Abstract: The backreaming operation plays a significant role in safe drilling for horizontal wellbores, while it may cause severe stuck pipe accidents. To lower the risk of the stuck pipe in backreaming operations, the mechanism of cuttings transport needs to be carefully investigated. In this research, a transient cuttings transport with multiple flow patterns model is developed to predict the evolution of cuttings transported in the annulus while backreaming. The established model can provide predictions of the distribution of cuttings bed along the wellbore considering the bulldozer effect caused by large-size drilling tools (LSDTs). The sensitivity analyses of the size of LSDTs, and backreaming operating parameters are conducted in Section 4. And a new theory is proposed to explain the mechanism of cuttings transport in the backreaming operation, in which both the bit and LSDTs have the “cleaning effect” and “plugging effect”. The results demonstrate that the cuttings bed in annuli is in a state of dynamic equilibrium, but the overall trend and the distribution pattern are obvious. First, larger diameters and longer drilling tools could lead to a higher risk of the stuck pipe. Second, we find that it is not the case that the higher flow rate is always better for hole cleaning, so three flow-rate intervals are discussed separately under the given conditions. When the “dangerous flow rate” (<33 L/s in Case 4) is employed, the cuttings bed completely blocks the borehole near the step surface and causes a stuck pipe directly. If the flow rate increases to the “low flow rate” interval (33–35 L/s in Case 4), a smaller flow rate instead facilitates borehole cleaning. If the flow rate is large enough to be in the “high flow rate” interval (>35 L/s in Case 4), the higher the flow rate, the better the cleaning effect of cuttings beds. Third, an interval of tripping velocity called “dangerous velocity” is proposed, in which the cuttings bed accumulation near the LSDTs is more serious than those of other tripping velocities. As long as the applied tripping velocity is not within the “dangerous velocity” (0.4–0.5 m/s in Case 5) interval in the backreaming operation, the risk of the stuck pipe can be controlled validly. Finally, through the factors analyses of the annular geometry, particle properties, and fluid properties in Section 5, it can be found that the “low flow rate”, “high flow rate” and “dangers flow rate” tend to decrease and the “dangerous velocity” tends to increase with the conditions more favorable for hole cleaning. This study has some guiding significance for risk prediction and parameter setting of the backreaming operation.