Endoscopic approach through the minor papilla for the management of pancreatic diseases

Table 4 Review of recently published data on an endoscopic approach through the minor papilla

Ref.	No. of patients	Disease	Divisum	Cannulation method	Cannulation success	Intervention	Improvement	PEP
Borak et al[2]	113	RAP	100%	NA	NA	EMP + EPS	62%	10.60%
Maple et al[3]	64	RAP	100%	Endoscopists’ preference	85	EMP + EPS	NA	14%
Chacko et al[4]	57	RAP/CP	100%	Tapered catheter and guidewire	86	EMP + EPS	58%	10.70%
Attwell et al[5]	184	CP	100%	Tapered catheter	NA	EMP + EPS	72%	6.50%
Song et al[9]	11	CP	0%	Rendezvous technique or CC	91	EMP + ENPD, ESWL	91%	0%
Heyries et al[6]	24	RAP	100%	Tapered catheter and guidewire	NA	EMP 8, EMP + EPS 16	92%	12.50%
Maple et al[11]	25	RAP	88%	Physician-controlled WGC	96	EMP + EPS	NA	12%
Gerke et al[15]	53	RAP	100%	NA	NA	EMP	60.40%	11.20%
Ertan et al[16]	25	RAP	100%	Tapered catheter and guidewire	74	Dilation	76%	0%
Boerma et al[17]	16	CP	100%	NA	NA	EPS with/without EMP	69%	6.30%
This study	34	RAP/CP	45%	WGC or CC	80	EMP + EPS	83%	4.50%

PEP: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis; RAP: Recurrent acute pancreatitis; CP: Chronic pancreatitis; WGC: Wire-guided cannulation; CC: Conventional contrast cannulation; EMP: Endoscopic minor papillotomy; EPS: Endoscopic pancreatic stent; ENPD: Endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage; ESWL: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy; NA: Not available.