Clin Endosc.  2014 May;47(3):217-221. 10.5946/ce.2014.47.3.217.

Prevention of Postendoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: The Endoscopic Technique

• Song BJ
• Kang DH

• KMID: 2049016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2014.47.3.217

Abstract

Pancreatitis is the most frequent and distressing complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Many recent studies have reported the use of pharmacological agents to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP); however, the most effective agents have not been established. Reduction in the incidence of PEP in high-risk patients has been reported through specific cannulation techniques such as guide wire-assisted cannulation and the use of pancreatic stents. The present review focuses on ERCP techniques for the prevention of PEP.

Keyword

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Post-ERCP pancreatitis; Guide wire-assisted cannulation; Pancreatic stent

MeSH Terms

Catheterization
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde
Humans
Incidence
Pancreatitis*
Stents

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 The double-guide wire technique was performed successfully in a case of difficult biliary cannulation. (A) Fluoroscopic image of each guidewire placed in the bile and pancreatic duct, respectively. (B) Endoscopic view of endoscopic sphincterotomy knife insertion into the bile duct alongside a guidewire placed into the pancreatic duct.

• 

  Fig. 2 An endoscopic image of a patient who received a 5-Fr pancreatic duct stent after endoscopic papillectomy.

Reference

1. Cooper ST, Slivka A. Incidence, risk factors, and prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2007; 36:259–276. PMID: 17533078.

2. 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. PMID: 16246677.

3. Masci E, Mariani A, Curioni S, Testoni PA. Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2003; 35:830–834. PMID: 14551860.

4. Vandervoort J, Soetikno RM, Tham TC, et al. Risk factors for complications after performance of ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 56:652–656. PMID: 12397271.

5. George S, Kulkarni AA, Stevens G, Forsmark CE, Draganov P. Role of osmolality of contrast media in the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a metanalysis. Dig Dis Sci. 2004; 49:503–508. PMID: 15139506.

6. Freeman ML, Guda NM. ERCP cannulation: a review of reported techniques. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61:112–125. PMID: 15672074.

7. Freeman ML, DiSario JA, Nelson DB, et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 54:425–434. PMID: 11577302.

8. 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. PMID: 11232684.

9. 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. PMID: 20306386.

10. Gong B, Hao L, Bie L, Sun B, Wang M. Does precut technique improve selective bile duct cannulation or increase post-ERCP pancreatitis rate? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:2670–2680. PMID: 20414680.

11. Testoni PA, Giussani A, Vailati C, Testoni S, Di Leo M, Mariani A. Precut sphincterotomy, repeated cannulation and post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with bile duct stone disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2011; 43:792–796. PMID: 21733768.

12. Verma D, Kapadia A, Adler DG. Pure versus mixed electrosurgical current for endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: a meta-analysis of adverse outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 66:283–290. PMID: 17643701.

13. Maple JT, Keswani RN, Hovis RM, et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation during ERCP for reduction of postprocedure pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70:278–283. PMID: 19523621.

14. Disario JA, Freeman ML, Bjorkman DJ, et al. Endoscopic balloon dilation compared with sphincterotomy for extraction of bile duct stones. Gastroenterology. 2004; 127:1291–1299. PMID: 15520997.

15. Baron TH, Harewood GC. Endoscopic balloon dilation of the biliary sphincter compared to endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy for removal of common bile duct stones during ERCP: a metaanalysis of randomized, controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004; 99:1455–1460. PMID: 15307859.

16. Attam R, Freeman ML. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for large common bile duct stones. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2009; 16:618–623. PMID: 19551331.

17. Heo JH, Kang DH, Jung HJ, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile-duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 66:720–726. PMID: 17905013.

18. Sherman S, Troiano FP, Hawes RH, Lehman GA. Sphincter of Oddi manometry: decreased risk of clinical pancreatitis with use of a modified aspirating catheter. Gastrointest Endosc. 1990; 36:462–466. PMID: 1699837.

19. Wehrmann T, Stergiou N, Schmitt T, Dietrich CF, Seifert H. Reduced risk for pancreatitis after endoscopic microtransducer manometry of the sphincter of Oddi: a randomized comparison with the perfusion manometry technique. Endoscopy. 2003; 35:472–477. PMID: 12783343.

20. Sherman S, Hawes RH, Troiano FP, Lehman GA. Pancreatitis following bile duct sphincter of Oddi manometry: utility of the aspirating catheter. Gastrointest Endosc. 1992; 38:347–350. PMID: 1376705.

21. Lella F, Bagnolo F, Colombo E, Bonassi U. A simple way of avoiding post-ERCP pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59:830–834. PMID: 15173796.

22. Adler DG, Verma D, Hilden K, Chadha R, Thomas K. Dye-free wire-guided cannulation of the biliary tree during ERCP is associated with high success and low complication rates: outcomes in a single operator experience of 822 cases. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010; 44:e57–e62. PMID: 19636260.

23. Cheung J, Tsoi KK, Quan WL, Lau JY, Sung JJ. Guidewire versus conventional contrast cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70:1211–1219. PMID: 19962504.

24. Cennamo V, Fuccio L, Zagari RM, et al. Can a wire-guided cannulation technique increase bile duct cannulation rate and prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009; 104:2343–2350. PMID: 19532133.

25. Shao LM, Chen QY, Chen MY, Cai JT. Can wire-guided cannulation reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 24:1710–1715. PMID: 20136957.

26. Maeda S, Hayashi H, Hosokawa O, et al. Prospective randomized pilot trial of selective biliary cannulation using pancreatic guide-wire placement. Endoscopy. 2003; 35:721–724. PMID: 12929017.

27. Herreros de Tejada A, Calleja JL, Díaz G, et al. Double-guidewire technique for difficult bile duct cannulation: a multicenter randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70:700–709. PMID: 19560764.

28. Xinopoulos D, Bassioukas SP, Kypreos D, et al. Pancreatic duct guide-wire placement for biliary cannulation in a single-session therapeutic ERCP. World J Gastroenterol. 2011; 17:1989–1995. PMID: 21528077.

29. Ito K, Fujita N, Noda Y, et al. Can pancreatic duct stenting prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients who undergo pancreatic duct guidewire placement for achieving selective biliary cannulation? A prospective randomized controlled trial. J Gastroenterol. 2010; 45:1183–1191. PMID: 20607310.

30. Smithline A, Silverman W, Rogers D, et al. Effect of prophylactic main pancreatic duct stenting on the incidence of biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 1993; 39:652–657. PMID: 8224687.

31. Sherman S, Bucksot EL, Esber E, et al. Does leaving a main pancreatic duct stent in place reduce the incidence of precut biliary sphincterotomy-induced pancreatitis? Randomized prospective study (abstract). Am J Gastroenterol. 1995; 90:241.

32. Tarnasky PR, Palesch YY, Cunningham JT, Mauldin PD, Cotton PB, Hawes RH. Pancreatic stenting prevents pancreatitis after biliary sphincterotomy in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Gastroenterology. 1998; 115:1518–1524. PMID: 9834280.

33. Patel R, Tarnasky PR, Hennessy WS, et al. Does stenting after pancreatic sphincterotomy reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with prior biliary sphincterotomy? Preliminary results of a prospective randomized study (abstract). Gastrointest Endosc. 1999; 49(4 Pt 2):AB80.

34. Fazel A, Quadri A, Catalano MF, Meyerson SM, Geenen JE. Does a pancreatic duct stent prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003; 57:291–294. PMID: 12612504.

35. Harewood GC, Pochron NL, Gostout CJ. Prospective, randomized, controlled trial of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for endoscopic snare excision of the duodenal ampulla. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 62:367–370. PMID: 16111953.

36. Sofuni A, Maguchi H, Itoi T, et al. Prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis by an endoscopic pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007; 5:1339–1346. PMID: 17981247.

37. Tsuchiya T, Itoi T, Sofuni A, et al. Temporary pancreatic stent to prevent post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a preliminary, single-center, randomized controlled trial. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2007; 14:302–307. PMID: 17520207.

38. Pan XP, Dang T, Meng XM, Xue KC, Chang ZH, Zhang YP. Clinical study on the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis by pancreatic duct stenting. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2011; 61:473–479. PMID: 21739262.

39. Sofuni A, Maguchi H, Mukai T, et al. Endoscopic pancreatic duct stents reduce the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011; 9:851–858. PMID: 21749851.

40. Kawaguchi Y, Ogawa M, Omata F, Ito H, Shimosegawa T, Mine T. Randomized controlled trial of pancreatic stenting to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. World J Gastroenterol. 2012; 18:1635–1641. PMID: 22529693.

41. Lee TH, Moon JH, Choi HJ, et al. Prophylactic temporary 3F pancreatic duct stent to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with a difficult biliary cannulation: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 76:578–585. PMID: 22771100.

42. Cha SW, Leung WD, Lehman GA, et al. Does leaving a main pancreatic duct stent in place reduce the incidence of precut biliary sphincterotomy-associated pancreatitis? A randomized, prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013; 77:209–216. PMID: 23084272.

43. Andriulli A, Forlano R, Napolitano G, et al. Pancreatic duct stents in the prophylaxis of pancreatic damage after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systematic analysis of benefits and associated risks. Digestion. 2007; 75:156–163. PMID: 17684365.

44. Choudhary A, Bechtold ML, Arif M, et al. Pancreatic stents for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 73:275–282. PMID: 21295641.

45. Singh P, Das A, Isenberg G, et al. Does prophylactic pancreatic stent placement reduce the risk of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis? A meta-analysis of controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 60:544–550. PMID: 15472676.

46. Mazaki T, Masuda H, Takayama T. Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2010; 42:842–853. PMID: 20886403.

47. Mazaki T, Mado K, Masuda H, Shiono M. Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol. 2014; 49:343–355. PMID: 23612857.

48. Bakman YG, Safdar K, Freeman ML. Significant clinical implications of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in previously normal pancreatic ducts. Endoscopy. 2009; 41:1095–1098. PMID: 19904701.

49. Zolotarevsky E, Fehmi SM, Anderson MA, et al. Prophylactic 5-Fr pancreatic duct stents are superior to 3-Fr stents: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy. 2011; 43:325–330. PMID: 21455872.