Impact of combined precut techniques on selective biliary cannulation

Introduction: simple biliary cannulation techniques obtain a success rate of 80-95%. Advanced precut techniques are not immediately successful in 10-40% of cases. Between extreme options such as a second attempt a few days later or an immediate attempt by the transparietal route, an alternative precut technique may be used as a rescue strategy for the initially failed procedure. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the combined use of two precut techniques when immediate biliary access is not granted by an initial procedure. Patients and method: a retrospective analysis of a personal series of precut (needle-knife and transpancreatic) sphincterotomies, both alone and in combination. Results: five hundred sixty nine ERCPs (endocopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography) met the inclusion criteria for the analysis. Simple cannulation was obtained in 444 (78%) of them. In all, 119 (21%) precuts were attempted and 110 (92.4%) were successful, which raised the overall cannulation rate to 97.4%. Ninety-five (80%) precuts were successful with the initial technique. Rescue with the alternative technique was attempted for 20 failures with a successful outcome in 15, which raised the overall success rate to 92%. The combination of needle-knife precut plus transpancreatic precut raised the success rate from 87% to 94%. The combination of transpancreatic precut plus needle-knife precut raised the success rate from 70% to 90%. Among all 96 patients with available follow-up data, 17 (18%) complications were recorded: 9 bleeding episodes, 4 pancreatitis cases, and 4 retroperitoneal perforations. No mortality was recorded. Conclusions: a combination of precut techniques is effective for biliary cannulation when simple cannulation and initial precut approaches fail. The safety profile differs from that in the delayed strategy, hence both should be considered alternatives, their use depending on the technical and clinical conditions prevailing for each patient, as well as endoscopist experience