Kuroda T, Miyata H, Kanemitsu-Okada K, Yanagihara E, Saneto H, Murakami T, Izumoto H, Onishi K, Kitahata S, Kawamura T, Iwasaki R, Tada F, Tsubouchi E, Hiraoka A, Ninomiya T. Development of a Scoring System for Predicting the Difficulty of Bile Duct Cannulation and Selecting the Appropriate Cannulation Method.
Dig Dis Sci 2025;
70:843-852. [PMID:
39266785 DOI:
10.1007/s10620-024-08598-0]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2024] [Accepted: 08/15/2024] [Indexed: 09/14/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Selective biliary cannulation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography can be challenging due to factors like papillary morphology. Various patterns indicate cannulation difficulty, but the combinations causing difficulty and the optimal cannulation method for each scenario are unclear.
AIMS
This study aimed to identify cannulation difficulty patterns and develop a predictive scoring system for selecting the appropriate cannulation method.
METHODS
We retrospectively compared 776 patients with naïve papilla, dividing them into conventional contrast cannulation (N = 510) and salvage technique (N = 266) groups. The salvage group included patients using pancreatic duct guidewire placement and/or wire-guided cannulation due to difficulties with the contrast method. Papillary morphology (Haraldsson's classification), periampullary diverticulum (PAD), and scope operability were analyzed using multiple regression to identify risk factors for cannulation difficulties. Factors were scored based on hazard ratios to access combinations causing difficulties.
RESULTS
The salvage group had more older patients and higher frequencies of type 2 (small), type 3 (protruding or pendulous), type 4 (creased or ridged) papillae, PAD, and poor scope operability. Significant risk factors in the multivariate analysis included type 2 [odds ratio (OR) 6.88], type 3 (OR 7.74), type 4 (OR 4.06) papillae, PAD (OR 2.26), and poor scope operability (OR 4.03). Pattern recognition scores were significantly higher in the salvage group (1.31 vs. 3.43, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
Type 2-4 papillae, PAD, and poor scope operability are significant risk factors for cannulation difficulty. Pattern recognition scores based on these factors can predict cannulation difficulty and aid in selecting between conventional and salvage methods.
Collapse