Number, depth, and location of inadvertent pancreatic guidewire cannulations and post-ERCP pancreatitis from multicenter real-time intra-procedural data

Abstract

Background

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is common. Although multiple pancreatic duct (PD) cannulations are a known risk factor for PEP, the impact of single cannulations remains controversial. We aimed to identify whether single PD cannulation is associated with PEP.

Methods

We conducted a prospective multicenter study in patients undergoing ERCP for biliary indications during 2021–2024, with third-party intra-procedural data recording and 30-day follow-up. PEP was defined using consensus definitions. Associations between PD cannulations and PEP were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression, with other patient- and procedure-related risk factors and preventative interventions used as covariates. Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs).

Results

PEP occurred in 282 (3.8%) of 7430 ERCPs across nine centers. From multivariable analysis, PD cannulation was statistically significantly associated with PEP, with similar odds for single and multiple cannulations in first-time patients (OR 2.03 [95%CI 1.32–3.14] for single, OR 2.18 [95%CI 1.18–4.00] for ≥5 cannulations) and all patients (OR 1.97 [95%CI 1.33–2.93] for single, OR 2.15 [95%CI 1.21–3.82] for ≥5). PD cannulation to the head (OR 2.09 [95%CI 1.36–3.21]) and body (OR 2.43 [95%CI 1.56–3.79]) were both associated with PEP, while side-branch cannulations alone were not (OR 1.18 [95%CI 0.64–2.06]).

Conclusions

Single main PD duct cannulation was independently associated with PEP and appeared to be responsible for most of the magnitude of the association with PD cannulation. These data support the use of preventative interventions such as PD stenting in cases where the PD is inadvertently cannulated.

Publication History

Received: 27 January 2025

Accepted after revision: 03 August 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
04 August 2025

Article published online:
03 September 2025

• References

• 1 Peery AF, Crockett SD, Murphy CC. et al. Burden and cost of gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States: update 2021. Gastroenterology 2022; 162: 621-644
• 2 Forbes N, Coelho-Prabhu N, Al-Haddad MA. et al. Adverse events associated with EUS and EUS-guided procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: 16-26 e12
• 3 Chandrasekhara V, Khashab MA, Muthusamy VR. et al. Adverse events associated with ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 32-47
• 4 Dumonceau JM, Kapral C, Aabakken L. et al. ERCP-related adverse events: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 127-149
• 5 Bishay K, Meng ZW, Khan R. et al. Adverse events associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2025; 168: 568-586
• 6 Elmunzer BJ, Foster LD, Serrano J. et al. Indomethacin with or without prophylactic pancreatic stent placement to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2024; 403: 450-458
• 7 Machicado JD, Gougol A, Stello K. et al. Acute pancreatitis has a long-term deleterious effect on physical health related quality of life. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1435-1443 e1432
• 8 Buxbaum JL, Freeman M, Amateau SK. et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention strategies: methodology and review of evidence. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 163-183 e140
• 9 Avila P, Holmes I, Kouanda A. et al. Practice patterns of post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis techniques in the United States: a survey of advanced endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 568-573 e562
• 10 Smith ZL, Elmunzer BJ, Cooper GS. et al. Real-world practice patterns in the era of rectal indomethacin for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis in a high-risk cohort. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115: 934
• 11 Buxbaum JL, Freeman M, Amateau SK. et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention strategies: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 153-162
• 12 Shin SH, So H, Cho S. et al. The number of wire placement in the pancreatic duct and metal biliary stent as risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 35: 1201-1207
• 13 Goenka MK, Akshintala VS, Kamal A. et al. Frequent guidewire passage into the pancreatic duct is an independent risk factor for postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) among high-risk individuals: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial data. J Dig Dis 2023; 24: 427-433
• 14 Fujita K, Yazumi S, Matsumoto H. et al. Multicenter prospective cohort study of adverse events associated with biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Incidence of adverse events and preventive measures for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Dig Endosc 2022; 34: 1198-1204
• 15 Nakai Y, Isayama H, Sasahira N. et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in wire-guided cannulation for therapeutic biliary ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 119
• 16 Forbes N, Koury HF, Bass S. et al. Characteristics and outcomes of ERCP at a Canadian tertiary centre: initial results from a prospective high-fidelity biliary endoscopy registry. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2021; 4: 78-83
• 17 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
• 18 Cotton PB, Lehman G, Vennes J. et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37: 383-393
• 19 Forbes N, Elmunzer BJ, Keswani RN. et al. Consensus-based development of a causal attribution system for post-ERCP adverse events. Gut 2022.
• 20 Wang P, Li Z-S, Liu F. et al. Risk factors for ERCP-related complications: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 31
• 21 Testoni PA, Mariani A, Giussani A. et al. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in high- and low-volume centers and among expert and non-expert operators: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1753-1761
• 22 Dumonceau JM, Andriulli A, Elmunzer BJ. et al. Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline – updated June 2014. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 799-815
• 23 El Nakeeb A, El Hanafy E, Salah T. et al. Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: risk factors and predictors of severity. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8: 709
• 24 Thiruvengadam NR, Saumoy M, Schneider Y. et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis in the United States. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 216-226 e242
• 25 Das A, Singh P, Sivak MV. et al. Pancreatic-stent placement for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 960-968
• 26 Tarnasky PR, Palesch YY, Cunningham JT. et al. Pancreatic stenting prevents pancreatitis after biliary sphincterotomy in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Gastroenterology 1998; 115: 1518-1524
• 27 Fazel A, Quadri A, Catalano MF. et al. Does a pancreatic duct stent prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 291-294
• 28 Zolotarevsky E, Fehmi SM, Anderson MA. et al. Prophylactic 5-Fr pancreatic duct stents are superior to 3-Fr stents: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 325-330
• 29 Freeman ML, Overby C, Qi D. Pancreatic stent insertion: consequences of failure and results of a modified technique to maximize success. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 8-14
• 30 Elmunzer BJ, Zhang J, Coté GA. et al. Technical factors associated with the benefit of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement during high-risk endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a secondary analysis of the SVI trial data set. Am J Gastroenterol 2025; 120: 811-815
• 31 Elmunzer BJ, Scheiman JM, Lehman GA. et al. A randomized trial of rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. New Engl J Med 2012; 366: 1414-1422
• 32 Laquière A, Privat J, Jacques J. et al. Early double-guidewire versus repeated single-guidewire technique to facilitate selective bile duct cannulation: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 120-127