| Literature DB >> 31382731 |
Chang-Il Kwon1,2, Dong Hee Koh2,3, Tae Jun Song2,4, Won Suk Park2,5, Dong Hang Lee6, Seok Jeong2,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Using an appropriate guidewire can increase the success rate of selective cannulation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The purpose of this technical study was to investigate the characteristics of each guidewire type and to evaluate its efficiency and rapidity of insertion.Entities:
Keywords: Cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde; Guidewire; In vitro model; Technical study
Year: 2019 PMID: 31382731 PMCID: PMC7003007 DOI: 10.5946/ce.2019.114
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Endosc ISSN: 2234-2400
Fig. 1.Typical characteristics of guidewires. (A) Structure of a 0.025-inch, hydrophilic coating guidewire (VisiGlide 2TM; Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan). The guidewire is structurally divided into a shaft area and a tip area. The hydrophilic coating is mainly applied for the tip area, and the radio-opaque material is mainly attached to part of tip area. (B, C) Scanning electron microscopy examinations representing cross-sectional images of the 0.025-inch guidewire (VisiGlide 2TM; Olympus Co.) (B) and 0.035-inch guidewire (JagwireTM; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) (C).
Basic Characteristics of Guidewires Used in This Study[a)]
| No. | Commercial name | Manufacturer | Diameter (inch) | Length (cm) | Core material | Sheath material | Tip core material | Spiral coiled spring | Tip coating | Shape of tip |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fusion Loop Tip | Cook Endoscopy | 0.035 | 205 | Nitinol | PTFE | Platinum | Yes | ETFE | Loop (fixed) |
| 2 | gSlider | Medwork | 0.035 | 450 | Stainless steel | PTFE | Stainless steel | No | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Straight |
| 3 | VisiGlide 2 | Olympus | 0.025 | 450 | Nitinol | Fluorine coating polyethylene | Confidential | Yes | Hydrophilic PTFE | Angled |
| 4 | Tracer Metro Direct 35 | Cook Endoscopy | 0.035 | 480 | Nitinol | PTFE | Platinum | Yes | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Curved |
| 5 | Tracer Metro Direct 25 | Cook Endoscopy | 0.025 | 480 | Nitinol | PTFE | Platinum | Yes | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Curved |
| 6 | Optimos | Taewoong Medical | 0.035 | 450 | Nitinol | PTFE | Nitinol | No | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Straight |
| 7 | Jagwire | Boston Scientific | 0.035 | 450 | Nitinol | PTFE | Tungsten | No | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Straight |
| 8 | Dreamwire | Boston Scientific | 0.035 | 450 | Nitinol | PTFE | Tungsten | No | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Straight |
| 9 | Acrobat II | Cook Endoscopy | 0.035 | 450 | Nitinol | PTFE | Platinum | Yes | Hydrophilic polyurethane | Angled |
ETFE, ethylenetetrafluoroethylene; PTFE, polytetrafluoroethylene.
Some items (especially, tip coating materials) are not accurate due to the confidentiality of the company.
Fig. 2.Basic property tests for the guidewires. (A) Measuring the minimum width of the loop when the tip of the guidewire is bent. (B) A universal testing machine (LRX plus; LLOYD Instrument Ltd., West Sussex, England) for the three-point bending test. (C) Examples of the three-point bending test. The distance between two points fixing the guidewire is fixed to 60 mm, and the maximum depth of bending point is fixed to 30 mm. (D) The bending test cannot be applied to the tip of the guidewire because of the uncheckable bending force.
Fig. 3.In vitro test using 3D-printed silicone tubes. (A) Concepts for the stricture models. (B) 3D modeling and fabrication of ten different types of stricture silicone models. (C) Guidewire is inserted into each silicone tube through a cannulation catheter after saline replenishing. (D) Examples of unsuccessful and successful insertion tests in a severe stricture model.
Fig. 4.In vitro test using a hand-made biliary tree silicone model with six-stranded intrahepatic ducts. (A) Six small-diameter silicone tubes were attached diagonally to a large-diameter silicone tube. (B) The assembled silicone tubes were attached to a 40×40-cm wide transparent board using Lego blocks. (C) A guidewire was successfully inserted into the right posterior branch through a bowing catheter.
Results of Basic Technical Tests for the Guidewires Used in This Study
| No. | Commercial name | Width of the shaft (mm) | Width of the tip (mm) | Length of the tip (mm) | Minimum of the loop (mm) | Maximum bending force ( | Maximum bending stiffness ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fusion Loop Tip | 0.766 | 1.975 | 4.0 | 2.0 (fixed) | 1.219 | 0.110 |
| 2 | gSlider | 0.785 | 0.705 | 56.3 | 4.54 | 1.105 | 0.094 |
| 3 | VisiGlide 2 | 0.583 | 0.562 | 70.7 | 3.33 | 0.879 | 0.076 |
| 4 | Tracer Metro Direct 35 | 0.718 | 0.557 | 55.3 | 4.04 | 1.307 | 0.109 |
| 5 | Tracer Metro Direct 25 | 0.572 | 0.531 | 0.362 | 0.032 | ||
| 6 | Optimos | 0.777 | 0.618 | 53.8 | 4.28 | 1.054 | 0.084 |
| 7 | Jagwire | 0.785 | 0.674 | 54.9 | 3.65 | 1.177 | 0.104 |
| 8 | Dreamwire | 0.847 | 0.758 | 100.0 | 5.13 | 1.090 | 0.103 |
| 9 | Acrobat II | 0.720 | 0.480 | 50.0 | 3.66 | 1.305 | 0.111 |
Fig. 5.The change in the bending force according to the displacement of the bending point. In most of the guidewires, the slope of the bending force increased sharply in the early stage, and then the bending force was steadily maintained steadily if the bending became severe.
Results of in vitro Tests Using Two Models
| No. | Commercial name | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | ||
| 1 | Fusion Loop Tip | 103.2±18.4 (101.9) | 9.0±0.0 (9.0) | 97.8±23.6 (106.1) | 5.0±0.0 (5.0) |
| 2 | gSlider | 59.1±11.8 (60.3) | 9.0±0.0 (9.0) | 69.9±31.1 (79.2) | 5.1±0.3 (5.0) |
| 3 | VisiGlide 2 | 50.8±8.6 (51.8) | 10.0±0.0 (10.0) | 52.1±18.3 (47.1) | 6.0±0.0 (6.0) |
| 4 | Tracer Metro Direct 35 | 68.7±15.8 (66.8) | 9.0±0.0 (9.0) | 61.4±13.7 (59.3) | 5.0±0.0 (5.0) |
| 5 | Tracer Metro Direct 25 | 66.9±11.1 (65.4) | 9.0±0.0 (9.0) | 59.6±10.0 (56.6) | 5.3±0.5 (5.0) |
| 6 | Optimos | 65.8±17.1 (63.8) | 9.1±0.3 (9.0) | 68.5±22.7 (68.9) | 5.2±0.4 (5.0) |
| 7 | Jagwire | 53.6±12.2 (57.6) | 9.0±0.0 (9.0) | 64.1±13.7 (62.9) | 5.1±0.3 (5.0) |
| 8 | Dreamwire | 53.4±14.6 (54.2) | 10.0±0.0 (10.0) | 54.1±11.7 (52.7) | 5.3±0.5 (5.0) |
| 9 | Acrobat II | 50.9±10.2 (50.7) | 10.0±0.0 (10.0) | 33.0±5.1 (32.9) | 6.0±0.0 (6.0) |
| Total | 63.6±20.3 | 9.3±0.5 | 62.3±24.0 | 5.3±0.5 | |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (median).
Results of in vitro Tests according to the Shape of the Tip
| Shape of the tip | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | |
| Straight, curved or loop | 67.2±21.2 (64.0) | 9.2±0.4 (9.0) | 67.9±22.8 (63.9) | 5.1±0.4 (5.0) |
| Angled | 50.9±9.2 (50.7) | 10.0±0.0 (10.0) | 42.5±16.3 (37.3) | 6.0±0.0 (6.0) |
| Total | 63.6±20.3 | 9.3±0.5 | 62.3±24.0 | 5.3±0.5 |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.256 | <0.001 | |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (median).
Results of in vitro Tests according to the Width of the Shaft
| Width of the shaft | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | Total insertion time (sec) | Frequency of insertion ( | |
| 0.035-inch | 65.0±21.9 (61.7) | 9.3±0.5 (9.0) | 64.1±25.8 (59.3) | 5.2±0.4 (5.0) |
| 0.025-inch | 58.8±12.7 (58.5) | 9.5±0.5 (9.5) | 55.8±14.9 (55.7) | 5.7±0.5 (6.0) |
| Total | 63.6±20.3 | 9.3±0.5 | 62.3±24.0 | 5.3±0.5 |
| 0.390 | 0.099 | 0.256 | 0.001 | |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (median).