Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Precut Fistulotomy for Difficult Biliary Cannulation: Is It a Risky Preference in Relation to the Experience of an Endoscopist?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Several studies have reported on the correlation between the experience level of an endoscopist and the outcomes of precut procedures. However, there are limited data on the early use of the precut fistulotomy in relation to the experience of an endoscopist.

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of precut fistulotomy in difficult biliary cannulation after ERCP training.

Methods

Two endoscopists, one at each tertiary referral center, performed the precut fistulotomy for difficult biliary cannulation between September 2008 and February 2010. The technical success, complications, and clinical outcomes in three groups were recorded prospectively over time.

Results

A total of 159 (23.1%) patients underwent precut fistulotomy. The mean procedure time was decreased as the number of procedures increased (p < 0.01). The success rates of selective biliary cannulation in the three groups were 86.8, 86.8, and 88.7% respectively, for the first attempt (p = 0.77) and 93.7% for the second attempt. Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in nine (5.7%) patients, which was not statistically significant between the three groups. As the frequency of papillary contacts increased, post-ERCP pancreatitis tended to increase (p = 0.017). In the multivariate analysis, more than 15 attempts at cannulating the major papilla prior to fistulotomy was a risk factor for pancreatitis (odds ratio 4.8, 95% CI 1.178–19.580, p = 0.029).

Conclusions

After therapeutic ERCP training involving at least 100 ERCPs, including at least half that were therapeutic cases and more than ten that were precut papillotomies, a precut fistulotomy can be performed safely and effectively in low-risk patients.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

DBC:

Difficult biliary cannulation

PF:

Precut fistulotomy

CBD:

Common bile duct

SOD:

Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction

References

  1. Harewood GC, Baron TH. An assessment of the learning curve for precut biliary sphincterotomy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:1708–1712.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mavrogiannis C, Liatsos C, Romanos A, Petoumenos C, Nakos A, Karvountzis G. Needle-knife fistulotomy versus needle-knife precut papillotomy for the treatment of common bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:334–339.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kasmin FE, Cohen D, Batra S, Cohen SA, Siegel JH. Needle-knife sphincterotomy in a tertiary referral center: efficacy and complications. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44:48–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Goff JS. Long-term experience with the transpancreatic sphincter pre-cut approach to biliary sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:642–645.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Foutch PG. A prospective assessment of results for needle-knife papillotomy and standard endoscopic sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;41:25–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. de la Morena EJ, Domínguez M, Lumbreras M, Opio V, Moyano E, Garćia Alvarez J. Self-training in needle-knife sphincterotomy. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000;23:109–115.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Maydeo A, Borkar D. Techniques of selective cannulation and sphincterotomy. Endoscopy. 2003;35:19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rollhauser C, Johnson M, Al-Kawas FH. Needle-knife papillotomy: a helpful and safe adjunct to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in a selected population. Endoscopy. 1998;30:691–696.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Masci E, Mariani A, Curioni S, Testoni PA. Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2003;35:830–834.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: An attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37:383–393.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:909–918.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cotton PB. Precut papillotomy—a risky technique for experts only. Gastrointest Endosc. 1989;35:578–579.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Freeman ML. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: A review. Endoscopy. 1997;29:288–297.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Akaraviputh T, Lohsiriwat V, Swangsri J, Methasate A, Leelakusolvong S, Lertakayamanee N. The learning curve for safety and success of precut sphincterotomy for therapeutic ERCP: A single endoscopist’s experience. Endoscopy. 2008;40:513–516.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Robison LS, Varadarajulu S, Wilcox CM. Safety and success of precut biliary sphincterotomy: Is it linked to experience or expertise? World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:2183–2186.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaffes AJ, Sriram PV, Rao GV, Santosh D, Reddy DN. Early institution of pre-cutting for difficult biliary cannulation: A prospective study comparing conventional vs. a modified technique. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62:669–674.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Freeman ML, DiSario JA, Nelson DB, et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: A prospective, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:425–434.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y, Kajiyama M, Tanaka N. Effect of precut sphincterotomy on biliary cannulation based on the characteristics of the major duodenal papilla. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:1113–1118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Connor HJ, Bhutta AS, Redmond PL, Carruthers DA. Suprapapillary fistulosphincterotomy at ERCP: A prospective study. Endoscopy. 1997;29:266–270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dowsett JF, Polydorou AA, Varia D. Needle knife papillotomy: How safe and how effective? Gut. 1990;31:905–908.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Leung JWC, Banez VP, Chung SCS. Precut (needle knife) papillotomy for impacted common bile duct stone at the ampulla. Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;85:991–998.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Rabenstein T, Ruppert T, Schneider HT, Hahn EG, Ell C. Benefits and risks of needle-knife papillotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;46:207–211.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Recchia S, Coppola F, Ferrari A, Righi D, Zanon E, Verme G. Fistulosphincterotomy in the endoscopic approach to biliary tract diseases. Am J Gastroenterol. 1992;87:1607–1609.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Bailey AA, Bourke MJ, Kaffes AJ, Byth K, Lee EY, Williams SJ. Needle-knife sphincterotomy: Factors predicting its use and the relationship with post-ERCP pancreatitis (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:266–271.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Huibregtse K, Kimmey MB. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic sphincterotomy and endoscopic biliary and pancreatic drainage. In: Yamada T, ed. Textbook of Gastroenterology. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott; 1995:2590–2617.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Siegel JH. Precut papillotomy: A method to improve success of ERCP and papillotomy. Endoscopy. 1980;12:130–133.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G, et al. Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: A prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;48:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Masci E, Toti G, Mariani A, et al. Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: A prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:417–423.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Baillie J. Needle-knife papillotomy revisited. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;46:282–284.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cotton PB. Is your sphincterotomy really safe and necessary? Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44:752–755.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Huibregtse K, Katon RM, Tytgat GN. Precut papillotomy via fine-needle knife papillotome: A safe and effective technique. Gastrointest Endosc. 1986;32:403–405.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cennamo V, Fuccio L, Zagari RM, et al. Can early precut implementation reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related complication risk? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endoscopy. 2010;42:381–388.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Figueiredo FA, Pelosi AD, Machado L, et al. Precut papillotomy: A risky technique not only for experts but also for average endoscopists skilled in ERCP. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:1485–1489.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Donnellan F, Zeb F, Courtney G, Aftab AR. Suprapapillary needleknife fistulotomy: A safe and effective method for accessing the biliary system. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1937–1940.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Artifon EL, Sakai P, Cunha JE, Halwan B, Ishioka S, Kumar A. Guidewire cannulation reduces risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and facilitates bile duct cannulation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:2147–2153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lella F, Bagnolo F, Colombo E, Bonassi U. A simple way of avoiding post-ERCP pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:830–834.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lee TH, Park do H, Park JY, et al. Can wire-guided cannulation prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:444–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Soon Chun Hyang University Cheonan Hospital, 23-20 Bongmyung-dong, Cheonan-si, Chungcheongnam-do, South Korea

    Tae Hoon Lee, Sang-Heum Park & Sun-Joo Kim

  2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea

    Byoung Wook Bang, Seok Jeong & Don Haeng Lee

Authors
  1. Tae Hoon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Byoung Wook Bang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sang-Heum Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Seok Jeong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Don Haeng Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sun-Joo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tae Hoon Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, T.H., Bang, B.W., Park, SH. et al. Precut Fistulotomy for Difficult Biliary Cannulation: Is It a Risky Preference in Relation to the Experience of an Endoscopist?. Dig Dis Sci 56, 1896–1903 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1483-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1483-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation