Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current Status and Future Perspective in Cholangiopancreatoscopy

  • Pancreas (V Chandrasekhara, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of review

With the rapid growth of cholangiopancreatoscopy, several platforms of cholangiopancreatoscopy have been currently available. Since the introduction of digital single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy, there have been several reports describing its efficacy for long-standing and novel applications. The purpose of this review is to show the current status and future perspective of cholangiopancreatoscopy.

Recent findings

Meta-analysis of cholangiopancreatoscopy have demonstrated good diagnostic yield for visual impression; however, it should be noted that there is no standardized classification system used for distinguishing benign from malignant lesions. In contrast, utility of tissue sampling under direct vision for cholangiopancreatic disorders is inconclusive. This could be explained by the fact that available devices (e.g., biopsy forceps) are limited by the small diameter of accessory channel. Regarding therapeutic applications, several studies demonstrated efficacy and feasibility of electrohydraulic lithotripsy or laser lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stone and pancreatic duct stone under cholangiopancreatoscopic guidance. Additionally, ablation of tumors, selective guidewire placement, retrieval of migrated stents, and anterograde cholangioscopy-guided procedure by using cholangiopancreatoscopy have been reported.

Summary

The recent development of digital single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy enables easy access to the bile duct and pancreatic duct, contributing to expanding indications for cholangiopancreatoscopy. Improvement of devices or development of innovative devices is required to overcome the remaining problems of cholangiopancreatoscopy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Nakajima M, Akasaka Y, Fukumoto K, Mitsuyoshi Y, Kawai K. Peroral cholangiopancreatoscopy (PCPS) under duodenoscopic guidance. Am J Gastroenterol. 1976;66:241–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.1976.tb00816.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Igarashi Y, Igarashi Y, Ukita T, Inoue H, Ishiguro J, Ogawa S, et al. Clinical evaluation of the peroral cholangioscopy using a new videoscope. Diagn Ther Endosc. 1999;5:231–7. https://doi.org/10.1155/DTE.5.231.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, Tsuchiya T, Kurihara T, Ishii K, et al. Peroral cholangioscopic diagnosis of biliary-tract diseases by using narrow-band imaging (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:730–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2007.02.056.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Okabe Y, Tsuruta O, Naito Y, Suga H, Sata M. Clinical evaluation of peroral cholangioscopy for biliary disease using narrow band imaging. Dig Endosc. 2007;19:S121–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1443-1661.2007.00721.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ishida Y, Itoi T, Okabe Y. Can image-enhanced cholangioscopy distinguish benign from malignant lesions in the biliary duct? Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015;29:611–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2015.05.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Moon JH, Ko BM, Choi HJ, Hong SJ, Cheon YK, Cho YD, et al. Intraductal balloon-guided direct peroral cholangioscopy with an ultraslim upper endoscope (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:297–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.11.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Choi HJ, Moon JH, Ko BM, Hong SJ, Koo HC, Cheon YK, et al. Overtube-balloon-assisted direct peroral cholangioscopy by using an ultra-slim upper endoscope (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:935–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.043.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mori A, Mori A, Ohashi N, Ohashi N, Nozaki M, Nozaki M, et al. Feasibility of duodenal balloon-assisted direct cholangioscopy with an ultrathin upper endoscope. Endoscopy. 2012;44:1037–44. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1309467.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen YK. Preclinical characterization of the Spyglass peroral cholangiopancreatoscopy system for direct access, visualization, and biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:303–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2006.07.048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen YK, Pleskow DK. SpyGlass single-operator peroral cholangiopancreatoscopy system for the diagnosis and therapy of bile-duct disorders: a clinical feasibility study (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:832–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2007.01.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakajima M, Akasaka Y, Yamaguchi K, Fujimoto S, Kawai K. Direct endoscopic visualization of the bile and pancreatic duct systems by peroral cholangiopancreatoscopy (PCPS). Gastrointest Endosc. 1978;24:141–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(78)73488-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ishida Y, Itoi T, Okabe Y. Types of peroral cholangioscopy: how to choose the most suitable type of cholangioscopy. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2016;14:210–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-016-0090-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. •• ASGE Technology Committee, Komanduri S, Thosani N, Abu Dayyeh BK, Aslanian HR, Enestvedt BK, et al. Cholangiopancreatoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:209–21 This report reviews currently available system and accessories of cholangiopancreatoscopy in detail.

  14. Itoi T, Moon JH, Waxman I. Current status of direct peroral cholangioscopy. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:154–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01114.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moon JH, Choi HJ. The role of direct peroral Cholangioscopy using an Ultraslim endoscope for biliary lesions: indications, limitations, and complications. Clin Endosc. 2013;46:537–9. https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2013.46.5.537.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Shah R, Neuhaus H, Parsi M, Reddy D, Pleskow D. Randomized study of digital single-operator cholangioscope compared to fiberoptic single-operator cholangioscope in a novel cholangioscopy bench model. Endosc Int Open. 2018;06:E851–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tsutsumi K, Kato H, Yabe S, Mizukawa S, Seki H, Akimoto Y, et al. A comparative evaluation of treatment methods for bile duct stones after hepaticojejunostomy between percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy and peroral, short double-balloon enteroscopy. Ther Adv Gastroenterol. 2017;10:54–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yamauchi H, Kida M, Okuwaki K, Miyazawa S, Matsumoto T, Uehara K, et al. Therapeutic peroral direct cholangioscopy using a single balloon enteroscope in patients with Roux-en-Y anastomosis (with videos). Surg Endosc. 2017;32:498–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tonozuka R, Itoi T, Sofuni A, Tsuchiya T, Ishii K, Tanaka R, et al. Novel peroral direct digital cholangioscopy-assisted lithotripsy using a monorail technique through the overtube in patients with surgically altered anatomy (with video). Dig Endosc. 2019;31:203–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Osanai M, Itoi T, Igarashi Y, Tanaka K, Kida M, Maguchi H, et al. Peroral video cholangioscopy to evaluate indeterminate bile duct lesions and preoperative mucosal cancerous extension: a prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy. 2013;45:635–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Korrapati P, Ciolino J, Wani S, Shah J, Watson R, Muthusamy VR, et al. The efficacy of peroral cholangioscopy for difficult bile duct stones and indeterminate strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4:E263–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ayoub F, Yang D, Draganov PV. Cholangioscopy in the digital era. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;3:82–2. https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh.2018.10.08.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. •• Mounzer R, Austin GL, Wani S, Brauer BC, Fukami N, Shah RJ. Per-oral video cholangiopancreatoscopy with narrow-band imaging for the evaluation of indeterminate pancreaticobiliary disease. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:509–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12981-019-0217-3. This is the first study on individual findings of video cholangioscopy.

  24. Itoi T, Kamisawa T, Igarashi Y, Kawakami H, Yasuda I, Itokawa F, et al. The role of peroral video cholangioscopy in patients with IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis. J Gastroenterol. 2013;48:504–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-012-0652-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ishida Y, Okabe Y, Yasumoto M, Naito Y, Nakama Y, Kitasato Y, et al. Ex vivo magnifying endoscopic observation of bile duct mucosa using narrowband imaging. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018;25:433–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.581.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ogura T, Imanishi M, Kurisu Y, Onda S, Sano T, Takagi W, et al. Prospective evaluation of digital single-operator cholangioscope for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures (with videos). Dig Endosc. 2017;29:782–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12878.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. •• Turowski F, Hügle U, Dormann A, Bechtler M, Jakobs R, Gottschalk U, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy with SpyGlassDS™: results of a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2018;32:3981–8 This study demonstrates efficacy of SpyGlass DS for diagnostic and therapeutic procedure.

  28. •• Navaneethan U, Hasan MK, Kommaraju K, Zhu X, Hebert-Magee S, Hawes RH, et al. Digital, single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy in the diagnosis and management of pancreatobiliary disorders: a multicenter clinical experience (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:649–55 This study reveals efficacy of SpyGlass DS for diagnostic and therapeutic procedure.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kanno Y, Koshita S, Ogawa T, Masu K, Kusunose H, Sakai T, et al. Peroral cholangioscopy by SpyGlass DS versus CHF-B260 for evaluation of the lateral spread of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Endosc Int Open. 2018;6:E1349–54. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0743-5283.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Mizrahi M, Khoury T, Wang Y, Cohen J, Sheridan J, Chuttani R, et al. “Apple Far from the Tree”: comparative effectiveness of fiberoptic single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy (FSOCP) and digital SOCP (DSOCP). HPB (Oxford). 2018;20:285–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2017.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. • Tyberg A, Raijman I, Siddiqui A, Arnelo U, Adler DG, Xu M-M, et al. Digital pancreaticocholangioscopy for mapping of pancreaticobiliary neoplasia: can we alter the surgical resection margin? J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2019;53:71–5 This study evaluates mapping biopsy to reveal clinical impact of SpyGlass DS.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. •• Navaneethan U, Hasan MK, Lourdusamy V, Njei B, Varadarajulu S, Hawes RH. Single-operator cholangioscopy and targeted biopsies in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82:608–614.e2. https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goy049. This study reveals the diagnostic yield of cholangioscopy-guided biopsy.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lenze F, Bokemeyer A, Gross D, Nowacki T, Bettenworth D, Ullerich H. Safety, diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy of digital single-operator cholangioscopy. United European Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:902–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640618764943.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Hasan MK, Navaneethan U, Hawes R, Hebert-Magee S. Improving the diagnostic yield of single-operator cholangioscopy-guided biopsy of indeterminate biliary strictures: ROSE to the rescue? (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:681–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.03.1497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Klapman JB, Logrono R, Dye CE, WAXMAN I. Clinical impact of on-site cytopathology interpretation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:1289–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07472.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Muñoz JE, Abdulkader I, Larino-Noia J, Eugenyeva E, Lozano-Leon A, et al. Influence of on-site cytopathology evaluation on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:1705–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2011.119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Seitz U, Bapaye A, Bohnacker S, Navarrete C, Maydeo A, Soehendra N. Advances in therapeutic endoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones. World J Surg. 1998;22:1133–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002689900532.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McHenry L, Lehman G. Difficult bile duct stones. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2006;9:123–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-006-0031-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yasuda I, Itoi T. Recent advances in endoscopic management of difficult bile duct stones. Dig Endosc. 2013;25:376–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Leung JW, Chung SS. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy with peroral choledochoscopy. BMJ. 1989;299:595–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.299.6699.595.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Neuhaus H, Zillinger C, Born P, Ott R, Allescher H, Rosch T, et al. Randomized study of intracorporeal laser lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:327–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(98)70214-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Binmoeller KF, Bruckner M, Thonke F, Soehendra N. Treatment of difficult bile duct stones using mechanical, electrohydraulic and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Endoscopy. 1993;25:201–6. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1010293.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Brewer Gutierrez OI, Bekkali NLH, Raijman I, Sturgess R, Sejpal DV, Aridi HD, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Digital Single-Operator Cholangioscopy for Difficult Biliary Stones. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16:918–926.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Buxbaum J, Sahakian A, Ko C, Jayaram P, Lane C, Yu CY, et al. Randomized trial of cholangioscopy-guided laser lithotripsy versus conventional therapy for large bile duct stones (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87:1050–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2017.08.021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Angsuwatcharakon P, Kulpatcharapong S, Ridtitid W, Boonmee C, Piyachaturawat P, Kongkam P, et al. Digital cholangioscopy-guided laser versus mechanical lithotripsy for large bile duct stone removal after failed papillary large-balloon dilation: a randomized study. Endoscopy. 2019:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0848-8373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Barakat MT, Girotra M, Choudhary A, Huang RJ, Sethi S, Banerjee S. A prospective evaluation of radiation-free direct solitary cholangioscopy for the management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87:584–589.e1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Itoi T, Isayama H, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, Tamura M, Watanabe Y, et al. Evaluation of effects of a novel endoscopically applied radiofrequency ablation biliary catheter using an ex-vivo pig liver. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2012;19:543–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Steel AW, Postgate AJ, Khorsandi S, Nicholls J, Jiao L, Vlavianos P, et al. Endoscopically applied radiofrequency ablation appears to be safe in the treatment of malignant biliary obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:149–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2010.09.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Dolak W, Schreiber F, Schwaighofer H, Gschwantler M, Plieschnegger W, Ziachehabi A, et al. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation for malignant biliary obstruction: a nationwide retrospective study of 84 consecutive applications. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:854–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3232-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Strand DS, Cosgrove ND, Patrie JT, Cox DG, Bauer TW, Adams RB, et al. ERCP-directed radiofrequency ablation and photodynamic therapy are associated with comparable survival in the treatment of unresectable cholangiocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:794–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.02.1030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mensah ET, Martin J, Topazian M. Radiofrequency ablation for biliary malignancies. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2016;32:238–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ogura T, Onda S, Sano T, Takagi W, Okuda A, Miyano A, et al. Evaluation of the safety of endoscopic radiofrequency ablation for malignant biliary stricture using a digital peroral cholangioscope (with videos). Dig Endosc. 2017;29:712–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12837.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Bokemeyer A, Gross D, Brückner M, Nowacki T, Bettenworth D, Schmidt H, et al. Digital single-operator cholangioscopy: a useful tool for selective guidewire placements across complex biliary strictures. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:731–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6334-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Tsuchiya T, Ijima M, Iwashita T. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided transhepatic antegrade stone removal in patients with surgically altered anatomy: case series and technical review (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2014;21:E86–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Iwashita T, Nakai Y, Hara K, Isayama H, Itoi T, Park DH. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade treatment of bile duct stone in patients with surgically altered anatomy: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016;23:227–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.329.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mukai S, Itoi T, Sofuni A, Tsuchiya T, Tanaka R, Tonozuka R, et al. EUS-guided antegrade intervention for benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;89:399–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.07.030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Hosmer A, Abdelfatah MM, Law R, Baron TH. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and antegrade clearance of biliary lithiasis in patients with surgically-altered anatomy. Endosc Int Open. 2018;6:E127–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. • Tanaka R, Itoi T, Honjo M, Tsuchiya T, Kurihara T, Tsuji S, et al. New digital cholangiopancreatoscopy for diagnosis and therapy of pancreaticobiliary diseases (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016;23:220–6 This is first study describing utility of SpyGlass DS, revealing many applications of SpyGlass DS.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Komaki Y, Kanmura S, Funakawa K, Komaki F, Hashimoto S, Taguchi H, et al. A case of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia with repeated hemobilia arrested by argon plasma coagulation under direct peroral cholangioscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:528–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. • Hajj El II, Brauer BC, Wani S, Fukami N, Attwell AR, Shah RJ. Role of per-oral pancreatoscopy in the evaluation of suspected pancreatic duct neoplasia: a 13-year U.S. single-center experience. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:737–45 This study reveals the good diagnostic yield of pancreatoscopy and also demonstrated endoscopic findings of pancreatic duct neoplasia.

  61. Parbhu SK, Siddiqui AA, Murphy M, Noor A, Taylor LJ, Mills A, et al. Efficacy, safety, and outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with per-oral pancreatoscopy: a multicenter experience. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2017;51:e101–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000000796.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Trindade AJ, Benias PC, Kurupathi P, Tharian B, Inamdar S, Sharma N, et al. Digital pancreatoscopy in the evaluation of main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm: a multicenter study. Endoscopy. 2018;50:1095–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ohtsuka T, Gotoh Y, Nakashima Y, Okayama Y, Nakamura S, Morita M, et al. Role of SpyGlass-DS tm in the preoperative assessment of pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm involving the main pancreatic duct. Pancreatology. 2018;18:566–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pan.2018.04.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Beyna T, Neuhaus H, Gerges C. Endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct stones under direct vision: revolution or resignation? Systematic review. Dig Endosc. 2018;30:29–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12909.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Ogura T, Okuda A, Imanishi M, Miyano A, Amano M, Nishioka N, et al. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy for pancreatic duct stones under digital single-operator pancreatoscopy (with video). Dig Dis Sci. 2018;387:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Bekkali NLH, Murray S, Johnson GJ, Bandula S, Amin Z, Chapman MH, et al. Pancreatoscopy-directed electrohydraulic lithotripsy for pancreatic ductal stones in painful chronic pancreatitis using SpyGlass. Pancreas. 2017;46:528–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000000790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mittal C, Shah RJ. Pancreatoscopy-guided laser dissection and ablation for treatment of benign and neoplastic pancreatic disorders: an initial report (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;89:384–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Draganov PV, Lin T, Chauhan S, Wagh MS, Hou W, Forsmark CE. Prospective evaluation of the clinical utility of ERCP-guided cholangiopancreatoscopy with a new direct visualization system. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:971–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Sethi A, Chen YK, Austin GL, Brown WR, Brauer BC, Fukami NN, et al. ERCP with cholangiopancreatoscopy may be associated with higher rates of complications than ERCP alone: a single-center experience. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:251–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. • Chavalitdhamrong D, Donepudi S, Pu L, Draganov PV. Uncommon and rarely reported adverse events of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Dig Endosc. 2014;26:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1392274. This review highlights uncommon adverse events of ERCP-related procedures, which endoscopists should know.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Mukewar S, Gorospe EC, Knipschield MA, Bingener J, Gostout C. Effects of carbon dioxide insufflation during direct cholangioscopy on biliary pressures and vital parameters: a pilot study in porcine models. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:238–242.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan

    Yusuke Ishida MD, PhD & Yoshinobu Okabe MD, PhD

  2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical University, 6-7-1 Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku, Tokyo, 160-0023, Japan

    Takao Itoi MD, PhD, FASGE

Authors
  1. Yusuke Ishida MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takao Itoi MD, PhD, FASGE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yoshinobu Okabe MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takao Itoi MD, PhD, FASGE.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Yusuke Ishida declares that he has no conflict of interest. Takao Itoi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Yoshinobu Okabe declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights and informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ishida, Y., Itoi, T. & Okabe, Y. Current Status and Future Perspective in Cholangiopancreatoscopy. Curr Treat Options Gastro 17, 327–341 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-019-00238-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-019-00238-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation