Assessment of efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage: a systematic review

[Relief of Obstruction in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer]

Pancreatic cancer is a major cause of cancer-related mortality and morbidity, and its incidence is increasing as the population is aging. On the other hand, significant improvement in the prognosis has not occurred. The absence of early diagnosis means that many patients are diagnosed only when they develop symptoms, such as jaundice, due to a biliary obstruction. The role of endoscopy in multidisciplinary care for patients with pancreatic cancer continues to evolve. Controversy remains regarding the best preoperative biliary drainage in patients with surgically resectable pancreatic head cancer. In general, patients undergoing a surgical resection usually do not require preoperative biliary drainage unless they have cholangitis or receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. If biliary drainage is performed prior to surgery, the patient's condition and a multidisciplinary approach should be considered. With the increasing life expectancy of patients with pancreatic cancer, the need for more long-time biliary drainage or pre-operative biliary drainage is also increasing. Strong evidence of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as a first-line and essential treatment for biliary decompression has been provided. On the other hand, the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage as well as percutaneous biliary drainage has been also recommended. During ERCP, self-expandable metal stent could be recommended instead of a plastic stent for the purpose of long stent patency and minimizing stent-induced complications. In this review, several points of view regarding the relief of obstruction in patients with pancreatic cancer, and optimal techniques are being discussed.

Review of Simultaneous Double Stenting Using Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Techniques in Combined Gastric Outlet and Biliary Obstructions

Concomitant malignant gastric outlet obstruction and biliary obstruction may occur in patients with advanced cancers affecting these anatomical regions. This scenario presents a unique challenge to the endoscopist in selecting an optimal management approach. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of endoscopic techniques for treating simultaneous gastric outlet and biliary obstruction (GOBO) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance for biliary drainage. An extensive literature search for peer-reviewed published cases yielded 6 unique case series that either focused on or included the use of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with simultaneous gastroduodenal stenting. In our composite analysis, a total of 51 patients underwent simultaneous biliary drainage through EUS, with an overall reported technical success rate of 100% for both duodenal stenting and biliary drainage. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy or EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was employed as the initial technique. In 34 cases in which clinical success was ascribed, 100% derived clinical benefit. The common adverse effects of double stenting included cholangitis, stent migration, bleeding, food impaction, and pancreatitis. We conclude that simultaneous double stenting with EUS-BD and gastroduodenal stenting for GOBO is associated with high success rates. It is a feasible and practical alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage or surgery for palliation in patients with associated advanced malignancies.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for malignant biliary obstruction: Is this the ultimate horizon of our experience?

In the last years, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has evolved from a purely diagnostic technique to a more and more complex interventional procedure, with the possibility to perform several type of therapeutic interventions. Among these, EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD) is gaining popularity as a therapeutic approach after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), due to the avoidance of external drainage, a lower rate of adverse events and re-interventions, and lower costs compared to percutaneous trans-hepatic BD. Initially, devices created for luminal procedures (e.g., luminal biliary stents) have been adapted to the new trans-luminal EUS-guided interventions, with predictable shortcomings in technical success, outcome and adverse events. More recently, new metal stents specifically designed for transluminal drainage, namely lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), have been made available for EUS-guided procedures. An electrocautery enhanced delivery system (EC-LAMS), which allows direct access of the delivery system to the target lumen, has subsequently simplified the classic multi-step procedure of EUS-guided drainages. EUS-BD using LAMS and EC-LAMS has been demonstrated effective and safe, and currently seems one of the most performing techniques for EUS-BD. In this Review, we summarize the evolution of the EUS-BD in distal MBO, focusing on the novelty of LAMS and analyzing the unresolved questions about the possible role of EUS as the first therapeutic option to achieve BD in this setting of patients.

Hemobilia: Historical overview, clinical update, and current practices

Hemobilia refers to macroscopic blood in the lumen of the biliary tree. It represents an uncommon, but important, cause of gastrointestinal bleeding and can have potentially lethal sequelae if not promptly recognized and treated. The earliest known reports of hemobilia date to the 17th century, but due to the relative rarity and challenges in diagnosis of hemobilia, it has historically not been well-studied. Until recently, most cases of hemobilia were due to trauma, but the majority now occur as a sequela of invasive procedures involving the hepatopancreatobiliary system. A triad (Quincke's) of right upper quadrant pain, jaundice and overt gastrointestinal bleeding has been classically described in hemobilia, but it is present in only a minority of patients. Therefore, prompt diagnosis depends critically on a high index of suspicion based on a patient's clinical presentation and a history of recently undergoing hepatopancreatobiliary intervention or having other predisposing factors. Treatment of hemobilia depends on the suspected source and clinical severity and thus ranges from supportive medical care to urgent advanced endoscopic, interventional radiologic, or surgical intervention. In the present review, we provide a historical perspective, clinical update and overview of current trends and practices pertaining to hemobilia.

Clinical practice guidelines for safe performance of endoscopic ultrasound/ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage: 2018

Endoscopic ultrasound/ultrasonography‐guided biliary drainage (EUS‐BD) is a relatively new modality for biliary drainage after failed or difficult transpapillary biliary cannulation. Despite its clinical utility, EUS‐BD can be complicated by severe adverse events such as bleeding, perforation, and peritonitis. The aim of this paper is to provide practice guidelines for safe performance of EUS‐BD as well as safe introduction of the procedure to non‐expert centers. The guidelines comprised patient–intervention–comparison–outcome‐formatted clinical questions (CQs) and questions (Qs), which are background statements to facilitate understanding of the CQs. A literature search was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Statement, evidence level, and strength of recommendation were created according to the GRADE system. Four committees were organized: guideline creation, expert panelist, evaluation, and external evaluation committees. We developed 13 CQs (methods, device selection, supportive treatment, management of adverse events, education and ethics) and six Qs (definition, indication, outcomes and adverse events) with statements, evidence levels, and strengths of recommendation. The guidelines explain the technical aspects, management of adverse events, and ethics of EUS‐BD and its introduction to non‐expert institutions.

Endoscopic ultrasound versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage for primary decompression of malignant biliary obstruction: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Current evidence supporting the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a first-line treatment option for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) is limited. We plan to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the performance of EUS-BD and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) as primary palliation of MBO.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised controlled trials evaluating EUS-BD versus ERCP-BD in primary drainage of MBO will be searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, from database inception to 31 October 2018. Data on study design, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcomes will be extracted. Primary outcomes to be assessed are technical and clinical success. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, stent patency, stent dysfunction, reinterventions, procedure duration and overall survival. Study quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan V.5.3 statistical software. Data will be combined with a random effect model. The results will be presented as a risk ratio for dichotomous data, weighted mean difference for continuous data and HR for time-to-event data. Publication bias will be visualised using funnel plots.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will not use primary data, and therefore, formal ethical approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and committee conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018117040.

Comprehensive review on EUS-guided biliary drainage

Feasibility of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for biliary drainage is not always applicable due to anatomical alterations or to inability to access the papilla. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage has always been considered the only alternative for this indication. However, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage represents a valid option to replace percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage when ERCP fails. According to the access site to the biliary tree, two kinds of approaches may be described: the intrahepatic and the extrahepatic. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided rendez-vous transpapillary drainage is performed where the second portion of the duodenum is easily reached but conventional ERCP fails. The recent introduction of self-expandable metal stents and lumen-apposing metal stents has improved this field. However, the role of the latter is still controversial. Echoendoscopic transmural biliary drainage can be challenging with potential severe adverse events. Therefore, trained endoscopists, in both ERCP and endoscopic ultrasonography are needed with surgical and radiological backup.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A change in paradigm?

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been developed as an alternative means of biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EUS-BD offers effective internal drainage in a single session in the event of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and has fewer adverse events (AE). In choosing which technique to use for EUS-BD, a combination of factors appears to be important in decision-making; technical expertise, the risk of AE, and anatomy. With the advent of novel all-in-one EUS-BD specific devices enabling simpler and safer techniques, as well as the growing experience and training of endosonographers, EUS-BD may potentially become a first-line technique in biliary drainage for MBO.

Advanced Endoscopic Procedures: An Update for Radiologists

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this article are to familiarize radiologists with endoscopic techniques currently in use and to improve identification of clinically relevant imaging findings and procedural complications related to common endoscopic interventions. CONCLUSION. The frequency of performance of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound-guided procedures has risen precipitously in the last decade. These procedures are replacing surgical and percutaneous approaches to a variety of disease entities. Recent advances include endoscopic bariatric procedures, endoscopic myotomies, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage procedures.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a thin stent delivery system in patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: A prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction, endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is an alternative. It has high technical and clinical success rates, but also has high adverse event rates. This prospective cohort study was aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of EUS-CDS with our newly developed partially covered self-expandable metal stent with a thin delivery system.

METHODS

Patients consisted of all consecutive patients in three tertiary referral centers with unresectable malignant distal obstruction in whom ERCP failed and in whom EUS-CDS with the thin delivery system was selected as the second-line approach. Rates of clinical success, technical success, technical success in cases not requiring fistulous tract dilation, adverse events, and stent dysfunction were determined.

RESULTS

In the 20 patients, technical and clinical success rates were 95.0% (19/20) and 100% (19/19), respectively. In 31.6% (6/19), the delivery system was successfully inserted into the bile duct without requiring a fistulous-tract dilatation device. These patients had significantly shorter procedure times than patients requiring fistulous-tract dilatation (12.7 ± 3.1 vs 23.2 ± 2.1 min; P < 0.01). One patient (5.0%) who required fistulous dilation had an adverse event, which was managed conservatively. There were no procedure-related deaths. During follow up, four patients (21.1%) developed stent dysfunction. Reintervention was successful in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-CDS approach had 95% technical and 100% clinical success rates, with adverse events reported in 5% of cases. EUS-CDS may become safer if efforts are made to avoid the dilation step (UMIN 000023938).

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS) biliary drainage was used as an alternative method for patients who failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In recent years, an increasing number of patients was treated with EUS-biliary drainage (BD), but lack of data was available to value the efficacy and safety between EUS and ERCP. Therefore, a review was needed to evaluate the similarities and differences between the two methods and explored whether EUS-guided biliary drainage could be considered as first-line treatment.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched the Pubmed/Medline, Embase, Web of science, Google scholar, the Cochrane Library and Clinical trials of electronic databases till October 2018 for all English language. Primary outcomes to comparison included technical success, clinical success and adverse events. Secondary outcomes consisted of stent dysfunction requiring reintervention and procedure duration, Data from selected studies were collected to calculate the odds ratios (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD).

EVIDENCE SINTHESIS

We searched 469 studies and at last identified 4 eligible trials. These included a total of 428 patients, 215 in the EUS group and 213 in the ERCP group. There was no difference in technical success (OR, 0.95; 95% CI: 0.45-2.02; I2=0%), clinical success (OR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.42-1.79; I2=0%) and adverse events between 2 procedures (OR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.29-2.00; I2=55%) but EUS-BD consisted of lower rate of reintervention (OR, 0.30; 95% CI: 0.14-0.63; I2=0%),and fewer procedure-related adverse events in pancreatitis and cholangitis (OR, 0.14; 95% CI: 0.04-0.51; I2=0%).There was no difference in length of procedure duration, with a pooled standard mean difference of 0.26 (95% CI: -0.15 to 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD and ERCP-BD in terms of relief of malignant biliary obstruction presented the similarity rate of technical success, clinical success and there is no significant difference in adverse events of two procedures. EUS-BD could be used as a substitute for ERCP-BD, even considered as first-line treatment.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO.

AIM

To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I 2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of -0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I 2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I 2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I 2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I 2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.

Endoscopic and Conservative Management of Chronic Pancreatitis and Its Complications

Chronic pancreatitis is a progressive inflammatory disease of the pancreas potentially giving rise to several complications. For this reason, patients need long-term care and treatment by medical, interventional, and sometimes surgical measures. This article reviews current state-of-the-art strategies and guidelines for treating chronic pancreatitis with conventional and endoscopic measures.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the preferred procedure for biliary drainage in benign and malignant obstructions. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is an emerging technique for when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. It is a highly versatile procedure with several options of access point, stent direction, and drainage route. Based on the current literature, the cumulative success rate is 88% to 93%, with an overall complication rate of 13% to 20%. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage seems to be an effective and valuable alternative technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography when performed by highly skilled endoscopists.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Choledochoduodenostomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the preferred method in biliary drainage. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance has shown tremendous success in situations where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails or is contraindicated. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDD) in particular is gathering a lot of interest due to its ease, and high rates of success. The reported adverse events with this procedure have been inconsistent among studies.

METHODS

We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through June 2018. The primary outcome was to estimate the risk of adverse events, and the commonly reported subtype of adverse events in EUS-CDD. The secondary outcome was to estimate the pooled technical and clinical success rates.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies including 572 patients underwent biliary drainage with EUS-CDD. The pooled rate of all adverse events was 0.136 (95% confidence interval, 0.097-0.188; P=0.01) with moderate heterogeneity (I=56.9), and pooled rate of cholangitis was 4.2%, bleeding was 4.1%, bile leak was 3.7%, and perforation was 2.9%. On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events with the use of lumen-apposing metal stent was 9.3% (95% confidence interval, 4.8-17.3).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our analysis EUS-CDD has an adverse event risk of 13.4%, which is lowest reported in literature so far. Reported adverse rates appeared to be lower with the use of lumen-apposing metal stent, except for perforation.

Success and safety of endoscopic treatments for concomitant biliary and duodenal malignant stenosis: A review of the literature

Synchronous biliary and duodenal malignant obstruction is a challenging endoscopic scenario in patients affected with ampullary, peri-ampullary, and pancreatic head neoplasia. Surgical bypass is no longer the gold-standard therapy for these patients, as simultaneous endoscopic biliary and duodenal stenting is currently a feasible and widely used technique, with a high technical success in expert hands. In recent years, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has evolved from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure, and is now increasingly used to guide biliary drainage, especially in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The advent of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has expanded EUS therapeutic options, and changed the management of synchronous bilioduodenal stenosis. The most recent literature regarding endoscopic treatments for synchronous biliary and duodenal malignant stenosis has been reviewed to determine the best endoscopic approach, also considering the advent of an interventional EUS approach using LAMS.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage: a comprehensive review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become widely accepted over the past several years for complicated biliary drainage. When conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not successful or feasible due to a variety of constraints, an ultrasound-guided technique through intrahepatic and extrahepatic approaches allows adequate management of hepatobiliary obstruction. Other management alternatives include percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainages (PTBD) and complicated surgical approaches, both of which can be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. There are various technical approaches to allow successful biliary drainage which will be reviewed in this article.

EUS-guided antegrade intervention for benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although balloon enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (BE-ERCP) is effective and safe for benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (SAA), BE-ERCP is not always successful. Recently, EUS-guided antegrade intervention (EUS-AI) by using a 1-stage or 2-stage procedure has been developed for BE-ERCP failure cases. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the outcome of EUS-AI for benign biliary diseases in patients with SAA.

METHODS

Of 48 patients in whom BE-ERCP failed, percutaneous transhepatic intervention was performed in 11. From November 2013 until November 2017, we retrospectively reviewed cases of an additional 37 patients with SAA who failed BE-ERCP and underwent EUS-AI for benign biliary diseases (common bile duct stones [n = 11], intrahepatic bile duct stones [n = 5], anastomotic strictures [n = 21]).

RESULTS

The overall technical success of the creation of the hepatoenteric tract by EUS was 91.9% (34/37). Moderate adverse events were observed in 8.1% (biliary peritonitis [n = 3]). One-stage EUS-AI by EUS succeeded in 8 cases (100%) without any adverse events. In another 26 cases, 2-stage EUS-AI by ERCP was performed about 1 or 2 months later. Endoscopic antegrade therapy under fluoroscopy was successful in 6 cases. Per-oral cholangioscopy-assisted antegrade intervention was required in 19 cases (guidewire manipulation across the anastomotic stricture [n = 6], cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy by using electrohydraulic lithotripsy [n = 13]). In 1 case, magnetic compression anastomosis was performed. The final clinical success rate of all EUS-AIs was 91.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-AI for benign biliary diseases in patients with SAA appears to be a feasible and safe alternative procedure after BE-ERCP failure.

Palliative therapy in pancreatic cancer-interventional treatment with stents

Interventional treatment with stents in pancreatic cancer is a topic that developed during recent years and new fields of palliative stent therapy have evolved. The increasing life expectancy of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer increases the need for clinical and cost effective therapeutic interventions. Current literature, guidelines, practice and evidence were reviewed. Besides the most obvious biliary stenting via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), pancreatic and gastroduodenal stenting as well as percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) and the rapidly growing field of endosonographic stent implantation in the palliative care of patients with pancreatic cancer are being discussed from several points of view in this review.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage: a multicenter retrospective experience of a technique slowly gaining acceptance in Egypt

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is an alternative to failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Unfortunately, this procedure remains relatively less explored in Egypt due to its high cost, lack of adequate training, and the perception of increased risk. This study is the first multicenter Egyptian experience of an endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 15 patients (10 men and five women) with malignant biliary obstruction who from October 2013 to May 2019, following a failed or inaccessible endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, underwent an endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy, or endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous. Their mean age was 57.4 years and mean bilirubin was 18.2 mg/dL. The outcome parameters included technical and clinical success. Technical success was defined as the successful placement of a stent in the biliary system, while clinical success was defined as a greater than 50% decrease in the bilirubin levels 2 weeks after the procedure. Patients were monitored for complications during and after the procedure.

RESULTS

In total, 15 patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (eight underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy, five underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy, and two underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous). The technical and clinical success rates were 100% (15/15 patients) and 93.3% (14/15 patients), respectively. The complication rate was 26.6% (4/15 patients). All complications were mild and self-limited, and included fever, mild biliary peritonitis, pneumoperitoneum, and a slight migration of one plastic stent during insertion.

CONCLUSION

Although slowly gaining acceptance in Egypt, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is an effective and safe procedure in patients with a malignant biliary obstruction after a failed or inaccessible endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Single-stage EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a lumen-apposing metal stent for malignant distal biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has recently been reported as an alternative treatment approach for patients with malignant obstructive jaundice and failed ERCP. We analyzed the safety and technical and clinical efficacy of EUS-CD using LAMSs in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients with inoperable malignant distal bile duct obstruction who underwent EUS-CD using an electrocautery-enhanced (EC)-LAMS over a 3-year period (2015-2018). The main outcome measures were technical and clinical success (defined as a decline in serum bilirubin level by 50% at 2-week follow-up). Secondary outcomes were occurrence of adverse events, procedure time, and stent patency.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients (47.8% women; median age, 73.1 ± 12.6 years) underwent direct EUS-CD using the biliary EC-LAMS. The procedure was technically successful in 43 patients (93.5%). The rate of clinical success was 97.7%. Adverse events occurred in 5 (11.6%) patients and included the following: 1 fatal bleeding 17 days after stent placement, 3 episodes of stent occlusion (food impaction), and 1 spontaneous migration (all 4 requiring reintervention). The mean follow-up was 114.37 days (95% confidence interval, 73.2-155.4).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-CD using the EC-LAMS is effective. The rate of adverse events including one fatal event is not negligible and should be carefully considered before using the stent in this clinical setting. Prospective studies are required to validate our preliminary findings to fully assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the stent.

Endoscopic Management of Combined Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction

Combined obstruction of the bile duct and duodenum is a common occurrence in periampullary malignancies. The obstruction of gastric outlet or duodenum can follow, occur simultaneously, or precede biliary obstruction. The prognosis in patients with combined obstruction is particularly poor. Therefore, minimally invasive palliation is preferred in these patients to avoid morbidity associated with surgery. Endoscopic palliation is preferred to surgical bypass due to similar efficacy, less morbidity, and shorter hospital stay. The success of endoscopic palliation depends on the type of bilioduodenal stenosis and the presence of previously placed duodenal metal stents. Biliary cannulation is difficult in type II bilioduodenal strictures where the duodenal stenosis is located at the level of the papilla. Consequentially, technical and clinical success is lower in these patients than in those with type I and III bilioduodenal strictures. However, in cases with failure of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with the introduction of endoscopic ultrasound for biliary drainage, the success of endoscopic bilioduodenal bypass is likely to increase further. The safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage has been documented in multiple studies. With the development of dedicated accessories and standardization of drainage techniques, the role of endoscopic ultrasound is likely to expand further in cases with double obstruction.

The underutilization of EUS-guided biliary drainage: Perception of endoscopists in the East and West

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly utilized to manage unresectable malignant biliary obstruction after a failed ERCP. However, there is no data on how endoscopists perceive EUS-BD. The aim of this study was to investigate the perception of endoscopists on EUS-BD.

Patients and Methods

A survey questionnaire of six topics with 22 survey statements was developed. A total of 17 pancreatobiliary endoscopists (10 from East and 7 from West) were invited to survey. The participants were asked to answer the multiple choice questionnaire and give comments. The opinions of the participants for individual survey statements were assessed using 5-point Likert scale.

Results

All participants completed the survey. The endoscopists had a trend to perceive EUS-BD as a procedure indicated after a failed ERCP. Various EUS-BD methods were regarded as having different efficacy and safety. The superiority of EUS-BD over percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) with regard to efficacy, procedure-related adverse events, and unscheduled re-intervention was not in agreement.

Conclusions

EUS-BD was not yet perceived as the initial procedure to relieve the unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. Various EUS-BD methods were regarded as having different efficacy and safety. The superiority of EUS-BD over PTBD was not in agreement. Refining the procedure, developing dedicated devices, and gaining expertise in the procedure are necessary to popularize EUS-BD.

Hemobilia: Etiology, diagnosis, and treatment☆

Hemobilia refers to bleeding from and/or into the biliary tract and is an uncommon but important cause of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Reports of hemobilia date back to the 1600s, but due to its relative rarity and challenges in diagnosis, only in recent decades has hemobilia been more critically studied. The majority of cases of hemobilia are iatrogenic and caused by invasive procedures involving the liver, pancreas, bile ducts and/or the hepatopancreatobiliary vasculature, with trauma and malignancy representing the two other leading causes. A classic triad of right upper quadrant pain, jaundice, and overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding has been described (i.e. Quincke's triad), but this is present in only 25%-30% of patients with hemobilia. Therefore, prompt diagnosis depends critically on having a high index of suspicion, which may be based on a patient's clinical presentation and having recently undergone (peri-) biliary instrumentation or other predisposing factors. The treatment of hemobilia depends on its severity and suspected source and ranges from supportive care to advanced endoscopic, interventional radiologic, or surgical intervention. Here we provide a clinical overview and update regarding the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of hemobilia geared for specialists and subspecialists alike.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage for Unresectable Hilar Malignant Biliary Obstruction

Endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage is the current standard of care for unresectable hilar malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and bilateral metal stent placement is shown to have longer patency. However, technical and clinical failure is possible and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is sometimes necessary. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly being reported as an alternative rescue procedure to PTBD. EUS-BD has a potential advantage of not traversing the biliary stricture and internal drainage can be completed in a single session. Some approaches to bilateral biliary drainage for hilar MBO under EUS-guidance include a bridging method, hepaticoduodenostomy, and a combination of EUS-BD and transpapillary biliary drainage. The aim of this review is to summarize data on EUS-BD for hilar MBO and to clarify its advantages over the conventional approaches such as endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage and PTBD.

A review of endoscopic ultrasound guided endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography techniques in patients with surgically altered anatomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary therapeutic intervention for pancreaticobiliary duct diseases. Surgically altered anatomy (SAA) makes performing successful ERCP challenging. In this review article the concept of endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreaticobiliary drainage (EUS-PBD) in cases of SAA where conventional ERCP fails or is not possible will be reviewed. EUS-PBD serves as an emerging and promising alternative for pancreaticobiliary therapy in the hands of skilled endoscopists compared to conventional therapies such as device-assisted ERCP, laparoscopic-assisted ERCP, or percutaneous drainage. The purpose of this review is to discuss the rationale, technique and current published outcomes on EUS-PBD for SAA.

A multi-institution consensus on how to perform EUS-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was shown to be useful for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). However, there is lack of consensus on how EUS-BD should be performed.

METHODS

This was a worldwide multi-institutional survey among members of the International Society of EUS conducted in February 2018. The survey consisted of 10 questions related to the practice of EUS-BD.

RESULTS

Forty-six endoscopists of them completed the survey. The majority of endoscopists felt that EUS-BD could replace percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failure of ERCP. Among all EUS-BD methods, the rendezvous stenting technique should be the first choice. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) were recommended by most endoscopists. For EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), superiority of partially-covered SEMS over fully-covered SEMS was not in agreement. 6-Fr cystotomes were recommended for fistula creation. During the HGS approach, longer SEMS (8 or 10 cm) was recommended. During the choledochoduodenostomy approach, 6-cm SEMS was recommended. During the intrahepatic (IH) approach, the IH segment 3 was recommended.

CONCLUSION

This is the first worldwide survey on the practice of EUS-BD for MBO. There were wide variations in practice, and randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for the management of this condition.

Updates in Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasonography

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in the possibilities of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). From EUS fine needle aspiration of cancerous lesion to pseudocyst drainage, it has now not only replaced some of the percutaneous techniques but has permitted to bypass all together laparoscopic approach for patient with altered anatomy or malignant gastric outlet obstruction. This review will emphasize the novel therapeutic EUS procedures added to our arsenal.

Hemobilia: Perspective and Role of the Advanced Endoscopist

Hemobilia refers to bleeding from and/or into the biliary tract and is an uncommon cause of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Hemobilia has been documented since the 1600s, but due to its relative rarity, it has only been more critically examined in recent decades. Most cases of hemobilia are iatrogenic and caused by procedures involving the liver, pancreas, bile ducts, and/or the hepatopancreatobiliary vasculature, with trauma and malignancy representing the two other major causes. A classic triad of right upper quadrant pain, jaundice, and overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding has been described, but this is present in only 25-30% of patients with hemobilia. Historically, the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment has been angiography and interventional radiologic intervention, respectively. However, the paradigm is shifting, at least in select cases, towards first-line reliance on noninvasive imaging (e.g., computed tomography) and therapeutic endoscopy, owing to advances in and the less invasive nature of both, while saving interventional radiological and/or surgical intervention for refractory or imminently life-threatening cases.

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD) for Malignant Biliary Obstruction Associated with Ascites: Results of a Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that EUS-BD may be a feasible and safer alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed ERCP in patients with ascites. To date, no study has specifically evaluated the performance of EUS-BD in this context.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was done for patients with and without ascites who underwent EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP between July 2010 and September 2014. Complications and technical and clinical successes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were included: 20 patients without ascites (group 1) and 11 with ascites (group 2). Nineteen patients underwent EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (six in group 2), and 12 underwent EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (five in group 2). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical success was observed in 95% (n = 19) in group 1 and 64% (n = 7) in group 2 (p = 0.042). In three out of four patients without clinical success in group 2, the follow-up period was not long enough to observe the clinical response because of early death within the 2 weeks after EUS-BD secondary to disease progression or preprocedural unresponsive sepsis. No significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 either in the overall rates of procedural-related complications (20 and 9%, respectively, p = 0.63) or in the rates of major complications (15 vs 9%, respectively, p = 0.639). Stent migration occurred in one patient in each group, intra- or post-procedural bleeding occurred in two patients in group 1, which was conservatively managed, and one patient in group 1 presented biliary leakage. Stent patency and the number of re-interventions were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD is technically feasible in patients with ascites. Our results suggest that EUS-BD may be a clinically effective and safe alternative after failed ERCP in patients with ascites.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel

OBJECTIVES

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures.

METHODS

Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question.

RESULTS

A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Clinical Impact of the Intra-scope Channel Stent Release Technique in Preventing Stent Migration During EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUNDS

Stent migration following endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) may sometimes be fatal because there are no adhesions between the biliary tract and stomach. To prevent stent migration and minimize the stent length in the abdominal cavity, we recently performed EUS-HGS using the technique of releasing the stent within the scope channel.

AIMS

To examine the technical feasibility of the intra-scope channel stent release technique.

METHODS

Forty-one consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS were enrolled. Between October 2015 and December 2015, EUS-HGS was performed using the extra-scope channel release technique, while the intra-scope channel release technique was performed between January 2016 and March 2016.

RESULTS

The distance between the hepatic parenchyma and the stomach wall after EUS-HGS in the intra-scope channel stent release group was significantly shorter than that in the extra-scope channel release group (0.66 ± 1.25 vs 2.52 ± 0.97, P < 0.05). Adverse events, such as biloma or stent migration, were seen in only the extra-scope channel release group.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, although additional cases and randomized controlled studies using metal stents of various lengths are needed, our technique is likely to be clinically useful for the prevention of early and late stent migration.

Stent placement by EUS or ERCP for primary biliary decompression in pancreatic cancer: a randomized trial (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Studies on EUS-guided transmural biliary drainage (EUS-BD) have evaluated its efficacy as a rescue technique after failed ERCP. We performed a single-center, single-blind, randomized trial to compare EUS-BD and ERCP as primary treatment for distal biliary obstruction in pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients underwent EUS-BD (n = 33) or ERCP (n = 34). The primary endpoint was the rate of adverse events. Secondary endpoints were technical success, treatment success (defined as decline in serum bilirubin by 50% at a 2-week follow-up), reinterventions, and intraoperative technical outcome, when applicable. Follow-up was until death or a minimum of 6 months.

RESULTS

The rates of adverse events were 21.2% (6.1% moderate severity; others mild severity) in the EUS-BD group and 14.7% (5.9% moderate severity; others mild severity) in the ERCP group (risk ratio, .69; 95% confidence interval, .24-1.97; P = .49). There were no procedure-related deaths. There was no significant difference in the rates of technical success (90.9% vs 94.1%, P = .67), treatment success (97% vs 91.2%, P = .61), or reinterventions (3.0% vs 2.9%, P = .99) between EUS-BD and ERCP cohorts, respectively. The endoscopic interventions did not impede subsequent pancreaticoduodenectomy that was performed in 5 of 33 patients (15.2%) in the EUS-BD and 5 of 34 patients (14.7%) in the ERCP group (P = .99).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the similar rates of adverse events and treatment outcomes in this randomized trial, EUS-BD is a practical alternative to ERCP for primary biliary decompression in pancreatic cancer. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03054987.).

Study of the standard direct costs of various techniques of advanced endoscopy. Comparison with surgical alternatives

INTRODUCTION

The complexity of endoscopy has carried out an increase in cost that has a direct effect on the healthcare systems. However, few studies have analyzed the cost of advanced endoscopic procedures (AEP).

OBJECTIVES

To carry out a calculation of the standard direct costs of AEP, and to make a financial comparison with their surgical alternatives.

METHODS

Calculation of the standard direct cost in carrying out each procedure. An endoscopist detailed the time, personnel, materials, consumables, recovery room time, stents, pathology and medication used. The cost of surgical procedures was the average cost recorded in the hospital.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight AEP were analyzed. The technique showing lowest cost was gastroscopy + APC (€116.57), while that with greatest cost was ERCP with cholangioscopy + stent placement (€5083.65). Some 34.2% of the procedures registered average costs of €1000-2000. In 57% of cases, the endoscopic alternative was 2-5 times more cost-efficient than surgery, in 31% of cases indistinguishable or up to 1.4 times more costly.

CONCLUSION

Standard direct cost of the majority of AEP is reported using a methodology that enables easy application in other centers. For the most part, endoscopic procedures are more cost-efficient than the corresponding surgical procedure.

EUS-Guided Biliary Drainage Versus ERCP for the Primary Palliation of Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

The goal of the study was to determine whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is comparable to conventional transpapillary stenting with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction. Although ERCP for the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction is the standard of care, post-procedure pancreatitis and stent dysfunctions are not uncommon. While EUS-BD has garnered interest as a viable alternative when ERCP is impossible, its role as a primary palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction is yet to be proven.

METHODS

We performed random allocation to EUS-BD or ERCP in 125 patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction at four tertiary academic referral centers in South Korea.

RESULTS

Technical success rates were 93.8% (60/64) for EUS-BD and 90.2% (55/61) for ERCP (difference 3.6%, 95% 1-sided confidence interval lower limit -4.4%, P = 0.003 for noninferiority margin of 10%). Clinical success rates were 90.0% (54/60) in EUS-BD and 94.5% (52/55) in ERCP (P = 0.49). Lower rates of overall adverse events (6.3% vs 19.7%, P = 0.03) including post-procedure pancreatitis (0 vs 14.8%), reintervention (15.6% vs 42.6%), and higher rate of stent patency (85.1% vs 48.9%) were observed with EUS-BD. EUS-BD was also associated with more preserved quality of life (QOL) than transpapillary stenting after 12 weeks of the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated comparable technical and clinical success rates between EUS-BD and ERCP in relief malignant distal biliary obstruction. Substantially longer duration of patency coupled with lower rates of adverse events and reintervention, and more preserved QOL were observed with EUS-BD (cris.nih.go.kr, Identifier: KCT0001396, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01_en.jsp?seq=9716&ltype=&rtype= ).

Outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent: a multicenter cohort study in West Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroduodenal and biliary obstruction may occur synchronously or asynchronously in advanced pancreatic cancer, and endoscopic double stent placement may be required. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) often is performed after unsuccessful placement of an endoscopic transpapillary stent (ETS), and EUS-BD may be beneficial in double stent placement. This retrospective multicenter cohort study compared the outcomes of ETS placement and EUS-BD in patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent (GDS).

METHODS

We recorded the clinical outcomes of patients at 5 tertiary-care medical centers who required biliary drainage after GDS placement between March 2009 and March 2014.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were included in this study. Patients' mean age was 68.5 years; 23 (59.0%) were men. The GDS overlay the papilla in 23 patients (59.0%). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (95.2%) than with ETS placement (56.0%; P < .01). Furthermore, the technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (93.3%) than with ETS placement (22.2%; P < .01) when the GDS overlies the papilla. The overall clinical success rate of EUS-BD also was significantly higher than for ETS placement (90.5% vs 52.0%, respectively; P = .01), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (ETS, 32.0% vs EUS-BD, 42.9%; P = .65).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic double stent placement with EUS-BD is technically and clinically superior to ETS placement in patients with an indwelling GDS. EUS-BD should be considered the first-line treatment option for patients with an indwelling GDS that overlies the papilla. ETS placement remains a reasonable alternative when the papilla is not covered by the GDS.

EUS-Guided Transluminal Interventions

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has transitioned from a diagnostic to a therapeutic one over the past 40 years. With the advent of curvilinear array echoendoscopes in the 1990s with an accessory channel, multiple tools and devices have been developed and used for a variety of transluminal interventions. EUS provides a viable option and is becoming the procedure of choice for many interventions, including bile and pancreatic duct drainage, guiding angiotherapy, pancreatic fluid collection management, gallbladder drainage, and creating a gastrojejunostomy. Although reports demonstrate the technical success of these interventions, there is tremendous study heterogeneity and a relative lack of controlled randomized trials, which may limit our understanding of their role and utility. Furthermore, adverse events are relatively common and occasionally severe. Despite the limitations, available data strongly indicate the efficacy of EUS interventions when performed by well-trained endosonographers in carefully selected patients and managed in a multidisciplinary setting.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is an emerging technique that combines the advantages of the endoscopic and percutaneous approaches, without the inconveniences and discomfort of an indwelling external catheter. There has been growing interest and experience in EUS-biliary drainage. Several different EUS-guided techniques have been developed to access the obstructed biliary tree from either the stomach or duodenum, according to the location of the stricture, the anatomy of the patient, and the experience of the endoscopist.

Multicenter prospective evaluation study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy combined with antegrade stenting (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is often indicated for advanced stage patients. Therefore it is important to prevent adverse events associated with EUS-HGS procedures and obtain long stent patency. EUS-guided antegrade stenting (AS) has been developed as an advanced technique. Thus, to prevent adverse events and achieve long stent patency, EUS-AS combined with EUS-HGS (EUS-HGAS) has been reported. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and efficacy of EUS-HGAS in a multicenter, prospective study.

METHODS

This prospective study was carried out at each hospital of the Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound Group. Primary endpoint of this multicenter prospective study was stent patency of EUS-HGAS.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients were enrolled. Technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 95.9% (47/49). EUS-AS failed in five patients because the guidewire could not be advanced into the intestine across the bile duct obstruction site. Therefore, EUS-HGAS was successfully carried out in 40 patients (technical success rate: 85.7%). Median overall survival was 114 days. Median stent patency including stent dysfunction and patient death was 114 days. In contrast, mean stent patency was 320 days. Adverse events were seen in 10.2% (5/49) of cases. Hyperamylasemia was seen in four patients, and bleeding was seen in one patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study is the first to evaluate EUS-HGAS. EUS-HGAS has clinical benefit for obtaining long stent patency and avoiding adverse events, although the possibility of acute pancreatitis as a result of obstruction of the orifice of the pancreatic duct must be considered.