Post-ERCP Acute PancreatitisSOCCERNCT05336630
Study of Forceps Cannulation During ERCP
A study testing Forceps in people with Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis, run by Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
A difficult cannulation has been identified as one of the high risk factors for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The accessibility and morphology of the papilla influence the level of cannulation difficulty. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis
- What is being tested?
- Forceps
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 152 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 12 May 2022to 21 Oct 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- PRIMARY INCLUSION CRITERIA:
- Patient consent
- ERCP done on native papilla
- SECONDARY INCLUSION CRITERIA:
- Papilla in a diverticulum
- Papilla on rim of a diverticulum
Show all 9Show fewer
- Difficult cannulation (5 attempts, 5 minutes, or 2 unintended PD wire passages)
- Redundant tissue overlying papilla
- Type 2, 3, or 4 papilla
Who cannot join
- Prior ampullectomy
- Known pregnancy, positive test, breastfeeding
- Clinical contraindication to ERCP
- Metal allergy
- Prior sphincterotomy
- Inability to follow protocol
Show all 9Show fewer
- <18 years old
- Enrolled in another ERCP study
- Biliary/PD stent in place
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: SOCCER: Study Of forCeps Cannulation During ERcp
A difficult cannulation has been identified as one of the high risk factors for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The accessibility and morphology of the papilla influence the level of cannulation difficulty. The use of a forceps to assist in the cannulation is a demonstrated effective technique for cannulating papillae that are difficult to access. Thus, the objective of our study is to determine whether a forceps assisted cannulation leads to less difficult cannulation during ERCP. Because difficult cannulation is associated with increased risk of PEP, our study investigates whether the forceps assisted cannulation also reduces the incidence of PEP as a secondary outcome. Eligible patients who have consented will either be randomized to cannulation with forceps or cannulation with no forceps.
Read the detailed description
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), an invasive procedure that combines endoscopy and x-ray to treat issues with the bile and pancreatic ducts, carries a two to ten percent risk of causing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) [1]. Because acute pancreatitis is a devastating inflammatory condition that leads to extensive morbidity and mortality, efforts to reduce the risk of PEP in patients undergoing ERCP would enhance patient outcomes and would decrease the economic burden in treating PEP nationwide [2-4].
A difficult cannulation has been identified as one of the high risk factors for developing PEP [5]. A study performed by Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) determined that cannulations with five or more attempts, a duration of five minutes or longer, or two or more unintended pancreatic duct (PD) wire passages significantly increased one's risk for PEP [6]. Thus, SADE defined a difficult cannulation as any cannulation with at least one of the following conditions: five or more attempts, five or more minutes, or two or more unintended PD wire passages [6]. This classification of a difficult cannulation has been adopted and standardized by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [7]. Because no current guidelines defining a difficult cannulation exist from the American College of Gastroenterology or American Gastroenterological Association, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines as gathered from the SADE study are the worldwide standardized definition of difficult cannulation.
Difficult cannulations have been reported to occur at a frequency of 42 percent for all ERCP exams [8]. The morphology and accessibility of the papilla influence the level of difficulty. Some studies have indicated that different macroscopic appearances of the papilla result in varying cannulation difficulty levels. Based on a study gauging intraobserver and interobserver agreement to the macroscopic appearance of different papillae, papillae are categorized as: Type 1, normal appearing; Type 2, small; Type 3, protruding or pendulous; and Type 4, ridged or creased [9]. Haraldsson et al. found that Type 2 and Type 3 papillae were more difficult to cannulate [8]. Regardless of papilla type, the involvement of a trainee (a GI fellow) resulted in more difficult cannulations [8]. In addition, the presence of redundant tissue, such as periampullary diverticula-which occurs in up to 20 percent of patients undergoing ERCP-results in more challenging cannulations [10]. The use of a forceps to assist in the cannulation is a demonstrated effective technique for cannulating papillae that are difficult to access [10-12]. The forceps clears the redundant tissue to enable access to the papilla, as well as stabilizes the ampullary position to permit an easier cannulation [10]. Currently, no randomized controlled trials that detail to what extent a forceps facilitates cannulation exist. Thus, our study aims to determine whether a forceps assisted cannulation reduces the incidence of difficult cannulations and consequently PEP.
The primary outcome is difficult cannulation after randomization. A difficult cannulation will be defined as any cannulation that results in any of the following: 5 or more minutes, 5 or more cannulation attempts, or 2 or more unintentional pancreatic wire passages.
The secondary outcome is PEP. Acute pancreatitis according to the Atlanta guidelines, is at least two of the following: abdominal pain consistent with pancreatitis, lipase or amylase greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal, radiographic evidence of pancreatitis on cross sectional imaging [13].
The study intervention is the use of a forceps during the cannulation. Eligible patients who have consented will either be randomized to forceps assisted cannulation or no forceps used during cannulation. The forceps is an FDA approved instrument and does not put the patient at any higher risk for any adverse event.
SOCCER plans to enroll 152 patients. All patients undergoing ERCP at Dartmouth-Hitchcock endoscopy will be approached and consented for this study. Medical records will be reviewed to see if they meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients will be consented day of the procedure. We received an approved HIPAA Authorization Waiver because access to a patient's chart will be required to determine inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Consent will be performed in the endoscopy pre-op area. During the standard of care ERCP, the patients will be randomized intraoperatively to either cannulation with forceps and cannulation with no forceps. Written informed consent will be reviewed and signed before any study related procedures are performed.
Please note that the primary outcome refers to a difficult cannulation AFTER randomization when the secondary inclusion criteria has been met. For example, if the secondary inclusion criteria met is difficult cannulation, then the primary outcome would be if from that point forward there were a difficult cannulation. As such, a total cannulation time of 10 minutes would enable the patient to be eligible (the first 5 minutes means the cannulation is difficult) and would mean the subject met the primary outcome (the second 5 minutes means cannulation after randomization is difficult). However, a total cannulation time of 8 minutes means the patient is eligible for the study (first 5 minutes means the cannulation is difficult) but did not meet the primary outcome (after randomization, the cannulation was not difficult because it was only 3 minutes). In a sense, the "difficult cannulation clock" is reset after randomization. If the secondary inclusion criteria met instead is papilla location or type, then the patient is randomized immediately before the cannulation and the difficult cannulation clock starts then. Measurement of difficult cannulation starts immediately after randomization upon the doctor's first cannulation attempt following randomization.
Randomization will occur in block format. Randomization assignments will be placed in sealed manila envelopes that will be opened at the time of randomization. Manila envelopes will be kept with the study coordinator.
After consent, data will be collected before, during, and after the procedure. The primary outcome will be measured during the procedure, whereas the secondary outcome will be determined during the 5 day follow up call. The study coordinator, GI fellow, or attending physician will call the patient 5 days (+/- 2 days) post-procedure to determine whether the patient developed PEP. Though it is preferred to contact the patient, other methods (chart review, emergency contact, outside records) are acceptable for determining the secondary outcome.
- Conditions
- Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis
- Being tested
- Forceps
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ForcepsDevice
The forceps clears the redundant tissue to enable access to the papilla, as well as stabilizes the ampullary position to permit an easier cannulation. The forceps is an FDA approved instrument and does not put the patient at any higher risk for any adverse event. Please note that for the explicit purpose of the study the forceps will be used to grab tissue and not take biopsies. The forceps may still be used to take biopsies if the physician believes it is indicated.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Forceps Assisted Cannulation | Experimental | Patients will have a forceps assisted cannulation during their ERCPs. Receives: Device: Forceps |
| No Forceps Assisted Cannulation | No intervention | Patients will not have a forceps assisted cannulation during their ERCPs. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Cannulation Success Rate and Difficult Cannulation Rate
A difficult cannulation will be defined as any cannulation that results in any of the following: 5 or more minutes, 5 or more cannulation attempts, or 2 or more unintentional pancreatic wire passages.
Measured: Baseline (during the ERCP)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Number of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP)
Measured: 5 (+/- 2) days after ERCP
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Apr 2022
- Study start12 May 2022
- Primary completion15 Oct 2024
- Study completion21 Oct 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (14)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Post-ERCP Acute PancreatitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Patients will be randomized to either ERCP with forceps assisted cannulation or ERCP with no forceps.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 152 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Timothy Gardner, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
- Investigators
- Timothy B Gardner, MD MS, Principal investigator, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05336630
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY02001449
- Acronym
- SOCCER
- Status last verified
- Oct 2025
- First submitted
- 14 Apr 2022
- Last updated
- 30 Oct 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Thaker AM, Mosko JD, Berzin TM. Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2015 Feb;3(1):32-40. doi: 10.1093/gastro/gou083. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
PubMed 25406464Neoptolemos JP, Raraty M, Finch M, Sutton R. Acute pancreatitis: the substantial human and financial costs. Gut. 1998 Jun;42(6):886-91. doi: 10.1136/gut.42.6.886.
PubMed 9691932Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, Haber GB, Herman ME, Dorsher PJ, Moore JP, Fennerty MB, Ryan ME, Shaw MJ, Lande JD, Pheley AM. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996 Sep 26;335(13):909-18. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199609263351301.
PubMed 8782497Elmunzer BJ, Serrano J, Chak A, Edmundowicz SA, Papachristou GI, Scheiman JM, Singh VK, Varadarajulu S, Vargo JJ, Willingham FF, Baron TH, Cote GA, Romagnuolo J, Wood-Williams A, Depue EK, Spitzer RL, Spino C, Foster LD, Durkalski V; SVI study group and the United States Cooperative for Outcomes Research in Endoscopy (USCORE). Correction to: Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020 Jun 3;21(1):471. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04458-0.
PubMed 32493506Freeman ML, Guda NM. Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comprehensive review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Jun;59(7):845-64. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)00353-0. No abstract available.
PubMed 15173799Halttunen J, Meisner S, Aabakken L, Arnelo U, Gronroos J, Hauge T, Kleveland PM, Nordblad Schmidt P, Saarela A, Swahn F, Toth E, Mustonen H, Lohr JM. Difficult cannulation as defined by a prospective study of the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) in 907 ERCPs. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jun;49(6):752-8. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2014.894120. Epub 2014 Mar 14.
PubMed 24628493Testoni PA, Mariani A, Aabakken L, Arvanitakis M, Bories E, Costamagna G, Deviere J, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Dumonceau JM, Giovannini M, Gyokeres T, Hafner M, Halttunen J, Hassan C, Lopes L, Papanikolaou IS, Tham TC, Tringali A, van Hooft J, Williams EJ. Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2016 Jul;48(7):657-83. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-108641. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
PubMed 27299638Haraldsson E, Kylanpaa L, Gronroos J, Saarela A, Toth E, Qvigstad G, Hult M, Lindstrom O, Laine S, Karjula H, Hauge T, Sadik R, Arnelo U. Macroscopic appearance of the major duodenal papilla influences bile duct cannulation: a prospective multicenter study by the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy Study Group for ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Dec;90(6):957-963. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.07.014. Epub 2019 Jul 18.
PubMed 31326385Haraldsson E, Lundell L, Swahn F, Enochsson L, Lohr JM, Arnelo U; Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) Study Group of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreaticography. Endoscopic classification of the papilla of Vater. Results of an inter- and intraobserver agreement study. United European Gastroenterol J. 2017 Jun;5(4):504-510. doi: 10.1177/2050640616674837. Epub 2016 Oct 17.
PubMed 28588881Levenick JM, Gardner TB, Hussain ZH, Gordon SR. SpyBite-assisted biliary cannulation for intradiverticular papilla during ERCP. Endoscopy. 2014;46 Suppl 1 UCTN:E514. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377365. Epub 2014 Nov 19. No abstract available.
PubMed 25409044Borahma M, Benelbarhdadi I, Berhili C, Lagdali N, Ajana FZ. Forceps-assisted technique: a new technique for difficult cannulation. Endoscopy. 2020 Jul;52(7):E247-E248. doi: 10.1055/a-1089-7418. Epub 2020 Jan 29. No abstract available.
PubMed 31995819Murabayashi T. The forceps-assisted technique for difficult cannulation has been in widespread use since 1996. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):457. doi: 10.1055/a-1288-0801. Epub 2021 Mar 29. No abstract available.
PubMed 33780985Foster BR, Jensen KK, Bakis G, Shaaban AM, Coakley FV. Revised Atlanta Classification for Acute Pancreatitis: A Pictorial Essay. Radiographics. 2016 May-Jun;36(3):675-87. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016150097.
PubMed 27163588Hadley SM Jr, Chevalier JI, Tomasetti GE, Hill JC, Duclos MC, Klibansky DA, Pohl H, Siegel CA, Toor A, Bensen SP, Adler JM, Gordon SR, Gardner TB. The Effectiveness of Forceps-Assisted Cannulation for Difficult Cannulation During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Results of the SOCCER Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2026 Feb 1;121(2):337-344. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003531. Epub 2025 May 14.
PubMed 40367484
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Oct 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- SOCCER: Study Of forCeps Cannulation During ERcp
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05336630
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SOCCER / STUDY02001449
- Conditions
- Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 152 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 May 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 21 Oct 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Apr 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 30 Oct 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A difficult cannulation has been identified as one of the high risk factors for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The accessibility and morphology of the papilla influence the level of cannulation difficulty. The use of a forceps to assist in the cannulation is a demonstrated effective technique for cannulating papillae that are difficult to access. Thus, the objective of our study is to determine whether a forceps assisted cannulation leads to less difficult cannulation during ERCP. Because difficult cannulation is associated with increased risk of PEP, our study investigates whether the forceps assisted cannulation also reduces the incidence of PEP as a secondary outcome. Eligible patients who have consented will either be randomized to cannulation with forceps or cannulation with no forceps.
Detailed description
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), an invasive procedure that combines endoscopy and x-ray to treat issues with the bile and pancreatic ducts, carries a two to ten percent risk of causing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) [1]. Because acute pancreatitis is a devastating inflammatory condition that leads to extensive morbidity and mortality, efforts to reduce the risk of PEP in patients undergoing ERCP would enhance patient outcomes and would decrease the economic burden in treating PEP nationwide [2-4].
A difficult cannulation has been identified as one of the high risk factors for developing PEP [5]. A study performed by Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) determined that cannulations with five or more attempts, a duration of five minutes or longer, or two or more unintended pancreatic duct (PD) wire passages significantly increased one's risk for PEP [6]. Thus, SADE defined a difficult cannulation as any cannulation with at least one of the following conditions: five or more attempts, five or more minutes, or two or more unintended PD wire passages [6]. This classification of a difficult cannulation has been adopted and standardized by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [7]. Because no current guidelines defining a difficult cannulation exist from the American College of Gastroenterology or American Gastroenterological Association, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines as gathered from the SADE study are the worldwide standardized definition of difficult cannulation.
Difficult cannulations have been reported to occur at a frequency of 42 percent for all ERCP exams [8]. The morphology and accessibility of the papilla influence the level of difficulty. Some studies have indicated that different macroscopic appearances of the papilla result in varying cannulation difficulty levels. Based on a study gauging intraobserver and interobserver agreement to the macroscopic appearance of different papillae, papillae are categorized as: Type 1, normal appearing; Type 2, small; Type 3, protruding or pendulous; and Type 4, ridged or creased [9]. Haraldsson et al. found that Type 2 and Type 3 papillae were more difficult to cannulate [8]. Regardless of papilla type, the involvement of a trainee (a GI fellow) resulted in more difficult cannulations [8]. In addition, the presence of redundant tissue, such as periampullary diverticula-which occurs in up to 20 percent of patients undergoing ERCP-results in more challenging cannulations [10]. The use of a forceps to assist in the cannulation is a demonstrated effective technique for cannulating papillae that are difficult to access [10-12]. The forceps clears the redundant tissue to enable access to the papilla, as well as stabilizes the ampullary position to permit an easier cannulation [10]. Currently, no randomized controlled trials that detail to what extent a forceps facilitates cannulation exist. Thus, our study aims to determine whether a forceps assisted cannulation reduces the incidence of difficult cannulations and consequently PEP.
The primary outcome is difficult cannulation after randomization. A difficult cannulation will be defined as any cannulation that results in any of the following: 5 or more minutes, 5 or more cannulation attempts, or 2 or more unintentional pancreatic wire passages.
The secondary outcome is PEP. Acute pancreatitis according to the Atlanta guidelines, is at least two of the following: abdominal pain consistent with pancreatitis, lipase or amylase greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal, radiographic evidence of pancreatitis on cross sectional imaging [13].
The study intervention is the use of a forceps during the cannulation. Eligible patients who have consented will either be randomized to forceps assisted cannulation or no forceps used during cannulation. The forceps is an FDA approved instrument and does not put the patient at any higher risk for any adverse event.
SOCCER plans to enroll 152 patients. All patients undergoing ERCP at Dartmouth-Hitchcock endoscopy will be approached and consented for this study. Medical records will be reviewed to see if they meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients will be consented day of the procedure. We received an approved HIPAA Authorization Waiver because access to a patient's chart will be required to determine inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Consent will be performed in the endoscopy pre-op area. During the standard of care ERCP, the patients will be randomized intraoperatively to either cannulation with forceps and cannulation with no forceps. Written informed consent will be reviewed and signed before any study related procedures are performed.
Please note that the primary outcome refers to a difficult cannulation AFTER randomization when the secondary inclusion criteria has been met. For example, if the secondary inclusion criteria met is difficult cannulation, then the primary outcome would be if from that point forward there were a difficult cannulation. As such, a total cannulation time of 10 minutes would enable the patient to be eligible (the first 5 minutes means the cannulation is difficult) and would mean the subject met the primary outcome (the second 5 minutes means cannulation after randomization is difficult). However, a total cannulation time of 8 minutes means the patient is eligible for the study (first 5 minutes means the cannulation is difficult) but did not meet the primary outcome (after randomization, the cannulation was not difficult because it was only 3 minutes). In a sense, the "difficult cannulation clock" is reset after randomization. If the secondary inclusion criteria met instead is papilla location or type, then the patient is randomized immediately before the cannulation and the difficult cannulation clock starts then. Measurement of difficult cannulation starts immediately after randomization upon the doctor's first cannulation attempt following randomization.
Randomization will occur in block format. Randomization assignments will be placed in sealed manila envelopes that will be opened at the time of randomization. Manila envelopes will be kept with the study coordinator.
After consent, data will be collected before, during, and after the procedure. The primary outcome will be measured during the procedure, whereas the secondary outcome will be determined during the 5 day follow up call. The study coordinator, GI fellow, or attending physician will call the patient 5 days (+/- 2 days) post-procedure to determine whether the patient developed PEP. Though it is preferred to contact the patient, other methods (chart review, emergency contact, outside records) are acceptable for determining the secondary outcome.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Patients will be randomized to either ERCP with forceps assisted cannulation or ERCP with no forceps.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Forceps Assisted Cannulation | Experimental | Device: ForcepsPatients will have a forceps assisted cannulation during their ERCPs. |
| No Forceps Assisted Cannulation | No intervention | –Patients will not have a forceps assisted cannulation during their ERCPs. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Patient consent
- ERCP done on native papilla
- Papilla in a diverticulum
- Papilla on rim of a diverticulum
- Difficult cannulation (5 attempts, 5 minutes, or 2 unintended PD wire passages)
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Prior ampullectomy
- Known pregnancy, positive test, breastfeeding
- Clinical contraindication to ERCP
- Metal allergy
- Prior sphincterotomy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| ForcepsThe forceps clears the redundant tissue to enable access to the papilla, as well as stabilizes the ampullary position to permit an easier cannulation. The forceps is an FDA approved instrument and does not put the patient at any higher risk for any adverse event. Please note that for the explicit purpose of the study the forceps will be used to grab tissue and not take biopsies. The forceps may still be used to take biopsies if the physician believes it is indicated. | Device | Forceps Assisted Cannulation |
Primary outcome
Cannulation Success Rate and Difficult Cannulation Rate
Time frame: Baseline (during the ERCP)
A difficult cannulation will be defined as any cannulation that results in any of the following: 5 or more minutes, 5 or more cannulation attempts, or 2 or more unintentional pancreatic wire passages.
1 secondary outcome
Number of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP)
Time frame: 5 (+/- 2) days after ERCP
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Oct 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 25406464Thaker AM, Mosko JD, Berzin TM. Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2015 Feb;3(1):32-40. doi: 10.1093/gastro/gou083. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
- Background: PubMed 9691932Neoptolemos JP, Raraty M, Finch M, Sutton R. Acute pancreatitis: the substantial human and financial costs. Gut. 1998 Jun;42(6):886-91. doi: 10.1136/gut.42.6.886.
- Background: PubMed 8782497Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, Haber GB, Herman ME, Dorsher PJ, Moore JP, Fennerty MB, Ryan ME, Shaw MJ, Lande JD, Pheley AM. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med. 1996 Sep 26;335(13):909-18. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199609263351301.
- Background: PubMed 32493506Elmunzer BJ, Serrano J, Chak A, Edmundowicz SA, Papachristou GI, Scheiman JM, Singh VK, Varadarajulu S, Vargo JJ, Willingham FF, Baron TH, Cote GA, Romagnuolo J, Wood-Williams A, Depue EK, Spitzer RL, Spino C, Foster LD, Durkalski V; SVI study group and the United States Cooperative for Outcomes Research in Endoscopy (USCORE). Correction to: Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020 Jun 3;21(1):471. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04458-0.
- Background: PubMed 15173799Freeman ML, Guda NM. Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comprehensive review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Jun;59(7):845-64. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)00353-0. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 24628493Halttunen J, Meisner S, Aabakken L, Arnelo U, Gronroos J, Hauge T, Kleveland PM, Nordblad Schmidt P, Saarela A, Swahn F, Toth E, Mustonen H, Lohr JM. Difficult cannulation as defined by a prospective study of the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) in 907 ERCPs. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jun;49(6):752-8. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2014.894120. Epub 2014 Mar 14.
- Background: PubMed 27299638Testoni PA, Mariani A, Aabakken L, Arvanitakis M, Bories E, Costamagna G, Deviere J, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Dumonceau JM, Giovannini M, Gyokeres T, Hafner M, Halttunen J, Hassan C, Lopes L, Papanikolaou IS, Tham TC, Tringali A, van Hooft J, Williams EJ. Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2016 Jul;48(7):657-83. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-108641. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
- Background: PubMed 31326385Haraldsson E, Kylanpaa L, Gronroos J, Saarela A, Toth E, Qvigstad G, Hult M, Lindstrom O, Laine S, Karjula H, Hauge T, Sadik R, Arnelo U. Macroscopic appearance of the major duodenal papilla influences bile duct cannulation: a prospective multicenter study by the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy Study Group for ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Dec;90(6):957-963. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.07.014. Epub 2019 Jul 18.
- Background: PubMed 28588881Haraldsson E, Lundell L, Swahn F, Enochsson L, Lohr JM, Arnelo U; Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) Study Group of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreaticography. Endoscopic classification of the papilla of Vater. Results of an inter- and intraobserver agreement study. United European Gastroenterol J. 2017 Jun;5(4):504-510. doi: 10.1177/2050640616674837. Epub 2016 Oct 17.
- Background: PubMed 25409044Levenick JM, Gardner TB, Hussain ZH, Gordon SR. SpyBite-assisted biliary cannulation for intradiverticular papilla during ERCP. Endoscopy. 2014;46 Suppl 1 UCTN:E514. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377365. Epub 2014 Nov 19. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 31995819Borahma M, Benelbarhdadi I, Berhili C, Lagdali N, Ajana FZ. Forceps-assisted technique: a new technique for difficult cannulation. Endoscopy. 2020 Jul;52(7):E247-E248. doi: 10.1055/a-1089-7418. Epub 2020 Jan 29. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 33780985Murabayashi T. The forceps-assisted technique for difficult cannulation has been in widespread use since 1996. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):457. doi: 10.1055/a-1288-0801. Epub 2021 Mar 29. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis
Not yet recruiting
Cold Water Papillary Irrigation Plus Rectal NSAIDs vs Rectal NSAIDs Alone for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (COLD)
Post ERCP Pancreatitis, Acute Pancreatitis (AP)
Not yet recruiting
Prophylactic Sphincterotomy in Acute Biliary Pancreatitis Patients Unfit for Surgery
Acute Biliary Pancreatitis
Recruiting
Cold and NSAID Trial for Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis
Pancreatitis, Acute
RecruitingObservational study
An European Multi-centre Cohort Study for Unravelling Pharmacokinetic and Genetic Factors Underlying Post-ERCP Pancreatitis
Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Indomethacin for Biliary ERCP Patients
Pancreatitis Biliary, Pancreatitis Acute Biliary
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Timothy B Gardner, MD MS principal investigator
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Forceps in people with Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis, run by Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Oct 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 30 Oct 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Cannulation Success Rate and Difficult Cannulation Rate (time frame: Baseline (during the ERCP)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05336630, which also lists 14 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Oct 2025.