Transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy versus double guidewire in difficult biliary cannulation: a randomized controlled trial

Author:

Kylänpää Leena1,Koskensalo Vilja1ORCID,Saarela Arto2,Ejstrud Per3,Udd Marianne1,Lindström Outi1,Rainio Mia1,Tenca Andrea4,Halttunen Jorma1,Qvigstad Gunnar5,Arnelo Urban6,Fagerström Niklas6,Hauge Truls7,Aabakken Lars8,Grönroos Juha9

Affiliation:

1. Abdominal Center, Gastroenterological Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland

3. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark

4. Abdominal Center, Gastroenterology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

5. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway

6. Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

7. Department of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway

8. Department of Medical Gastroenterology, Rikshospitalet University Hospital, Oslo, Norway

9. Division of Digestive Surgery and Urology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland

Abstract

Abstract Background Difficult biliary cannulation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) increases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The purpose of this prospective, randomized, multicenter study was to compare two advanced rescue methods, transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy (TPBS) and a double-guidewire (DGW) technique, in difficult common bile duct (CBD) cannulation. Methods Patients with native papilla and planned CBD cannulation were recruited at eight Scandinavian hospitals. An experienced endoscopist attempted CBD cannulation with wire-guided cannulation. If the procedure fulfilled the definition of difficult cannulation and a guidewire entered the pancreatic duct, randomization to either TPBS or to DGW was performed. If the randomized method failed, any method available was performed. The primary end point was the frequency of PEP and the secondary end points included successful cannulation with the randomized method. Results In total, 1190 patients were recruited and 203 (17.1 %) were randomized according to the study protocol (TPBS 104 and DGW 99). PEP developed in 14/104 patients (13.5 %) in the TPBS group and 16/99 patients (16.2 %) in the DGW group (P = 0.69). No difference existed in PEP severity between the groups. The rate of successful deep biliary cannulation was significantly higher with TPBS (84.6 % [88/104]) than with DGW (69.7 % [69/99]; P = 0.01). Conclusions In difficult biliary cannulation, there was no difference in PEP rate between TPBS and DGW techniques. TPBS is a good alternative in cases of difficult cannulation when the guidewire is in the pancreatic duct.

Funder

Maud Kuistilan Muistosäätiö

Suomen Lääketieteen Säätiö

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3