Development of a Scoring System for Predicting the Difficulty of Bile Duct Cannulation and Selecting the Appropriate Cannulation Method

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Digestive Diseases and Sciences Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1007/s10620-024-08598-0
Taira Kuroda, Hideki Miyata, Kozue Kanemitsu-Okada, Emi Yanagihara, Hironobu Saneto, Taisei Murakami, Hirofumi Izumoto, Kei Onishi, Shogo Kitahata, Tomoe Kawamura, Ryuichiro Iwasaki, Fujimasa Tada, Eiji Tsubouchi, Atsushi Hiraoka, Tomoyuki Ninomiya
{"title":"Development of a Scoring System for Predicting the Difficulty of Bile Duct Cannulation and Selecting the Appropriate Cannulation Method","authors":"Taira Kuroda, Hideki Miyata, Kozue Kanemitsu-Okada, Emi Yanagihara, Hironobu Saneto, Taisei Murakami, Hirofumi Izumoto, Kei Onishi, Shogo Kitahata, Tomoe Kawamura, Ryuichiro Iwasaki, Fujimasa Tada, Eiji Tsubouchi, Atsushi Hiraoka, Tomoyuki Ninomiya","doi":"10.1007/s10620-024-08598-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>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.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Aims</h3><p>This study aimed to identify cannulation difficulty patterns and develop a predictive scoring system for selecting the appropriate cannulation method.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>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.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>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, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.0001).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>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.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Graphical Abstract</h3>\n","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08598-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.

Graphical Abstract

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开发用于预测胆管插管难度和选择合适插管方法的评分系统
背景在内镜逆行胰胆管造影术中,由于乳头形态等因素,选择性胆道插管可能具有挑战性。方法我们回顾性比较了 776 例乳头不成熟的患者,将其分为常规造影剂插管组(510 例)和挽救技术组(266 例)。抢救组包括因造影剂方法困难而使用胰管导丝置入和/或导丝插管的患者。使用多元回归分析了乳头形态(Haraldsson分类)、胰周憩室(PAD)和镜下可操作性,以确定插管困难的风险因素。结果抢救组中年龄较大的患者较多,2型(小)、3型(突出或下垂)、4型(皱褶或成脊状)乳头、PAD和范围操作性差的患者较多。多变量分析中的重要风险因素包括 2 型乳头[几率比(OR)6.88]、3 型乳头(OR 7.74)、4 型乳头(OR 4.06)、PAD(OR 2.26)和范围可操作性差(OR 4.03)。抢救组的模式识别评分明显更高(1.31 vs. 3.43,P < 0.0001)。基于这些因素的模式识别评分可以预测插管难度,并有助于在传统方法和抢救方法之间做出选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Digestive Diseases and Sciences 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
420
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.
期刊最新文献
Country Comfort? Risk Factors for Unplanned Healthcare Visits in Rural America in Children with IBD. Preventive Measures and Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis. A Case of Imaging-Negative Distal Cholangiocarcinoma Diagnosed by Novel Spyglass Transoral Cholangioscope. Association of Heterotopic Gastric Mucosa in the Upper Esophagus (HGMUE) with Pharyngolaryngeal Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Inflammatory Bowel Disease Knowledge and Education Among Healthcare Professional Groups.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1