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

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided vs Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-Guided Biliary Drainage as Primary Approach to Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare the outcomes of these 2 approaches.

METHODS

Electronic databases from January 2005 through December 2023 were searched for RCTs comparing outcomes of EUS-BD and ERCP for treating MDBO. Pooled proportions, risk ratio (RR), and odds ratio were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comprising 519 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled RR for overall technical success with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.96-1.16, P = 0.246, I2 = 61%) and for clinical success was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95-1.04, P = 0.850, I2 = 0%). The pooled rate of procedure-related pancreatitis was 7.20% (95% CI = 3.60-13.80, I2 = 34%) in the ERCP group compared with zero in the EUS-BD group. The pooled RR for stent dysfunction with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 0.48 (95% CI = 0.28-0.83, P = 0.008, I2 = 7%). The weighted mean procedure time was 13.43 (SD = 10.12) minutes for EUS-BD compared with 21.06 (SD = 6.64) minutes for ERCP. The mean stent patency was 194.11 (SD = 52.12) days in the EUS-BD group and 187 (SD = 60.70) days in the ERCP group.

DISCUSSION

EUS-BD is an efficient and safe alternative to ERCP in MDBO. An almost nonexistent risk of procedure-related pancreatitis, lower procedure time, and ease of use make this an attractive primary approach to biliary decompression in centers with expertise.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Transmural Biliary Drainage With 6 mm and 8 mm Cautery-enhanced Lumen-apposing Metal Stents: A Multicenter Collaborative Study

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may be unsuccessful in patients with duodenal stenosis or malignant ampullary infiltration. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been proposed as an alternative. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD for malignant distal bile duct obstruction using the newly introduced smaller caliber 6 or 8 mm cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was performed on patients with unresectable malignant distal bile duct obstruction who underwent EUS-BD between 2021 and 2022 after unsuccessful ERCP.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were included [7 (53.13%) males], with a mean age of 72.2 ± 12.5 years. The technical success rate was 100%. Altered anatomy was present in 2 (6.25%). The indication for drainage was biliary obstruction from pancreatic cancer in 26 patients (84.5%), cholangiocarcinoma in 3 (9.4%), and ampullary mass in 3 (9.4%). The procedure was performed mostly in an outpatient setting (n = 19, 59.38%). The clinical success rate was 92.3% [bilirubin: 14.1 (SD: 8.9) preprocedure vs 4.9 (SD: 1.1) postprocedure; P = 0.0001]. There was one early adverse event of a perforation, which was closed endoscopically and drained percutaneously. Delayed adverse events included food impaction of the stent (n = 1), which was resolved with a repeat procedure and insertion of a double pigtail stent.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the feasibility of EUS-BD drainage using smaller caliber 6 or 8 mm lumen-apposing metal stent to relieve malignant distal bile duct obstruction in patients who fail conventional ERCP.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stent placement in patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a rescue procedure when ERCP fails. Peritonitis and recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) are adverse events (AEs) associated with EUS-HGS. Antegrade stent placement across a malignant distal biliary obstruction (DBO) followed by EUS-HGS (EUS-HGAS) creates 2 biliary drainage routes, potentially reducing peritonitis and prolonging time to RBO (TRBO). We compared the outcomes of the 2 techniques.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients with malignant DBO who underwent attempted EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS across 5 institutions from January 2014 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. A matched cohort of patients was obtained using 1-to-1 propensity score matching. The primary outcome was TRBO, and secondary outcomes were AEs except for RBO and overall survival.

RESULTS

Among 360 patients, 283 (176 and 107 in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively) were eligible. The matched cohorts included 81 patients in each group. AEs developed in 10 (12.3%) and 15 (18.5%) patients (P = .38) in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively. RBO occurred in 18 and 2 patients in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively (P < .001). TRBO was significantly longer in the HGAS group (median, 194 days vs 716 days; hazard ratio, .050; 95% confidence interval, .0066-.37; P < .01). However, no significant differences occurred in overall survival between the groups (median, 97 days vs 112 days; hazard ratio, .97; 95% confidence interval, .66-1.4; P = .88).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGAS extended TRBO compared with EUS-HGS, whereas AEs, except for RBO and overall survival, did not differ. The longer TRBO of EUS-HGAS could benefit patients with longer life expectancy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (BD) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows for biliary access when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is unsuccessful. The technique can be divided based on biliary access route: intrahepatic or extrahepatic, as well as on stenting approach: rendezvous approach (EUS-RV), antegrade placement, or transluminal (intra or extra hepatic) placement. There is no clear consensus on which approach is superior. Compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EUS-BD offers lower rates of adverse events without the need for an external drain. Compared to conventional ERCP, EUS-BD shows comparable, and in some cases superior, outcomes related to technical success, clinical success, and adverse events.

Comparison between Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Antegrade and Transluminal Stent Implantation in Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction after Failed ERCP

Background

Distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) can result in obstructive jaundice. Endoscopic ultrasound- (EUS-) guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been an alternative for DMBO after failed ERCP.

Aim

To compare the efficacy and safety between antegrade and transluminal approaches in patients with unresectable DMBO when ERCP failed.

Methods

Patients with DMBO leading to obstructive jaundice after failed ERCP were enrolled in this study. We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy between EUS-guided transluminal stenting (TLS group) and antegrade stenting (AGS group).

Results

82 patients were enrolled, of which 45 patients were in TLS group and 37 in AGS group. There were no statistical differences in the malignancy type, baseline common bile duct diameter, total bilirubin level, reason for EUS-BD, and history of biliary drainage between TLS and AGS groups. The technical success rate was statistically higher in TLS group than in AGS group (97.8 vs. 81.1%, P = 0.031). There were no statistical differences in clinical success rate, procedure-related adverse events, stent migration rate, stent dysfunction rate, reintervention rate, and overall patient survival time between TLS and AGS groups. The median time to stent dysfunction or patient death in TLS and AGS groups was 53 and 81 days, respectively (P = 0.017).

Conclusions

Although AGS had a lower technical success rate than TLS, it was superior to TLS in stent patency in patients with DMBO.

Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

In this 14th document in a series of papers entitled "Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound" we discuss various aspects of EUS-guided biliary drainage that are debated in the literature and in practice. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography is still the reference technique for therapeutic biliary access, but EUS-guided techniques for biliary access and drainage have developed into safe and highly effective alternative options. However, EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques are technically demanding procedures for which few training models are currently available. Different access routes require modifications to the basic technique and specific instruments. In experienced hands, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage is also a good alternative. Therefore, in this paper, we compare arguments for different options of biliary drainage and different technical modifications.

EUS- versus ERCP-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Increasing evidence supports EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a potential alternative to ERCP-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) in the primary treatment of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of both techniques as the initial approach for MBO.

METHODS

We systematically searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials comparing both techniques and reporting at least one of the outcomes of interest. The pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model, and I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included 6 randomized controlled trials (577 patients). There were no significant differences between both groups in terms of stent patency (mean difference [MD], 8.18 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -22.55 to 38.91), procedure time (MD, -6.31 minutes; 95% CI, -12.68 to 0.06), and survival (MD, 4.59 days; 95% CI, -34.23 to 43.40). Technical success (risk ratio [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13), clinical success (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.08), overall adverse events (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.24-1.43), and cholangitis (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.39-3.61) were also similar between groups. However, the hospital stay was significantly shorter (MD, -1.03 days; 95% CI, -1.53 to -0.53), and the risk of reintervention (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37-0.88), postprocedure pancreatitis (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.66), and tumor ingrowth/overgrowth (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11-0.70) were significantly lower with EUS-BD.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD and ERCP-BD had similar efficacy and safety as the initial approach for MBO. However, EUS-BD had a significantly lower risk of reintervention, postprocedure pancreatitis, tumor ingrowth/overgrowth, and reduced hospital stay.

Is ERCP still the elective primary biliary drainage technique in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction?

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been established as the first line therapy for the resolution of biliary and pancreatic diseases. The main disadvantage of the procedure is the rate of adverse events, around 10%1. So, despite being a minimally invasive procedure, ERCP has a non-negligible rate of adverse effects (AEs) and secondary mortality.

Safety of skipping the tract dilation step for EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (with video)

BACKGROUND

Thin delivery system stents can be inserted directly without the need for a tract dilation step and are expected to reduce bile leakage during endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). The present study retrospectively compared the safety and efficacy of EUS-BD using a thin metal stent (< 7.5 Fr) with those of EUS-BD using a conventional stent (≥ 7.5 Fr).

METHODS

The present study enrolled 112 patients who underwent EUS-BD using metal stents for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction between April 2016 and July 2022. The primary endpoint was the rate of adverse events (AEs). The secondary endpoints were clinical success rate, procedure time, procedure success rate in the absence of the tract dilation step, recurrent biliary obstruction rate, time to biliary obstruction, and overall survival. Risk factors associated with early AEs were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The rate of early AEs was significantly lower (12% vs. 35%, P = 0.013) and the procedure success without the tract dilation step was significantly higher (82% vs. 33%, P < 0.001) in the thin than in the conventional delivery system stent group. None of the other secondary endpoints differed significantly between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that employing the tract dilation step during EUS-BD was a significant independent risk factor for early AEs (skipping vs. employing; HR, 9.66; 95% CI, 1.13-83.0, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Employing the tract dilation step during EUS-BD was a significant risk factor for early AEs. Metal stents with a delivery diameter < 7.5 Fr can be inserted directly without the tract dilation step, resulting in lower early AE rates.

Outcomes predictors in endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy with lumen-apposing metal stent: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) by transduodenal placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) into the extrahepatic bile duct. To identify factors that contribute to safe and effective EUS-CDS using LAMS, we performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Methods The methodology of our analysis was based on PRISMA recommendations. Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to November 2022. Full articles that included patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS using LAMS after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were eligible. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed reporting pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) by means of a random model. Multivariate meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to assess possible associations between the outcomes and selected variables to assess the correlation between outcomes and different variables. Results were also stratified according to stent size. Results Twelve studies with 845 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled technical and clinical success rates were 96% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94%-98%; I 2 = 52.29%) and 96% (95%CI 95%-98%), respectively, with no significant association with baseline characteristics, such are sex, age, common bile duct diameter, or stent size. The pooled AE rate was 12% (95%CI: 8%-16%; I 2 = 71.62%). The AE rate was significantly lower when using an 8 × 8 mm stent as compared with a 6 × 8 mm LAMS (odds ratio 0.59, 0.35-0.99; P = 0.04), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). Conclusions EUS-CDS with LAMS is a safe and effective option for relief of MBO. Selecting an appropriate stent size is crucial for achieving optimal safety outcomes.

Safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with malignant biliary obstruction and ascites

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is useful for patients with biliary cannulation failure or inaccessible papillae. However, it can lead to serious complications such as bile peritonitis in patients with ascites; therefore, development of a safe method to perform EUS-HGS is important. Herein, we evaluated the safety of EUS-HGS with continuous ascitic fluid drainage in patients with ascites.

METHODS

Patients with moderate or severe ascites who underwent continuous ascites drainage, which was initiated before EUS-HGS and terminated after the procedure at our institution between April 2015 and December 2022, were included in the study. We evaluated the technical and clinical success rates, EUS-HGS-related complications, and feasibility of re-intervention.

RESULTS

Ten patients underwent continuous ascites drainage, which was initiated before EUS-HGS and terminated after completion of the procedure. Median duration of ascites drainage before and after EUS-HGS was 2 and 4 days, respectively. Technical success with EUS-HGS was achieved in all 10 patients (100%). Clinical success with EUS-HGS was achieved in 9 of the 10 patients (90 %). No endoscopic complications such as bile peritonitis were observed.

CONCLUSION

In patients with ascites, continuous ascites drainage, which is initiated before EUS-HGS and terminated after completion of the procedure, may prevent complications and allow safe performance of EUS-HGS.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy using single-step lumen-apposing metal stents for primary drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction (SCORPION-p): a prospective pilot study

BACKGROUND

 This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) as a primary drainage strategy in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO).

METHODS

 A prospective, single-center, pilot study was conducted in patients with pathology-confirmed MBO without gastric outlet obstruction. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes included clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and reinterventions. The study was registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry (registry number NL9757).

RESULTS

 22 patients were enrolled (median age 69.5 years [interquartile range 64-75.3]). Technical success was achieved in 20/22 patients (91 %). AEs occurred in one patient, namely perforation following inadequate stent deployment (5 %), which was treated in the same procedure. Clinical success was achieved in 19/22 patients (86 %). Stent dysfunction was observed in 11/20 patients (55 %) after technically successful EUS-CDS: two patients were treated conservatively and nine patients underwent reintervention(s). One patient died within ≤ 30 days due to fulminant disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS

 The results confirmed the safety and feasibility of EUS-CDS using LAMS as a primary drainage strategy. The high incidence of stent dysfunction should be improved before EUS-CDS with LAMS can be seen as a valid alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound for Complications of Pancreatic Cancer

Progression of pancreatic adenocarcinoma can result in disease complications such as biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction. The recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have transformed EUS from a purely diagnostic technology to a therapeutic modality, particularly with the development of lumen-apposing metal stents. In terms of biliary drainage, EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy offer safe and effective techniques when conventional transpapillary stent placement via ERCP fails or is not possible. If these modalities are not feasible, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage offers yet another salvage technique when the cystic duct is non-involved by the cancer. Lastly, EUS-guided gastroenterostomy allows for an effective bypass treatment for cases of gastric outlet obstruction that enables patients to resume eating within several days. Future randomized studies comparing these techniques to current standard-of-care options are warranted to firmly establish therapeutic EUS procedures within the treatment algorithm for this challenging disease.

Preoperative endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for primary drainage in obstructive jaundice

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic transpapillary approach by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the established technique for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been reported to be a useful alternative technique after ERCP fail. However, the optimal strategy remain controversial.

AREA COVERED

This review summarizes the literature on EUS-BD techniques for PBD with a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database between 2000 and 2023 using keywords for 'preoperative biliary drainage' and all types of EUS-BD techniques.

EXPERT OPINION

As there is no consensus on the optimal EUS-BD technique for PBD, selection of the EUS-BD approach depends on the patient's condition, the biliary obstruction site, the anastomosis after surgical intervention, and the preference of the endoscopist. However, we consider that EUS-HGS using a dedicated plastic stent may have some advantages in the adverse impact of surgical procedure because the location where the fistula is created by EUS-HGS is away from the site of the surgical procedure. Although there remain many issues that require further investigation, EUS-BD can be a feasible and safe alternative method of PBD for malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP fail.

The Role of Endoscopy in the Palliation of Pancreatico-Biliary Cancers: Biliary Drainage, Management of Gastrointestinal Obstruction, and Role in Relief of Oncologic Pain

Therapeutic endoscopy permits many and various treatments for cancer palliation in patients with bilio-pancreatic cancers, enabling different options, supporting patients during their route to oncologic treatments, and trying to improve their quality of life. Therefore, both endoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided techniques are performed in this scenario. We performed a literature review focusing on the role of endoscopy in the palliation of those advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers developing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and pain unresponsive to medical therapies. Therefore, we explored and focused on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic procedures in this scenario. In fact, the endoscopic treatment is based on achieving biliary drainage in the case of MBO through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), while GOO is endoscopically treated through the deployment of an enteral stent or the creation of EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis (EUS-GEA). Furthermore, untreatable chronic abdominal pain is a major issue in patients unresponsive to high doses of painkillers, so EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) or celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN) helps to reduce dosage and have better pain control. Therefore, therapeutic endoscopy in the palliative setting is an effective and safe approach for managing most of the clinical manifestations of advanced biliopancreatic tumors.

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage using a lumen-apposing metal stent as rescue treatment for malignant distal biliary obstruction: a large multicenter experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has been reported as a rescue treatment with encouraging results for the relief of jaundice in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) and after failure of both ERCP and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy.

METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective analysis of all cases of consecutive EUS-GBD with LAMSs used as a rescue treatment for patients with DMBO in 14 Italian centers from June 2015 to June 2020. Primary endpoints were technical and clinical success, whereas the secondary endpoint was the adverse event (AE) rate.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (52.1% women) with a mean age of 74.3 ± 11.7 years were included in the study. Biliary stricture was related to pancreatic adenocarcinoma (85.4%), duodenal adenocarcinoma (2.1%), cholangiocarcinoma (4.2%), ampullary cancer (2.1%), colon cancer (4.2%), and metastatic breast cancer (2.1%). The mean diameter of the common bile duct was 13.3 ± 2.8 mm. LAMSs were placed transgastrically in 58.3% of cases and transduodenally in 41.7%. Technical success was 100%, whereas clinical success was 81.3%, with a mean total bilirubin reduction after 2 weeks of 66.5%. The mean procedure time was 26.4 minutes, and the mean hospital stay was 9.2 ± 8.2 days. AEs occurred in 5 patients (10.4%): 3 were classified as intraprocedural and 2 were classified as delayed because they occurred after >15 days. When the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon was used, 2 AEs were mild and 3 were moderate (2 buried LAMSs). The mean follow-up was 122 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that EUS-GBD with LAMSs used as a rescue treatment for patients affected by DMBO represents a valuable option in terms of technical and clinical success rates, with an acceptable AE rate. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study concerning the use of this procedure. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03903523.).

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage of First Intent With a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent vs Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study (ELEMENT Trial)

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy with a lumen-apposing metal stent (EUS-CDS) is a promising modality for management of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) with potential for better stent patency. We compared its outcomes with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with metal stenting (ERCP-M).

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, we recruited patients with MDBO secondary to borderline resectable, locally advanced, or unresectable peri-ampullary cancers across 10 Canadian institutions and 1 French institution. This was a superiority trial with a noninferiority assessment of technical success. Patients were randomized to EUS-CDS or ERCP-M. The primary end point was the rate of stent dysfunction at 1 year, considering competing risks of death, clinical failure, and surgical resection. Analyses were performed according to intention-to-treat principles.

RESULTS

From February 2019 to February 2022, 144 patients were recruited; 73 were randomized to EUS-CDS and 71 were randomized to ERCP-M. The mean (SD) procedure time was 14.0 (11.4) minutes for EUS-CDS and 23.1 (15.6) minutes for ERCP-M (P < .01); 40% of the former was performed without fluoroscopy. Technical success was achieved in 90.4% (95% CI, 81.5% to 95.3%) of EUS-CDS and 83.1% (95% CI, 72.7% to 90.1%) of ERCP-M with a risk difference of 7.3% (95% CI, -4.0% to 18.8%) indicating noninferiority. Stent dysfunction occurred in 9.6% vs 9.9% of EUS-CDS and ERCP-M cases, respectively (P = .96). No differences in adverse events, pancreaticoduodenectomy and oncologic outcomes, or quality of life were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not superior in stent function, EUS-CDS is an efficient and safe alternative to ERCP-M in patients with MDBO. These findings provide evidence for greater adoption of EUS-CDS in clinical practice as a complementary and exchangeable first-line modality to ERCP in patients with MDBO.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, Number: NCT03870386.

The Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound Connection: Unity Is Strength, or the Endoscopic Ultrasonography Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Concept

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are both crucial for the endoscopic management of biliopancreatic diseases: the combination of their diagnostic and therapeutic potential is useful in many clinical scenarios, such as indeterminate biliary stenosis, biliary stones, chronic pancreatitis and biliary and pancreatic malignancies. This natural and evident convergence between EUS and ERCP, which by 2006 we were calling the "Endoscopic ultrasonography retrograde colangiopancreatography (EURCP) concept", has become a hot topic in the last years, together with the implementation of the therapeutic possibilities of EUS (from EUS-guided necrosectomy to gastro-entero anastomoses) and with the return of ERCP to its original diagnostic purpose thanks to ancillary techniques (extraductal ultrasound (EDUS), intraductal ultrasound (IDUS), cholangiopancreatoscopy with biopsies and probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE)). In this literary review, we retraced the recent history of EUS and ERCP, reported examples of the clinical applicability of the EURCP concept and explored the option of performing the two procedures in only one endoscopic session, with its positive implications for the patient, the endoscopist and the health care system. In the last few years, we also evaluated the possibility of combining EUS and ERCP into a single endoscopic instrument in a single step, but certain obstacles surrounding this approach remain.

EUS-Guided Biliary Drainage Versus ERCP in Malignant Biliary Obstruction Before Hepatobiliary Surgery: An International Multicenter Comparative Study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is the procedure of choice for patients who cannot undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The outcomes of patients undergoing surgery after EUS-BD for malignancy are unknown.

METHODS

We conducted an international, multicenter retrospective comparative study of patients who underwent hepatobiliary surgery after having undergone EUS-BD or ERCP from 6 tertiary care centers. Patient demographics, procedural data, and follow-up care were collected in a registry.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five patients were included: EUS-BD n=58 (mean age 66, 45% male), ERCP n=87 (mean age 68, 53% male). The majority of patients had pancreatic cancer, cholangiocarcinoma, or gallbladder malignancy. In the EUS-BD group, 29 patients had hepaticogastrostomy, 24 had choledochoduodenostomy, and 5 had rendezvous technique done. The most common surgery was Whipple in both groups (n=41 EUS-BD, n=56 ERCP) followed by partial hepatectomy (n=7 EUS-BD, n=14 ERCP) and cholecystectomy (n=2 EUS-BD, n=2 ERCP). Endoscopy clinical success was comparable in both groups (98% EUS-BD, 94% ERCP). Adverse event rates were similar in both groups: EUS-BD (n=10, 17%) and ERCP (n=23, 26%). Surgery technical success and clinical success were significantly higher in the EUS-BD group compared with the ERCP group (97% vs. 83%, 97% vs. 75%). Total Hospital stay from surgery to discharge was significantly higher in the ERCP group (19 d vs. 10 d, P =0.0082).

DISCUSSION

Undergoing EUS-BD versus ERCP before hepatobiliary surgery is associated with fewer repeat endoscopic interventions, shorter duration between endoscopy and surgical intervention, higher rates of surgical clinical success, and shorter length of hospital stay after surgery.

Adverse events with EUS-guided biliary drainage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multiple meta-analyses have evaluated the technical and clinical success of EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD), but meta-analyses concerning adverse events (AEs) are limited. The present meta-analysis analyzed AEs associated with various types of EUS-BD.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from 2005 to September 2022 for studies analyzing the outcome of EUS-BD. The primary outcomes were incidence of overall AEs, major AEs, procedure-related mortality, and reintervention. The event rates were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-five studies (7887 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled clinical success rates and incidence of AEs with EUS-BD were 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.1-95.9) and 13.7% (95% CI, 12.3-15.0), respectively. Among early AEs, bile leak was the most common followed by cholangitis with pooled incidences of 2.2% (95% CI, 1.8-2.7) and 1.0% (95% CI, .8-1.3), respectively. The pooled incidences of major AEs and procedure-related mortality with EUS-BD were .6% (95% CI, .3-.9) and .1% (95% CI, .0-.4), respectively. The pooled incidences of delayed migration and stent occlusion were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.3-12.8), respectively. The pooled event rate for reintervention (for stent migration or occlusion) after EUS-BD was 16.2% (95% CI, 14.0-18.3; I2 = 77.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high clinical success rate, EUS-BD may be associated with AEs in one-seventh of the cases. However, major AEs and mortality incidence remain less than 1%, which is reassuring.

Utility of interventional endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic cancer

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has an important role in the management algorithm of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), typically for its diagnostic utilities. The past two decades have seen a rapid expansion of the therapeutic capabilities of EUS. Interventional EUS is now one of the more exciting developments within the field of endoscopy. The local effects of PDAC tend to be in anatomical areas which are difficult to target and endoscopy has cemented itself as a key role in managing the clinical sequelae of PDAC. Interventional EUS is increasingly utilized in situations whereby conventional endoscopy is either impossible to perform or unsuccessful. It also adds a different dimension to the host of oncological and surgical treatments for patients with PDAC. In this review, we aim to summarize the various ways in which interventional EUS could benefit patients with PDAC and aim to provide a balanced commentary on the current evidence of interventional EUS in the literature.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

Prospective clinical trial of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy without fistula dilation for malignant distal biliary obstruction

Background and Objectives

During EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), fistula dilation before stent insertion is associated with adverse events (AEs), such as bile leakage and peritonitis. We hypothesized that EUS-CDS without fistula dilation using a novel self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) with a thin delivery system could overcome this problem, and we conducted this study to evaluate its feasibility and safety.

Methods

This was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study at a single institution. We planned EUS-CDS without fistula dilation using a fully covered SEMS with a 5.9-Fr delivery system for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction. The primary outcome was overall technical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success without fistula dilation, procedure time, functional success, time to recurrent biliary obstruction, and AEs. The planned sample size was 25 patients.

Results

In total, 24 patients were included in this study. In 21 patients, EUS-CDS was performed as primary drainage. The overall technical success rate was 100% (24 of 24 patients). The technical success rate without fistula dilation was 96% (23 of 24). The median procedure time was 16 min (range, 10-66 min). The functional success rate was 96% (23 of 24). The median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was 148 days (95% confidence interval, 29-266 days). There were no procedure-related AEs. Furthermore, computed tomography immediately after the procedure showed no leakage of contrast medium into the abdominal cavity in any patient.

Conclusions

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy without fistula dilation using a fully covered SEMS with a 5.9-Fr delivery system is feasible with a high probability and can be achieved quickly while effectively preventing bile leakage and peritonitis.

Endoscopy Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Using Lumen Apposing Metal Stent in Malignant Biliary Obstruction

This narrative review provides an overview of the application of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), including EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), for the treatment of malignant biliary obstruction. EUS-BD has demonstrated excellent technical and clinical success rates, with lower rates of adverse events when compared with percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). EUS-BD is currently the preferred alternative technique for biliary drainage (BD) in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Particularly, this review will focus on EUS-BD performed with the use of lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS). The introduction of these innovative devices, followed by the advent of electrocautery-enhanced LAMS (EC-LAMS), gave the procedure a great technical implementation and a widespread application.

EUS-Guided Choledocho-duodenostomy Using Lumen Apposing Stent Versus ERCP With Covered Metallic Stents in Patients With Unresectable Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (DRA-MBO Trial)

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several studies have compared primary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with insertion of metal stents in unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) and the results were conflicting. The aim of the current study was to compare the outcomes of the procedures in a large-scale study.

METHODS

This was a multicenter international randomized controlled study. Consecutive patients admitted for obstructive jaundice due to unresectable MDBO were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to receive EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy (ECDS) or ERCP for drainage. The primary outcome was the 1-year stent patency rate. Other outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, time to stent dysfunction, reintervention rates, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Between January 2017 and February 2021, 155 patients were recruited (ECDS 79, ERCP 76). There were no significant differences in 1-year stent patency rates (ECDS 91.1% vs ERCP 88.1%, P = .52). The ECDS group had significantly higher technical success (ECDS 96.2% vs ERCP 76.3%, P < .001), whereas clinical success was similar (ECDS 93.7% vs ERCP 90.8%, P = .559). The median (interquartile range) procedural time was significantly shorter in the ECDS group (ECDS 10 [5.75-18] vs ERCP 25 [14-40] minutes, P < .001). The rate of 30-day adverse events (P = 1) and 30-day mortality (P = .53) were similar.

CONCLUSION

Both procedures could be options for primary biliary drainage in unresectable MDBO. ECDS was associated with higher technical success and shorter procedural time then ERCP. Primary ECDS may be preferred when difficult ERCPs are anticipated. This study was registered to Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03000855.

A Systematic Review of Endoscopic Treatments for Concomitant Malignant Biliary Obstruction and Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction and the Outstanding Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Therapies

BACKGROUND

The treatments for cancer palliation in patients with concomitant malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) are still under investigation due to the lack of evidence available in the medical literature. We performed a systematic search and critical review to investigate efficacy and safety among patients with MBO and MGOO undergoing both endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and MGOO endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. EUS-BD included both transduodenal and transgastric techniques. Treatment of MGOO included duodenal stenting or EUS-GEA (gastroenteroanastomosis). Outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing double treatment in the same session or within one week.

RESULTS

11 studies were included in the systematic review for a total number of 337 patients, 150 of whom had concurrent MBO and MGOO treatment, fulfilling the time criteria. MGOO was treated by duodenal stenting (self-expandable metal stents) in 10 studies, and in one study by EUS-GEA. EUS-BD had a mean technical success of 96.4% (CI 95%, 92.18-98.99) and a mean clinical success of 84.96% (CI 95%, 67.99-96.26). The average frequency of AEs for EUS-BD was 28.73% (CI 95%, 9.12-48.33). Clinical success for duodenal stenting was 90% vs. 100% for EUS-GEA.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD could become the preferred drainage in the case of double endoscopic treatment of concomitant MBO and MGOO in the near future, with the promising EUS-GEA becoming a valid option for MGOO treatment in these patients.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: a literature review

Neoplasms of the biliopancreatic confluence may present with obstruction of the bile tract, leading to jaundice, pruritus and cholangitis. In these cases drainage of the bile tract is imperative. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with placement of a choledochal prosthesis is an effective treatment in about 90% of cases, even in experienced hands. In cases of ERCP failure, therapeutic options traditionally include surgical bypass by hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) or percutaneous transparietohepatic drainage (DPTH). In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage techniques have gained space because they are less invasive, effective and have an acceptable incidence of complications. Endoscopic echo-guided drainage of the bile duct can be performed through the stomach (hepatogastrostomy), duodenum (choledochoduodenostomy) or by the anterograde drainage technique. Some services consider ultrasound-guided drainage of the bile duct the procedure of choice in the event of ERCP failure. The objective of this review is to present the main types of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage and compare them with other techniques.

Experience-Related Factors in the Success of Beginner Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: A Multicenter Study

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become comparable to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and is now considered a first-line intervention for certain biliary obstructions. Although analysis of experience-related factors may help achieve better outcomes and contribute to its wider adoption, no concrete evidence exists regarding the required operator or institutional experience levels. This study aimed to analyze experience-related factors at beginner multicenters. Patients who underwent EUS-BD using self-expandable metal stents and/or dedicated plastic stents during the study period (up to the first 25 cases since introducing the technique) were retrospectively enrolled from seven beginner institutions and operators. Overall, 90 successful (technical success without early adverse events) and 22 failed (technical failure and/or early adverse events) cases were compared. EUS-BD-related procedures conducted at the time of applicable EUS-BD by each institution/operator were evaluated. The number of institution-conducted EUS-BD procedures (≥7) and operator-conducted EUS screenings (≥436), EUS-guided fine-needle aspirations (FNA) (≥93), and EUS-guided drainages (≥13) significantly influenced improved EUS-BD outcomes (p = 0.022, odds ratio [OR], 3.0; p = 0.022, OR, 3.0; p = 0.022, OR, 3.0; and p = 0.028, OR, 2.9, respectively). Our threshold values, which significantly divided successful and failed cases, were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and may provide useful approximate indications for successful EUS-BD.

Comparison between transpapillary versus transmural endoscopic ultrasound-guided decompression for biliary obstruction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent advances have led to the development of transmural endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) for cases where the duodenal papilla cannot be accessed.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a meta-analysis comparing efficacy and complications of both approaches for biliary drainage.

REVIEW METHODS

English articles were searched in PubMed. Primary outcomes included technical success and complications. Secondary outcomes were clinical success and subsequent stent malfunction. Patient demographics and etiology of obstruction were collected and relative risk ratios and 95% CIs were calculated. P-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Initial database search yielded 245 studies from which 7 were chosen based upon inclusion criteria for final analysis. There was no statistically different relative risk for technical success when comparing primary EUS-BD to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (RR: 1.04) or overall procedural complication rate (RR 1.39). EUS-BD did have increased specific risk of cholangitis (RR: 3.01). Likewise, primary EUS-BD and ERCP had similar RR for clinical success (RR: 1.02) and overall stent malfunction (RR: 1.55), but stent migration was higher in the primary EUS-BD group (RR: 5.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary EUS-BD may be considered when the ampulla cannot be accessed, when there is gastric outlet obstruction, or presence of a duodenal stent.

Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy of India Consensus Guidelines on Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: Part I (Indications, Outcomes, Comparative Evaluations, Training)

Endoscopic management of bile duct obstruction is a key aspect in gastroenterology practice and has evolved since the first description of biliary cannulation by McCune et al in 1968. Over many decades, the techniques and accessories have been refined and currently, the first-line management for extrahepatic biliary obstruction is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). However, even in expert hands the success rate of ERCP reaches up to 95%. In almost 4 to 16% cases, failure to cannulate the bile duct may necessitate other alternatives such as surgical bypass or more commonly percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). While surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality, PTBD has a very high reintervention and complication rate (∼80%) and poor quality of life. Almost parallelly, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to a substantial therapeutic option in various pancreatico-biliary diseases. Biliary drainage using EUS-guidance (EUS-BD) has gained momentum since the first report published by Giovannini et al in 2001. The concept of accessing the bile duct through a different route than the papilla, circumventing the shortcomings of PTBD and sometimes bypassing the actual obstruction have enthused a lot of interest in this novel strategy. The three key methods of EUS-BD entail transluminal, antegrade, and rendezvous approach. Over the past decade, with growing experience, EUS-BD has been found to be equivalent to ERCP or PTBD for malignant obstruction with better success rates.

EUS-BD, albeit, is not devoid of adverse events and can carry fatal adverse events. However, neither the technique of EUS-BD, nor the accessories and stents for EUS-BD have been standardized.

Additionally, different countries and regions have different availability of the accessories making generalizability a difficult task. Thus, technical aspects of this evolving therapy need to be outlined. For these reasons, the Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy India deemed it appropriate to develop technical consensus statements for performing safe and successful EUS-BD.

Clinical Outcomes of EUS-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy for Biliary Drainage in Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Case Series

Introduction. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is associated with poor prognosis and 98% loss-of-life expectancy. 80% of patients with PDA are unfit for radical surgery. In those cases, emphasis is set on management of cancer-related symptoms, among which obstructive jaundice is most common. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) emerges as a valid alternative to the well-accepted methods for treatment of biliary obstruction. Patient Selection. Five consecutive patients with unresectable pancreatic malignancy, were subjected to EUS-BD, particularly EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). Ethics. Oral and written informed consent was obtained in all cases prior procedure. Technique. EUS-guided puncture of the common bile duct was performed, followed by advancement of a guidewire to the intrahepatic bile ducts. After dilation of the fistulous tract with a cystotome, a fully covered self-expandable metal stent was inserted below the hepatic confluence and extending at least 3 cm in the duodenum. Technical and clinical success was achieved in four patients without adverse events. In one patient procedure failed due to dislocation of the guidewire, with consequent biliary leakage requiring urgent surgery. Recovery was uneventful with no further clinical sequelae and there was no mortality associated with procedure. Discussion. Introduced in 2001, EUS-guided biliary drainage has become an accepted option for treatment of obstructive jaundice. According to recent guidelines published by European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) in 2022, EUS-CDS is a preferred modality to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and surgery in patients with failed ERCP, with comparable efficiency and better safety profile, which is supported by our experience with the procedure. Conclusions. Our case series suggests that EUS-CDS is an excellent option for palliative management of malignant distal biliary obstruction, emphasizes on the importance of adequate technique and experience for the technical success, and urges the need for future research on establishing the best choice for guidewire and dilation device.

Drenagem biliar endoscópica ecoguiada: revisão da literatura

RESUMO Neoplasias da confluência biliopancreática podem cursar com obstrução da via biliar, levando a icterícia, prurido e colangite. Nesses casos a drenagem da via biliar é imperativa. A colangiopancreatografia endoscópica retrógrada (CPER) com colocação de prótese coledociana constitui tratamento eficaz em cerca de 90% dos casos mesmo em mãos experientes. Nos casos de insucesso da CPER, tradicionalmente as opções terapêuticas incluem a derivação cirúrgica por hepaticojejunostomia (HJ) ou drenagem percutânea transparietohepática (DPTH). Nos últimos anos as técnicas endoscópicas ecoguiadas de drenagem biliar ganharam espaço por serem menos invasivas, eficazes e apresentarem incidência aceitável de complicações. A drenagem endoscópica ecoguiada da via biliar pode ser realizada pelo estômago (hepatogastrostomia), duodeno (coledocoduodenostomia) ou pela técnica de drenagem anterógrada. Alguns serviços consideram a drenagem ecoguiada da via biliar o procedimento de escolha no caso de insucesso da CPER. O objetivo desta revisão é apresentar os principais tipos de drenagem biliar endoscópica ecoguiada e confrontá-los com outras técnicas.

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy for malignant biliary obstruction: A multicenter comparative study between plastic and metallic stents

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is commonly employed to address malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) after a failed ERCP. In this context, both self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) and double-pigtail stents (DPSs) are suitable devices. However, few data comparing the outcomes of SEMS and DPS exist. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of SEMS and DPS at performing EUS-CDS.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study between March 2014 and March 2019. Patients diagnosed with MBO were considered eligible after at least one failed ERCP attempt. Clinical success was defined as a drop of direct bilirubin levels ≥ 50% at 7 and 30 postprocedural days. Adverse events (AEs) were categorized as early (≤7 days) or late (>7 days). The severity of AEs was graded as mild, moderate, or severe.

Results

Forty patients were included, 24 in the SEMS group and 16 in the DPS group. Demographic data were similar between the groups. Technical success rates and clinical success rates at 7 and 30 days were similar between the groups. Similarly, we found no statistical difference in the incidence of early or late AEs. However, there were two severe AEs (intracavitary migration) in the DPS group and none in the SEMS cohort. Finally, there was no difference in median survival (DPS 117 days vs. SEMS 217 days; P = 0.99).

Conclusion

EUS-guided CDS is an excellent alternative to achieve biliary drainage after a failed ERCP for MBO. There is no significant difference regarding the effectiveness and safety of SEMS and DPS in this context.

EUS-guided biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction: An international survey to identify barriers of technology implementation

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a promising alternative to ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Despite accumulating data, however, its application in clinical practice has been impeded by undefined barriers. This study aims to evaluate the practice of EUS-BD and its barriers.

Methods

An online survey was generated using Google Forms. Six gastroenterology/endoscopy associations were contacted between July 2019 and November 2019. Survey questions measured participant characteristics, EUS-BD in different clinical scenarios, and potential barriers. The primary outcome was the uptake of EUS-BD as a first-line modality, without previous ERCP attempts, in patients with MDBO.

Results

Overall, 115 respondents completed the survey (2.9% response rate). Respondents were from North America (39.2%), Asia (28.6%), Europe (20%), and other jurisdictions (12.2%). Regarding the uptake of EUS-BD as first-line treatment for MDBO, only 10.5% of respondents would consider EUS-BD as a first-line modality regularly. The main concerns were the lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and limited access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. On multivariable analysis, lack of access to EUS-BD expertise was an independent predictor against the use of EUS-BD, odds ratio 0.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.65). In salvage situations following failed ERCP, most favored EUS-BD (40.9%) over percutaneous drainage (21.7%) in unresectable cancer. In borderline resectable or locally advanced disease, however, most favored the percutaneous approach due to fear of EUS-BD complicating future surgery.

Conclusions

EUS-BD has not reached widespread clinical adoption. Identified barriers include lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and lack of access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. Fear of complicating future surgery was also identified as a barrier in potentially resectable disease.

Role of Endoscopy in Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Upper endoscopy has an established role in diagnosing and staging upper GI cancers, screening for pre-malignant lesions, and providing palliation in cases of advanced malignancy. New advances in endoscopic techniques and technology have improved diagnostic accuracy and increased the therapeutic potential of upper endoscopy. We aim to describe the different types of endoscopic technology used in cancer diagnosis, summarize the current guidelines for endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of malignant and pre-malignant lesions, and explore new potential roles for endoscopy in cancer therapy.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary interventions

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), even in expert hands, may fail in 5-10% of cases, especially in cases of papillary infiltration, malignant gastric outlet obstruction, or surgically altered anatomy. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) has represented the traditional rescue therapy, despite associated with high rate of adverse events, need for re-interventions and an inferior quality of life. The evolution of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic tool offers an effective and safe alternative for internal biliary drainage (BD) into the stomach or the duodenum. EUS-BD is reported to have similar or even improved efficacy and increased safety when compared to PTBD and can be performed in the same session of a failed ERCP. This review summarizes technical aspects of intra-hepatic and extra-hepatic EUS-BD (including hepatico-gastrostomy, choledocho-duodenostomy and rendezvous) together with current evidence and future perspectives that steadily cements EUS-BD's place in multidisciplinary management of bilio-pancreatic diseases.

Prospective feasibility study on the efficacy and safety of a novel spiral dilator for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage

Objectives

A difficult step in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided drainage procedures is dilation of the puncture tract before stent deployment. The efficacy and safety of a novel spiral dilator, Tornus ES, for EUS‐guided drainage were investigated in this study.

Methods

This study was conducted as a prospective, single‐arm, observational study at Sendai City Medical center. Dilation of the puncture tract using a spiral dilator was attempted for all EUS‐guided drainage cases. The primary outcome was the technical success rate which was defined as successful stent placement in the puncture tract. Secondary outcomes were the success rate of dilation using a spiral dilator, procedure time, and adverse events related to the procedures.

Results

A total of 10 patients were enrolled between January and March 2022. Seven patients underwent EUS‐guided biliary drainage (hepaticogastrostomy for six and hepaticojejunostomy for one), and the remaining three patients underwent EUS‐guided gallbladder drainage. The technical success rate and the success rate of dilation using a spiral dilator were both 100%. The mean procedure time was 27 min. No adverse events related to the procedure occurred in all cases.

Conclusions

Dilation of the puncture tract using a spiral dilator was effective and safe and might make it easier to perform EUS‐guided drainage.

Current endoscopic approaches to biliary strictures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current status and future perspectives of the endoscopic management of biliary strictures.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to conventional diagnostic modalities, such as cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), per-oral cholangioscopy is helpful for indeterminate biliary strictures. It allows direct visualization of the biliary tract and targeted biopsy. For distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard of care. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an emerging alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in cases with failed ERCP. EUS-BD is also an effective salvage option for perihilar MBO, which can not be managed via ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Preoperative drainage is necessary for most jaundiced patients as neoadjuvant chemotherapy is widely administered for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and a SEMS is preferred in this setting, too. For benign biliary strictures, a covered SEMS can improve stricture resolution and reduce the number of endoscopic sessions as compared to plastic stents.

SUMMARY

ERCP and EUS play a central role in the diagnosis and drainage for both malignant and benign biliary strictures.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Antegrade Stent Placement in Patients with Failed ERCP as a Modality of Preoperative and Palliative Biliary Drainage

BACKGROUND

No large studies have addressed the role of endoscopic-ultrasound biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction (MEBO). We aimed to discuss the outcomes of EUS antegrade stent placement (EUS-AG) in the preoperative and palliative setting.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent EUS-AG for MEBO between December 2019 and December 2021 was done. Primary outcome measures were technical success and clinical success. Secondary outcome measures were number of days of hospitalization postprocedure, adverse events related to EUS-AG procedure, morbidity related to surgery, and 3-month mortality after surgery.

RESULTS

54 patients underwent attempt for EUS-AG (mean age 54.8 ± 12.1 years; female 44.4%). Most common primary cancer was pancreatic cancer in 42.1% (23/54) patients. Indication was palliative in 34 (62.9%) patients and PBD in 20 (37%) patients. Level of block was distal in 35 (64.8%) and proximal in 19 (35.1%) patients. Technical success of EUS-AG was 88.7% (47/53). Clinical success was seen in 95.7% (45/47) patients. Median number of days of hospitalization postprocedure was 1 day. No procedure-related severe adverse events were seen. Of 20 patients who underwent EUS-AG as PBD, 19 had technical success (95%) with clinical success in 94.5% (18/19). Surgery was performed in 11 patients, of whom 10 patients underwent successful PPPD (one intraoperative liver metastasis). Two patients had Clavein-Dindo III/IV complication post-PPPD, with one mortality within 30 days of surgery.

CONCLUSION

EUS-AG is safe and effective after failed ERCP in both preoperative and palliative setting.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary interventions have evolved to become an integral part of advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy units. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an accepted alternative for patients with failed ERCP or altered surgical anatomy. The potential advantages of EUS-guided interventions include choice of biliary access from stomach or duodenum, choice of stent exit in stomach and duodenum, and possibility of avoiding traversing through the obstruction. A variety of procedures have been described depending on the level of obstruction. Maximum evidence is available for distal malignant obstruction, and more studies are needed for hilar obstruction and benign indications.