Bile duct biopsy | 8 | 100 (8/8)% | 9 | 100 (9/9)% | NS |
| Pancreatic duct biopsy | 0 | - | 1 | 100 (1/1)% | NS |
| Peroral cholangioscopy | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | 1 | 100 (1/1)% | NS |
| IDUS | 10 | 100 (10/10)% | 6 | 100 (6/6)% | NS |
| Bile duct brushing cytology | 12 | 100 (12/12)% | 9 | 100 (9/9)% | NS |
| Pancreatic duct brushing cytology | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | 2 | 100 (2/2)% | NS |
| Total 333 99.4 (331/333) | Total 263 99.6 (262/263)% | NS | |||
| Guidewire type straight angle | 127 | 34 | NS | ||
| 75 | 0 | NS | |||
ENBD: Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage; ENPD: Endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage; ENGBD: Endoscopic nasogallbladder drainage; EGBS: Endoscopic gallbladder stenting; EBS: Endoscopic biliary stenting; EPS: Endoscopic pancreatic stenting; EML: Endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy; MS: Metallic stent; IDUS: Intraductal ultrasonography; NS: Not significant.
Results of incidence of accidental symptoms
| Bleeding | 2 | 4 | NS |
| Pancreatitis | 3 | 1 | NS |
| Perforation | 1 | 0 | NS |
| Guidewire perforation | 0 | 4 | NS |
| Total (%) | 6 (3.0%) | 9 (4.6%) | NS |
NS: Not significant.