Purpose

Cannulation of the major papilla is the most challenging part of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for which physician-controlled wire-guided cannulation (PCWGC) and assistant-controlled wire-guided cannulation (ACWGC) are used as the cannulation techniques. PCWGC can reportedly save up to about 30% of the labor cost by reducing the number of assistants. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of PCWGC and ACWGC.

Materials and Methods

Of the 2151 patients aged >20 years (4193 cases) who underwent ERCP at Yonsei University Medical Center between January 2015 and December 2016, 989 were included in this study.

Results

Among efficacy outcomes, cannulation success rate, rate of precut sphincterotomy (PCWGC vs. ACWGC: 21.3% vs. 25.9%), bile duct cannulation time (PCWGC vs. ACWGC: median 3.0 minutes vs. 3.6 minutes), and total procedure time (PCWGC vs. ACWGC: median 13.6 minutes vs. 13.1 minutes) were not significantly different. Among safety outcomes, lower rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis were observed with PCWGC than with ACWGC (PCWGC vs. ACWGC: 5.8% vs. 8.8%, p=0.128). Among other post-ERCP adverse events (bleeding, perforation, and cholangitis), the difference was not significant between the groups. Radiation exposure (total dose area product, PCWGC vs. ACWGC: median 1979.9 µGym² vs. 2062.0 µGym², p=0.194) and ERCP cost excluding labor cost (PCWGC vs. ACWGC: $1576 vs. $1547, p=0.606) were not significantly different.

Conclusions

Requiring less assistants, PCWGC showed comparable efficacy and safety to ACWGC. PCWGC can be considered as an alternative option, especially in facilities lacking manpower and resources.

PMID: 38154478