BACKGROUND/AIMS: Peroral cholangioscopy is a rapidly evolving technique that allows direct examination of the bile duct. We sought to determine if there was a difference in image quality with the cholangioscope immersed in normal saline compared with radiologic contrast or a mixture of contrast and normal saline. METHODS: Images were captured using the SpyGlass(R) cholangioscope system (Boston Scientific Corp.) immersed in solutions ranging from 0 to 100% contrast. The images were then reviewed in a blinded fashion by a panel of 9 endoscopists with experience using the SpyGlass(R) system. The reviewers scored the quality of each image based on a scale of 0 (extremely poor) to 10 (excellent). RESULTS: With the cholangioscope immersed in saline and 100% contrast, the mean image quality scores were 7.6 (95% confi dence interval [CI], 6.7-8.5) and 6.9 (95% CI, 5.8-8.0), respectively. The highest mean image quality score was 7.8 (95% CI, 6.7-8.9), obtained in 70% contrast. No signifi cant difference was noted in mean image quality scores using a one way analysis of variance technique (p=0.414). CONCLUSIONS: Although there are limitations to ex vivo studies, we encourage endoscopists to use intraductal contrast prior to peroral cholangioscopy, if needed for lesion localization.
Bile Ducts ; Endoscopes

Background: /Aim: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) training requires varying degrees of staff assistance regarding operation of the fluoroscopy machine via a foot pedal. Efficiency is important to acquire during this training due to radiation risks. In this study, we evaluate the effect of controlling endoscopy and fluoroscopy unit on duct cannulation rates (CRs) and total fluoroscopy time (FT) for fellows in training. Methods: 204 patients undergoing ERCP were randomized to one of two groups: 1) “Endoscopist Driven” group in which the endoscopist controlled the foot pedal for fluoroscopy, and 2) “Assistant Driven” group in which attending or fellow controlled the foot pedal while the other team member controlled the endoscope. Various measures including selective duct CR and total FT were recorded. Results: There was no significant difference in mean procedure duration between the two groups (32 minutes vs. 33 minutes, p=0.70). There was also no statistically significant difference in CR (83.7% vs. 77.4%, p=0.25) or FT (3.27 minutes vs. 3.54 minutes, p=0.48). Conclusions ERCP is a technically challenging procedure which requires extensive supervision. This study demonstrates that CR and FT are not affected by who controls the fluoroscopy.