©2010 Baishideng.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Mar 16, 2010; 2(3): 97-103
Published online Mar 16, 2010. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v2.i3.97
Published online Mar 16, 2010. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v2.i3.97
Table 2 Success and pancreatitis rates with cannulation techniques
| % | Ref. | |
| Primary success in cannulation | ||
| Standard catheter | 54 to 67 | [3,30] |
| Standard catheter with guide wire | 81 | [3] |
| Sphincterotome | 78 to 84 | [4,29] |
| Sphincterotome with guide wire | 97 to 99 | [26,30] |
| Success in difficult cannulation after primary failure with standard method | ||
| Persistence | 73 to 75 | [2,49] |
| Needle knife | 67 to 91 | [2,6,9,34,37] |
| Erlangen knife | 78 to 100 | [32,50] |
| Pancreatic sphincterotomy | 91 to 100 | [10,12,13,22,40,41] |
| Pancreatic stent | 97 to 100 | [28,47] |
| Pancreatic guide wire | 73 to 93 | [5,8] |
| Pancreatitis rate after difficult cannulation | ||
| Persistence | 2-4 | [2,49] |
| Needle knife | 1-11 | [2,6,9,34,37] |
| Erlangen knife | 3-7 | [32,50] |
| Pancreatic sphincterotomy | 0-12 | [10,12,13,22,40,41] |
| Pancreatic stent | 5-7 | [28,47] |
| Pancreatic guide wire | 0-2 | [5,8] |
- Citation: Udd M, Kylänpää L, Halttunen J. Management of difficult bile duct cannulation in ERCP. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 2(3): 97-103
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v2/i3/97.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v2.i3.97