Steven M Hadley,Jessica I Chevalier,Grace E Tomasetti,Julia C Hill,Madison C Duclos,David A Klibansky,Heiko Pohl,Corey A Siegel,Arifa Toor,Steven P Bensen,Jeffrey M Adler,Stuart R Gordon,Timothy B Gardner
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Forceps-Assisted Cannulation for Difficult Cannulation During ERCP: Results of the SOCCER Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Steven M Hadley,Jessica I Chevalier,Grace E Tomasetti,Julia C Hill,Madison C Duclos,David A Klibansky,Heiko Pohl,Corey A Siegel,Arifa Toor,Steven P Bensen,Jeffrey M Adler,Stuart R Gordon,Timothy B Gardner","doi":"10.14309/ajg.0000000000003531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES\r\nForceps-assisted cannulation has been reported to facilitate difficult papillary cannulation during ERCP, especially in the context of abnormal papillary anatomy or associated papillary diverticula. We performed a randomized, controlled trial to evaluate if forceps-assisted cannulation improves cannulation success rates, reduces the incidence of difficult cannulations, and decreases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\n152 patients with difficult papillary cannulation during ERCP were randomized to cannulation with or without forceps. Difficult cannulation was defined as: papilla in/on the rim of a diverticulum, difficult cannulation (defined as 5 or more attempts, 5 or more minutes, or 2 or more unintended PD wire passages), redundant tissue overlaying the papilla, or a type 2, 3, or 4 papilla. The primary clinical outcome was rate of successful cannulation.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\n70 patients underwent forceps-assisted cannulation and 81 did not use forceps. Forceps patients were younger (62 vs. 68 years p=0.009), but otherwise baseline demographics, ERCP indication, trainee involvement and papilla classification were similar with failed initial cannulation the most common reason for enrollment. 100% of patients in the forceps-assisted group vs. 83.9% in the no forceps group (p<0.001) underwent successful cannulation. All patients in the no forceps group who crossed over to the forceps group had successful cannulation. While not statistically significant, the difficult cannulation rate (57.1 vs. 69.1, p=0.132) was higher in the no forceps group and the PEP rate was low in both groups (5.7 vs 3.7, p=0.705).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nUsing forceps-assisted technique to overcome difficult cannulation improves ERCP cannulation success rates.","PeriodicalId":520099,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003531","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
Forceps-assisted cannulation has been reported to facilitate difficult papillary cannulation during ERCP, especially in the context of abnormal papillary anatomy or associated papillary diverticula. We performed a randomized, controlled trial to evaluate if forceps-assisted cannulation improves cannulation success rates, reduces the incidence of difficult cannulations, and decreases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
METHODS
152 patients with difficult papillary cannulation during ERCP were randomized to cannulation with or without forceps. Difficult cannulation was defined as: papilla in/on the rim of a diverticulum, difficult cannulation (defined as 5 or more attempts, 5 or more minutes, or 2 or more unintended PD wire passages), redundant tissue overlaying the papilla, or a type 2, 3, or 4 papilla. The primary clinical outcome was rate of successful cannulation.
RESULTS
70 patients underwent forceps-assisted cannulation and 81 did not use forceps. Forceps patients were younger (62 vs. 68 years p=0.009), but otherwise baseline demographics, ERCP indication, trainee involvement and papilla classification were similar with failed initial cannulation the most common reason for enrollment. 100% of patients in the forceps-assisted group vs. 83.9% in the no forceps group (p<0.001) underwent successful cannulation. All patients in the no forceps group who crossed over to the forceps group had successful cannulation. While not statistically significant, the difficult cannulation rate (57.1 vs. 69.1, p=0.132) was higher in the no forceps group and the PEP rate was low in both groups (5.7 vs 3.7, p=0.705).
CONCLUSIONS
Using forceps-assisted technique to overcome difficult cannulation improves ERCP cannulation success rates.
据报道,钳辅助插管可促进ERCP期间困难的乳头状插管,特别是在乳头状解剖异常或相关乳头状憩室的情况下。我们进行了一项随机对照试验,以评估钳辅助插管是否能提高插管成功率,降低插管困难的发生率,并降低ercp后胰腺炎的风险。方法152例ERCP术中乳头状插管困难的患者随机分为有钳插管组和无钳插管组。插管困难的定义为:憩室边缘的乳头,插管困难(定义为5次或更多尝试,5分钟或更长时间,或2次或更多意外的PD丝通道),覆盖乳头的多余组织,或2型,3型或4型乳头。主要临床观察指标为插管成功率。结果70例患者行产钳辅助插管,81例未使用产钳。产钳患者更年轻(62岁vs. 68岁p=0.009),但除此之外,基线人口统计学、ERCP指征、受诊者受诊和乳头分类与初始插管失败相似,这是入组的最常见原因。有产钳组100%的患者插管成功,无产钳组83.9%的患者插管成功(p<0.001)。无产钳组转入产钳组的患者插管均成功。无产钳组插管困难率(57.1 vs 69.1, p=0.132)高于无产钳组,两组PEP率均较低(5.7 vs 3.7, p=0.705)。结论采用钳辅助技术克服插管困难,提高了ERCP插管成功率。