Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2013 Apr 7;26(1):100–107. doi: 10.1111/den.12082

Clinical evaluation of a prototype multi-bending peroral direct cholangioscope

Takao Itoi 1,✉, D Nageshwar Reddy 2, Atsushi Sofuni 1, Mohan Ramchandani 2, Fumihide Itokawa 1, Rajesh Gupta 2, Toshio Kurihara 1, Takayoshi Tsuchiya 1, Kentaro Ishii 1, Nobuhito Ikeuchi 1, Fuminori Moriyasu 1, Jong Ho Moon 3
PMCID: PMC3933760  PMID: 23560942

Abstract

Background Although peroral direct cholangioscopy (PDCS) is emerging as an alternative to traditional mother-daughter cholangioscopy, it is associated with high failure rates. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the ability to insert and carry out interventions using a prototype multi-bending PDCS.

Patients and Methods Prospective, observational clinical feasibility study was done in 41 patients with a variety of biliary diseases. A multi-bending PDCS prototype was inserted using a free-hand technique, a guidewire alone, or with a 5-Fr diameter anchoring balloon. Diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were carried out.

Results The free-hand direct insertion technique failed in all attempted cases (n = 7). Of the remaining 34 cases, successful rate of PDCS insertion into the distal bile duct was achieved by passing the PDCS over a guidewire alone (n = 6) and/or with a guidewire plus anchoring balloon (n = 28) for an overall successrate of 88.2% (30/34). In 13 (92.9%) patients without an underlying biliary stricture, PDCS insertion proximal to the bifurcation was possible. In 25 cases, biliary interventions were attempted including biopsy (n = 13), stone removal (n = 6), stent removal (n = 1), and intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy (n = 2) and were successful in 22 (88%). Other than two patients with procedure-related cholangitis with a mild grade of severity, no complications were observed.

Conclusions Using a novel multi-bending prototype peroral direct cholangioscope, cholangioscopy had a high diagnostic and therapeutic success rate only when passed over a guidewire and anchoring balloon but not with the free-hand insertion technique. Comparative studies of direct cholangioscopy are warranted.

Keywords: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), peroral direct cholangioscopy

Introduction

Since the publication of a feasibility study of peroral direct cholangioscopy using a conventional ultraslim upper endoscope by Larghi and Waxman,1 diagnostic and therapeutic peroral direct cholangioscopy (PDCS) have become increasingly used not only in patients with normal anatomy2–7 but also in those with surgically altered anatomy.8–12 Although free-hand insertion of such conventional upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopes should theoretically be easy to carry out, the success rate, defined as the ability to pass deeply into the bile duct, is low.1–6 Unfortunately, it remains low even when passed over a guidewire with or without an anchoring balloon. To overcome this problem, we developed first-and second-generation dedicated PDCS prototypes.13–14 Using a phantom biliary model we found a high rate of technical success with the free-hand direct insertion technique using these endoscopes.14 We now report the results of the first clinical prospective study using a multi-bending PDCS prototype for the diagnosis and therapy of biliary diseases.

Methods

Patients

Eligible patients included those who needed diagnostic and/or therapeutic biliary interventions by PDCS. Patients with Vater's papilla tumors and papillary stenosis were excluded. PDCS was done in 41 patients: 21 with bile duct (BD) stones, 10 with a benign biliary stricture (BBS), one with a BD stone and BBS, one with intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct (IPNB) and eight with cholangiocarcinoma. Procedures were carried out between September 2011 and May 2012 by one of two experienced interventional endoscopists (T.I. and R.D.N.) at two institutions (Table 1). In the present study, the patient inclusion criteria were as follows: (i) observation of biliary strictures and filling defects; (ii) stone management including lithotripsy by electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) and confirmation of no residual stone after lithotripsy by using a mechanical lithotripter; and (iii) migrated stent removal. The patient exclusion criteria were as follows: (i) duodenal papillar tumors or lower (<1 cm above the major papilla) cholangiocarcinoma; (ii) narrow distal bile duct (<6 mm); and (iii) critically ill patients and patients who refused PDCS. The indications for PDCS are shown in Table 1. Each institution's review board approved the study. Written informed consent for the endoscopic procedures was obtained from all patients.

Table 1.

Characteristics of patients who underwent peroral direct cholangioscopy

Case no. Final diagnosis Treatment of papilla Aim of ERCP Diameter of lower BD (mm) Site of BD stricture Aim of PDCS
Previous ES ES ES EPBD
 1 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 12 NA Exclude residual stones
 2 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 10 NA Exclude residual stones
 3 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 12 NA Removal of stones
 4 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 12 NA Exclude residual stones
 5 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 14 NA Exclude residual stones
 6 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 16 NA Exclude residual stones
 7 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 10 NA Exclude residual stones
 8 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 14 NA Removal of stones
 9 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 10 NA Exclude residual stones
10 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 11 NA Exclude residual stones
11 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 18 NA Exclude residual stones
12 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 20 NA Exclude residual stones
13 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 11 NA Exclude residual stones
14 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 16 NA Exclude residual stones
15 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 13 NA Exclude residual stones
16 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 15 NA Removal of stones
17 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 18 NA Exclude residual stones
18 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 13 NA Exclude residual stones
19 BD stone Yes No Yes Stone removal 16 NA EHL
20 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 14 NA Removal of stones
21 BD stone No Yes Yes Stone removal 15 NA EHL
22 BBS Yes No Yes Stenting 11 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
23 BBS Yes No Yes Stenting 12 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
24 BBS Yes No Yes Stenting 8 Middle to Upper Diagnosis of BD stricture
25 BBS Yes No Yes Stenting 13 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
26 BBS Yes No Yes Stenting 12 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
27 BBS Yes No Yes Migrated PS removal 11 Middle Migrated PS removal
28 BBS Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 8 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
29 BBS Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 10 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
30 BBS Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 10 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
31 BBS Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 12 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
32 BBS, BD stone Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 10 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
33 IPNB Yes No No Diagnosis of tumor location 16 NA Diagnosis of tumor location
34 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 10 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
35 Cholangiocarcinoma No Yes Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 11 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
36 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 9 LHBD Diagnosis of BD stricture
37 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 12 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
38 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 13 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
39 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 8 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
40 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 8 Lower Diagnosis of BD stricture
41 Cholangiocarcinoma Yes No Yes Diagnosis of BD stricture 10 Middle Diagnosis of BD stricture
Open in a new tab

BBS, benign biliary stricture; BD, bile duct; EHL, electrohydraulic lithotripsy; EPBD, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation; ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; ES, endoscopic sphincterotomy; IPNB, intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct; LHBD, left hepatic BD; NA, not available; PDCS, peroral direct cholangioscopy; PS, plastic stent.

Specifications of the multi-bending PDCS

The specifications of the second prototype (Olympus Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan), the first prototype (Olympus Medical Systems) and a conventional ultraslim upper endoscope (GIF-XP180N; Olympus Medical Systems) have previously been described.14 Briefly, the second prototype has two bending sections: the proximal section can be deflected in a single plane (90° up or 90° down), and the distal section can also be deflected in a single plane (160° up or 100° down) (Fig. 1). The endoscope is forward-viewing with a working length of 133 cm, a field of view of 90°, and an outer diameter of the distal end and an insertion tube of 5.2 mm and 7.0 mm, respectively (Table 2). The ratios of the distal bending section and the distal plus proximal bending section compared to the GIF-XP180N are 0.6 and 2.2, respectively. The endoscope has two accessory channels of 2.2 mm and 0.85 mm diameter. It also has suction and insufflation capabilities.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Second-generation prototype direct peroral cholangioscope. (a) The outer diameters of the distal end and the insertion tube are 5.2 mm (15-cm tip length) and 7.0 mm, respectively. It has two accessory channels. (b) This prototype has two bending sections: the proximal section can be deflected in a single plane (90° up and 90° down), and the distal section can also be deflected in a single plane (160° up and 100° down).

Table 2.

Specifications of multi-bending cholangioscopes

Second prototype First prototype GIF-XP180N CHF-B260
Angle of view, degrees 90 90 120 90
Observed depth, mm 1–50 1–50 3–100 3–20
Outer diameter, mm
 Distal end 5.2 5.6 5.5 3.4
 Insertion end 7 5.5 5.5 3.5
Distal bending section, degrees
 Up/down 160/100 160/100 210/90 70/70
 Right/left NA 100/100 100/100 NA
Proximal bending section, degrees
 Up/down 90/90 NA NA NA
 Right/left NA NA NA NA
Bending length†
 Distal bending section 0.6 0.6 1 0.3
 Distal + Proximal bending section 2.2 NA NA NA
Working length, mm 1330 (150)‡ 1330 1100 2000
Working channel diameter, mm 2.2 and 0.85 2 and 1.2 2 1.2
Air insufflation function Present Absent Present Absent
Open in a new tab
†

Ratio to GIF-XP180N.

‡

Length of the 5.2-mm diameter tip of the endoscope.

NA, not available.

PDCS procedures

All procedures were carried out in the prone patient position with i.v. anesthesia (propofol, 0.5 mg/kg) at Asian Institute of Gastroenterology and with conscious sedation (i.v. midazolam, 0.05 mg/kg) at Tokyo Medical University. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was done using a conventional therapeutic duodenoscope (TJF-180V, TJF-260V, JF-260V; Olympus Medical Systems). After dilating the sphincterotomy site with a 12–15-mm balloon (CRE esophageal/pyloric or colon balloon; Boston Scientific Japan, Tokyo, Japan) according to the diameter of the bile duct, PDCS was carried out. Based on the successful outcome previously described,14 in the first seven cases, we attempted to carry out PDCS with the free-hand technique. We then carried out PDCS using the over-the-wire technique with or without an anchoring balloon (5-Fr, B5-2Q; Olympus, 4-Fr prototype;5 Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, NC, USA) as follows. First, the duodenoscope was removed, leaving a 0.018-inch or 0.025-inch stiff guidewire (Pathfinder®; Boston Scientific Japan or VisiGlide®; Olympus Medical Systems, respectively) with the proximal end positioned in the intrahepatic bile duct. The second-generation prototype was then advanced into the bile duct over the guidewire. If endoscope insertion was impossible, an anchoring balloon was used. If guidewire access was lost during insertion of the prototype endoscope, direct biliary cannulation and guidewire insertion to the intrahepatic bile duct using a 5-Fr tapered catheter (PR-110Q; Olympus Medical Systems) was carried out as previously described.15

Results

In all cases, either an endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) or an endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) was done previously or concurrently (Table 1). Despite an en face view of the papilla in all cases, the free-hand technique failed (Table 3). The papilla was located in the second portion (n = 6) and third portion (n = 1) of the duodenum.

Table 3.

Outcome of multi-bending peroral cholangioscopy

Case no. Location of papilla Scope insertion technique Success of scope insertion at LBD Success of scope insertion at HBD Irrigation and insufflation Type of intervention by PDCS Success of intervention Adverse event
Free hand Guidewire Balloon
 1 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 2 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 3 B Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 4 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 5 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 6 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 7 A Yes No No No NA NA NA NA No
 8 A No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 Stone removal Yes No
 9 A No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 Stone removal Yes No
10 A No Yes No Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
11 A No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
12 A No Yes No Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
13 A No Yes No No NA CO2 NA NA No
14 A No No Yes No NA CO2 Stone removal Yes No
15 A No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
16 A No No Yes Yes No CO2 Stone removal Yes No
17 B No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
18 B No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 NA NA No
19 A No No Yes Yes Yes Saline and CO2 Stone crushing Yes Cholangitis
20 A No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 Stone removal Yes No
21 A No Yes No Yes Yes Saline and CO2 Stone crushing Yes No
22 A No Yes No No NA NA NA NA No
23 A No No Yes No NA NA NA NA No
24 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
25 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
26 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy No No
27 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Stent removal Yes† No
28 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
29 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy No No
30 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes Cholangitis
31 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
32 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy, Stone removal Yes No
33 A No No Yes Yes Yes Saline and CO2 Biopsy Yes No
34 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
35 A No Yes No Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
36 B No No Yes Yes Yes CO2 Biopsy Yes No
37 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
38 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
39 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
40 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy No No
41 A No No Yes Yes NA CO2 Biopsy Yes No
Open in a new tab
†

Grasping stent was good but it broke during the procedure.

A, second portion of duodenum; B, third portion of duodenum; HBD, hilar bile duct; LBD, lower bile duct; NA; not available; PDCS, peroral direct cholangioscopy.

In the remaining 34 cases, the free-hand technique was not attempted and the papilla was located in the second portion of the duodenum in all. The mean diameter of the bile duct was 11.2 mm (range, 8–16 mm) (Table 2). The rate of successful endoscope insertion into the distal bile duct using the guidewire alone (n = 6) or with an anchoring balloon (n = 28) was 88.2% (30/34; guidewire: 66.7%, anchoring balloon: 92.9%) (Table 3; Fig. 2). In 13 (92.9%) patients without an underlying biliary stricture, deep endoscope insertion beyond the hilum was possible (Fig. 3a). Carbon dioxide insufflation was used to observe the bile duct in all cases. In addition, saline irrigation was used in three cases (patient numbers 19, 21 and 33), to detect subtle papillary lesions (Fig. 3b) in one and to carry out electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) in others.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Prototype endoscope inserted into the distal bile duct.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

(a) Prototype endoscope was inserted into the left intrahepatic bile duct. (b) Subtle papillary lesions (arrows) were detected in a patient with biliary intraductal papillary neoplasm.

In 25 cases, biliary interventions were attempted and successfully carried out in 22 (88%) including biopsy (n = 13), stone removal (n = 6) (Fig. 4), stent removal (n = 1) (Fig. 5), and EHL (n = 2). Appropriate precise biopsies were not conducted in three failed cases (nos. 26, 29, and 40).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Endoscopic direct lithotripsy. (a) X-ray shows grasping a stone using a basket catheter with the prototype cholangioscope. (b) Endoscopic image shows grasping of the stone with a basket.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Retrieval of a migrated plastic stent using a basket catheter with the prototype cholangioscope. (a) X-ray image. (b) Endoscopic image.

Other than two patients with procedure-related cholangitis with a mild grade of severity, no complications were observed.

Discussion

Peroral direct cholangioscopy, similar to conventional upper GI endoscopy allows for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients with biliary tract diseases. It has the potential to be an ideal method of cholangioscopy as it can be done by a single operator with superior optics and channel size compared to other methods of cholangioscopy. However, several limitations remain that need to be overcome including: identification of the major papilla and biliary orifice, endoscope insertion into the distal bile duct and hilar region, and therapeutic intervention. The major papilla must be visualized in order to accomplish PDCS. Conventional ultraslim upper GI endoscopes are not designed for cholangioscopy and the bending portion of the endoscope is too long to directly observe the inferior aspect of the papilla. The prototype multi-bending PDCS has a shorter first bending portion than conventional ultraslim upper GI endoscopes. As a result, in all seven patients in whom free-hand endoscope insertion was attempted, the major papilla and biliary orifice were identified using the prototype cholangioscope. Therefore, the short length of the first bending portion of the direct cholangioscope seems to greatly facilitate an en face position at the major papilla. Nevertheless, even when an en face view of the major papilla was achieved, free-hand insertion of the endoscope directly into the bile duct was not possible by two skilled endoscopists despite the fact that the prototype cholangioscope allowed deep entry into the extrahepatic bile duct in a simulated ex-vivo model.14 In a previous study using the model, flexion of the second bending portion was more effective for insertion of the endoscope into the lower bile duct when combined with flexion of the first bending portion of the endoscope. However, in this study, the tip of the endoscope could not be inserted into the bile duct using the free-hand technique. Thus, further modifications of the length, angulation and deflection of the endoscope are necessary for free-hand cannulation.

For reliable direct insertion into the bile duct, a large biliary orifice is mandatory. At present, endoscopic sphincterotomy with or without large papillary balloon dilation is needed to allow passage of the PDCS. However, this may be cumbersome and time-consuming. A 5-Fr sphincterotome with or without a small diameter papillary dilation balloon and controllable multi-bending PDCS should make it possible to carry out ‘one-step PDCS’ without carrying out ERCP using a standard duodenoscope.

The present study suggests that free-hand insertion was not possible using the current multi-bending direct cholangioscope. The use of a guidewire and anchoring balloon was needed to achieve a high rate of successful endoscope insertion into the bile duct at 92.9% and is similar to the 72–100% rate seen in previously reported series using an anchoring balloon and overtube balloon with conventional ultraslim upper GI endoscopes.3–4 Endoscope insertion into the distal bile duct is relatively easy using a guidewire, anchoring balloon, and the free-hand technique using the hooking method with the endoscope in the retroflexed position.15 In contrast, cholangioscope insertion proximal to the bifurcation is comparatively difficult. In the present study, in 13 (92.9%) patients without extrahepatic bile duct strictures, the tip of the endoscope was successfully advanced to the bifurcation. This is likely a result of five major improvements in the multi-bending PDCS compared to conventional ultraslim upper endoscopes. Briefly, these changes include a working length 30 cm longer than standard ultraslim endoscopes to facilitate endoscope insertion into the bile duct when loop formation occurs in the stomach. Second, it has a 7.0-mm outer diameter insertion portion compared to a 5.5-mm insertion portion of a standard ultraslim endoscope. This provides stiffness that allows the endoscope to be advanced into the bile duct. Third, it has two working channels whereas the standard ultraslim endoscope has a single 2.0-mm channel. Fourth, the length of the distal bending section is shorter with a proximal bending section, thus the multi-bending cholangioscope facilitates insertion into the bile duct. Fifth, it has an air insufflation function. In this clinical study, among these improvements, we felt that the second bending portion of the scope enabled easy scope advancement in the bile duct compared to the conventional ultraslim upper GI endoscope. Finally, the tip of the endoscope is not easily expelled from the distal bile duct.

The ultimate goals of PDCS are optical precision, and ability to biopsy and carry out interventions. In the present study, targeted interventions were achieved in all but one patient. Although a super ultraslim cholangioscope (CHF-B260; Olympus) is available in a mother-baby system, the 3-Fr accessory channel limits the ability to pass accessories. In contrast, the current multi-bending PDCS, as well as conventional ultraslim upper GI endoscopes, has a 5-Fr accessory channel, leading to potential diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, such as biliary stent placement, tumor ablation, and delivery of photodynamic therapy.2–8

Air embolism is an extremely rare but fatal adverse event of ERCP.16 Recently, air embolism with resultant left hemiparesis occurred after direct cholangioscopy was carried out with an intraductal balloon anchoring system.17 In the present study, PDCS was done using CO2 insufflation rather than room air, although the potential for embolism still exists. Therefore, PDCS should be carried out with minimal insufflation.

Limitations of the present study include the small number of patients and a lack of comparison with conventional cholangioscopy.

In conclusion, we showed that the novel multi-bending PDCS cannot be inserted free-hand into the bile duct. However, a high success rate of direct insertion can be achieved when the endoscope is passed over a guidewire and an anchoring balloon. Furthermore, this novel PDCS appears to enable reliable diagnostic and therapeutic applications in the extrahepatic bile duct.

Acknowledgments

The authors are indebted to Roderick J. Turner and Professor J. Patrick Barron of the Department of International Medical Communications of Tokyo Medical University for their review of this manuscript. We are grateful to Dr Todd H. Baron of the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, for his valuable editing suggestions.

Conflict of Interests

T. Itoi is a speaker and consultant for Olympus Medical Systems. The prototype cholangioscope was provided free of charge by Olympus Medical Systems (Tokyo, Japan). D.N. Reddy, A. Sofuni, M. Ramchandani, F. Itokawa, R. Gupta, T. Kurihara, T. Tsuchiya, K. Ishii, N. Ikeuchi, F. Moriyasu and J.H. Moon declare no conflict of interests for this article.

References

  1. Larghi A, Waxman I. Endoscopic direct cholangioscopy by using an ultra-slim upper endoscope: A feasibility study. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2006;63:853–857. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.07.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Park do H, Park BW, Lee HS, et al. Peroral direct cholangioscopic argon plasma coagulation by using an ultraslim upper endoscope for recurrent hepatoma with intraductal nodular tumor growth (with videos) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2007;66:201–203. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.11.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Moon JH, Ko BM, Choi HJ, et al. Intraductal balloon guided direct peroral cholangioscopy using an ultra-slim upper endoscope. Gastrointest. Endosc. 70:297–302. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.11.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Tsou YK, Lin CH, Tang JH, et al. Direct peroral cholangioscopy using an ultraslim endoscope and overtube balloon-assisted technique: A case series. Endoscopy. 2009;42:681–684. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1255616. 2010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Waxman I, Chennat J, Konda V. Peroral direct cholangioscopic-guided selective intrahepatic duct stent placement with an ultraslim endoscope. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2010;71:875–878. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.09.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Choi HJ, Moon JH, Ko BM, et al. Clinical feasibility of direct peroral cholangioscopy-guided photodynamic therapy for inoperable cholangiocarcinoma performed by using an ultra-slim upper endoscope (with videos) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2011;73:808–813. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.11.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Pohl J, Ell C. Direct transnasal cholangioscopy with ultraslim endoscopes: A one-step intraductal balloon-guided approach. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2011;74:309–316. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.02.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Brauer BC, Fukami N, Chen YK. Direct cholangioscopy with narrow-band imaging, chromoendoscopy, and argon plasma coagulation of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the bile duct (with videos) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2008;67:574–576. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.07.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Baron TH, Saleem A. Intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy by using SpyGlass cholangioscopy through a colonoscope in a patient with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2010;71:650–651. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.08.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mou S, Waxman I, Chennat J. Peroral cholangioscopy in Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy anatomy by using the SpyGlass Direct Visualization System (with video) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2010;72:458–460. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.11.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic peroral direct cholangioscopy in patients with altered GI anatomy (with videos) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012;75:441–449. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Itoi T, Moon JH, Waxman I. Current status of direct peroral cholangioscopy. Dig. Endosc. 2011;23(Suppl 1):154–157. doi: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01114.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, et al. Initial experience with a prototype peroral direct cholangioscope to perform intraductal lithotripsy (with video) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2011;73:841–843. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, et al. Free-hand direct insertion ability into a simulated ex vivo model using a prototype multibending peroral direct cholangioscope (with videos) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012;76:454–457. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Itoi T, Kawai T, Sofuni A, et al. Efficacy and safety of one-step transnasal endoscopic nasobiliary drainage for the treatment of acute cholangitis in patients who have undergone endoscopic sphincterotomy (with video) Gastrointest. Endosc. 2008;68:84–90. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.11.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Siddiqui J, Jaffe PE, Aziz K, et al. Fatal air and bile embolism after percutaneous liver biopsy and ERCP. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2005;61:153–157. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02448-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Efthymiou M, Raftopoulos S, Chirinos JA, May GR. Air embolism complicated by left hemiparesis after direct cholangioscopy with an intraductal balloon anchoring system. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012;75:221–223. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Digestive Endoscopy are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES