Techniques of Selective Cannulation and Sphincterotomy

Selective access into the desired duct followed by incision of the sphincter, i. e. sphincterotomy, forms the cornerstone of any endoscopic intervention within the pancreaticobiliary system. The apprehensive beginner’s performance and hesitance is aggravated by ignorance of ampullary anatomy and he considers selective cannulation to be the greatest hurdle. An understanding of ampullary morphology and its variations is vital in achieving selective cannulation. Technological advances have assisted in the form of development of better accessories, progressing from ”immovable” catheters to movable cannulae and to single-, double-, and even triple-lumen sphincterotomes. Orientation along the long axis of the bile duct ensures access and avoids inadvertent and hazardous manipulation of the pancreatitic duct. Using guide wires, especially the ‘angulated-tip’ glide wire improves cannulation successs rates considerably. Precut accessotomy complements wire-guided selective cannulation, and can be used analogously to a controlled surgical incision to facilitate cannulation of the desired system after deroofing the papilla layer by layer. Published data have validated its role, demonstrating high efficacy and minimal complications when it is properly performed. Biliary sphincterotomy, using the right mode of blended current in the 11–12 o’clock direction and with the tip of the sphincterotome wire, provides a clean and bloodless splitting open of the sphincter of Oddi. Pancreatic precut, over-the-stent papillotomy and sphincterotomy over a guide wire have all been proven to be safe and effective measures, in large groups of patients. In special situations, such as where there are impacted stones or ampullary lesions, needle-knife infundibulotomy achieves reliable access. Techniques such as saline infiltration into the papilla and subtle body movements to re-position the scope enable biliary cannulation in difficult situations. Alterations in anatomy, for instance post Billroth II gastrectomy, no longer discourage the endoscopist from attempting intervention. Application of knowledge of reverse anatomy, specially designed instruments, and adherence to the proper technique improves success in these patients. Our experience of 9000 sphincterotomies over the past 12 years with minimal morbidity stands proof to the principles and techniques highlighted in this monograph. We recommend these to all aspiring endoscopists, with the assurance of improved technical success when they are implemented.

References

• 1 Shakoor T, Geenen J E. Pre-cut papillotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1992;  38 623-627
• 2 Leung J WC, Banez V P, Chung S CS. et al . Pre-cut needle knife papillotomy for impacted common bile duct stone at the ampulla.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;  85 991-993
• 3 Sherman S, Ruffolo T A, Hawes R H, Lehman G A. et al . Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Gastroenterology. 1991;  101 1068-1075
• 4 Tweedle D EF, Martin D F. Needle knife pre-cut papillotomy for sphincterotomy and cholangiography.  Gut. 1989;  30 A1460-1461
• 5 Huibregtse K, Katon R M, Tytgat G NJ. Pre-cut papillotomy via the needle knife papillotome: a safe and effective technique.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1986;  32 403-405
• 6 Freeman M L, Nelson D B, Sherman S. et al . Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.  N Engl J Med. 1996;  335 909-923
• 7 Foutch P G. A prospective assessment of results for needle-knife papillotomy and standard endoscopic sphincterotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;  41 25-32
• 8 Rabenstein T, Ruppert T, Schneider T, Hahn E. et al . Benefits and risks of needle-knife papillotomy.  Endoscopy. 1997;  46 207-211
• 9 Booth F V, Doerr R J, Khalafi R S. et al . Surgical management of complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy with precut papillotomy.  Am J Surg. 1990;  159 132-135
• 10 Dowsett J F, Polydorou A A, Vaira D. et al . Needle-knife papillotomy: how safe and how effective?.  Gut. 1990;  31 905-908
• 11 Visse C A, Flament J-B. et al . Ampulla of Vater: anatomic, embryologic and surgical aspects.  Surg Clin N Am. 2000;  80 201-212
• 12 Freeman M L, Nelson D B, Sherman S. et al . Pancreatitis from endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES): a prospective multi-centre, 30-day study [abstract].  Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;  40 108A
• 13 Kohler A, Maier M, Benz C. et al . A new HF current generator with automatically controlled system (Endocut mode) for endoscopic sphincterotomy – preliminary experience.  Endoscopy. 1998;  30 351-355
• 14 Jackobs R, Benz C, Leonhardt A. et al . Pancreatic endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with chronic pancreatitis: a single-center experience in 171 consecutive patients.  Endoscopy. 2002;  34 551-554
• 15 Ell C, Rabenstein T, Schneider T. et al . Safety and efficacy of pancreatic sphincterotomy in chronic pancreatis.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  48 244-249
• 16 Tantau M, Person B, Burtin P. et al . Duodenal diverticula and ERCP: a new trick.  Endoscopy. 1996;  28 326
• 17 Fogel E L, Sherman S, Lehman G A. Increased selective biliary cannulation rates in the setting of periampullary diverticula: main pancreatic duct stent placement followed by pre-cut biliary sphincterotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  47 396-400
• 18 O’Connor H J, Bhutta A S, Redmond P L. et al . Supra-papillary fistulo-sphincterotomy at ERCP: a prospective study.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 266-270
• 19 Lehman G A, Sherman S, Nisi R. et al . Pancreas divisum: results of minor papilla sphincterotomy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1993;  39 1-8