A new guidewire cannulation technique in ERCP: successful deep biliary access with triple-lumen sphincterotome and guidewire controlled by the endoscopist

Wire-guided biliary cannulation: a comprehensive approach to a set of techniques

Biliary cannulation represent a challenge for the endoscopists that approach to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with non-negligible rate of failure even in expert hands. In order to achieve the biliary tree, two main technique are nowadays mainly used, namely the contrast-assisted cannulation and the wire-guided cannulation (WGC) techniques. The WGC technique is widely used because it seems to be related to higher success rate of cannulation of the common bile duct and, at the same time, to lower rates of complications. Particularly, this approach is associated with lower risk of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis, although the pathogenesis of this adverse event is still not completely understood. The outspread of this technique among endoscopists promoted the development of different methods of performing WGC-assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, such as the touch technique, the no-touch technique and the double guide-wire cannulation. Furthermore, the variety of guide wires and accessories, with their different characteristics, contribute to make the scenario extremely heterogeneous. To date, the published studies did not highlight which is the best strategy that maximizes the rate of success and minimizes the percentage of complications, even because the experience of the operator represents an important variable that conditions the outcomes. The aim of this review is to define state of the art in WGC technique, in order to better understand the possible advantages in using this approach and to bring to light the possible area that may be object of further studies.

Endoscopic treatment for pancreatic diseases: Needle-knife-guided cannulation via the minor papilla

AIM

To determine the efficacy and safety of meticulous cannulation by needle-knife.

METHODS

Three needle-knife procedures were used to facilitate cannulation in cases when standard cannulation techniques failed. A total of 104 cannulations via the minor papilla attempted in 74 patients at our center between January 2008 and June 2014 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Standard methods were successful in 79 cannulations. Of the 25 cannulations that could not be performed by standard methods, 19 were performed by needle-knife, while 17 (89.5%) were successful. Needle-knife use improved the success rate of cannulation [76.0%, 79/104 vs 92.3%, (79 + 17)/104; P = 0.001]. When the 6 cases not appropriate for needle-knife cannulation were excluded, the success rate was improved further (80.6%, 79/98 vs 98.0%, 96/98; P = 0.000). There were no significant differences in the rates of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography adverse events between the group using standard methods alone and the group using needle-knife after failure of standard methods (4.7% vs 10.5%, P = 0.301).

CONCLUSION

The needle-knife procedure may be an alternative method for improving the success rate of cannulation via the minor papilla, particularly when standard cannulation has failed.

Conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography vs the Olympus V-scope system

AIM

To compare the new Olympus V-scope (VS) to conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP).

METHODS

Forty-nine patients with previous endoscopic papillotomy who were admitted for interventional ERCP for one of several reasons were included in this single-centre, prospective randomized study. Consecutive patients were randomized to either the VS group or to the conventional ERCP group. ERCP-naïve patients who had not undergone papillotomy were excluded. The main study parameters were interventional examination time, X-ray time and dose, and premedication dose (all given below as the median, range) and were investigated in addition to each patient's clinical outcome and complications. Subjective scores to assess each procedure were also provided by the physicians and endoscopy assistants who carried out the procedures. A statistical analysis was carried out using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with 50 interventions were examined with the VS ERCP technique, and 24 patients with 47 interventions were examined using the conventional ERCP technique. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the age, sex, indications, degree of ERCP difficulty, or interventions performed. The main study parameters in the VS group showed a nonsignificant trend towards a shorter interventional examination time (29 min, 5-50 min vs 31 min, 7-90 min, P = 0.28), shorter X-ray time (5.8 min, 0.6-14.1 min vs 6.1 min, 1.6-18.8 min, P = 0.48), and lower X-ray dose (1351 cGy/m(2), 159-5039 cGy/m(2) vs 1296 cGy/m(2), 202.2-6421 cGy/m(2), P = 0.34). A nonsignificant trend towards fewer adverse events occurred in the VS group as compared with the conventional ERCP group (cholangitis: 12% vs 16%, P = 0.12; pain: 4% vs 12.5%, P = 0.33; post-ERCP pancreatitis: 4% vs 12.5%, P = 0.14). In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in assessment by the physicians and endoscopy assistants using subjective questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

ERCP using the short-guidewire V-system did not significantly improve ERCP performance or patient outcomes, but it may reduce and simplify the ERCP procedure in difficult settings.