Efficacy of EUS-guided and ERCP-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction: prospective randomized controlled study

Feasibility and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in inexperienced centers: a multicenter study in southwest Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has shown promising procedural outcomes in high-volume centers. Although inferior procedural outcomes were reported in inexperienced centers during the early days of EUS-BD, the current outcomes are unknown. This study aimed to clarify the feasibility and safety of EUS-BD in centers that recently introduced EUS-BD.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study was conducted at 22 centers that introduced EUS-BD between 2017 and 2022. A maximum of 20 initial EUS-BD cases at each center were evaluated. The clinical outcomes and experience of 84 endoscopists who performed these procedures were examined. Primary outcomes were the rate of technical success and adverse events (AEs), whereas secondary outcomes were risk factors associated with technical failure and procedure-related AEs.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-five patients were enrolled. The technical success rate was 91.4% (233/255). Among 22 technical failure cases, guidewire manipulation failure was the most common cause (n = 12) followed by tract dilation failure (n = 5). The AE rate was 10.2% (26/255). Multivariate analysis identified a puncture target diameter of <5 mm (odds ratio, 3.719; 95% CI, 1.415-9.776; P = .008) and moderate ascites extending to the liver surface (odds ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.195-8.653; P = .021) as independent risk factors for technical failure and procedure-related AEs, respectively. Endoscopists' procedural experience was not a risk factor for technical failure or procedure-related AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility and safety of EUS-BD were maintained during the induction phase at inexperienced centers. These data will be helpful to better understand the current status of EUS-BD. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000053615.).

Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents for Palliation of Gastrointestinal Tumors

Interventional endoscopy is gaining ground in the armamentarium of the management of cancer-related complications [...].

Randomized comparison of precut papillotomy versus an endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous procedure for difficult biliary access in malignant distal biliary obstruction

Difficult biliary cannulation (DBC) is a marker for prolonged procedure time and a higher rate of adverse events (AEs) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We previously showed that endoscopic ultrasound-assisted rendezvous (EUS-RV) procedures had a higher single-session success rate than precut papillotomy (PCP) in cases of DBC. The present randomized study aimed to compare the technical success and AE rates of the two approachesThis was an open-label randomized controlled trial in a tertiary care setting. Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) and DBC were enrolled. The patients were randomized to PCP with a needle-knife or EUS-RV. The primary outcome was technical success; secondary outcomes were the AE rate, procedure duration, and length of hospital stay (LOS).208 patients were enrolled, 104 in each group. There were no statistically significant differences in technical success (93.3% PCP vs. 97.1% EUS-RV; P = 0.33; odds ratio [OR] 0.4, 95%CI 0.1-1.6) and overall AE rate (11.5% PCP vs. 5.8% EUS-RV; P=0.14; OR 0.5, 95%CI 0.8-5.9). Pancreatitis was higher in the PCP group (8.7% vs. 1.9%; P=0.06; OR 4.8, 95%CI 1.0-22.9). The mean duration of the procedure was significantly higher for EUS-RV (47 vs. 27 minutes; P<0.001). LOS was similar in the two groups (1.2 PCP vs. 1.1 days EUS-RV; P=0.25).Both PCP and EUS-RV have comparable rates of success, AEs, mortality, and LOS. EUS-RV could be used as an alternative to PCP in patients with MDBO and DBC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage for distal malignant biliary obstruction due to pancreatic cancer with asymptomatic duodenal invasion: a retrospective, single-center study in Japan

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Duodenal invasion (DI) is a risk factor for early recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) may reduce early RBO in cases of asymptomatic DI, even when ERCP is possible.

METHODS

We enrolled 56 patients with pancreatic cancer and asymptomatic DI who underwent EUS-HGS (n=25) or ERCP-BD (n=31). Technical and clinical success, early (<3 months) and overall RBO rates, time to RBO (TRBO), and adverse events were compared between the EUS-HGS and ERCP-BD groups. Risk factors for early RBO were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Both procedures demonstrated 100% technical and clinical success rates, with a similar incidence of adverse events (48% vs. 39%, p=0.59). While the median TRBO was comparable (5.7 vs. 8.8 months, p=0.60), EUS-HGS was associated with a lower incidence of early RBO compared to ERCP-BD (8% vs. 29%, p=0.09). The major causes of early RBO in ERCP-BD were sludge and food impaction, rarely occurring in EUS-HGS. EUS-HGS was potentially reduced early RBO (odds ratio, 0.32; p=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS can be a viable option for treating pancreatic cancer with asymptomatic DI.

Endoscopic biliary drainage for distal bile duct obstruction due to pancreatic cancer

Approximately 60% of pancreatic cancers occur in the pancreatic head and may present as obstructive jaundice due to bile duct invasion. Obstructive jaundice often leads to poor general conditions and acute cholangitis, interfering with surgery and chemotherapy and requiring biliary drainage. The first choice of treatment for biliary drainage is the endoscopic transpapillary approach. In unresectable tumors, self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are most commonly used and are classified into uncovered and covered SEMSs. Recently, antireflux metal stents and large- or small-diameter SEMSs have become commercially available, and their usefulness has been reported. Plastic stents are infrequently used in patients with resectable biliary obstruction; however, owing to the recent trend in preoperative chemotherapy, SEMSs are frequently used because of the long time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is often performed in patients who are not eligible for the transpapillary approach, and favorable outcomes have been reported. Different EUS-BD techniques and specialized stents have been developed and can be safely used in high-volume centers. The indications for EUS-BD are expected to further expand in the future.

Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound in Pancreatic Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Palliative Care

Pancreatic cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with a profoundly poor prognosis. Clinically, the condition most frequently manifests with symptoms including painless jaundice, abdominal discomfort, and back pain. Early diagnosis and the implementation of effective therapeutic strategies are critical for improving patient survival outcomes. However, merely 10-20% of patients are diagnosed at an early stage, with the majority presenting at advanced stages, often with metastasis. Consequently, early detection and intervention are crucial for enhancing prognosis. The widespread adoption of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) technology in recent years has significantly enhanced the diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic space-occupying lesions. EUS is increasingly recognized for its pivotal role in alleviating malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and refractory pain in advanced pancreatic cancer. This article aims to provide an overall review of the current applications of EUS in the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer, exploring its advantages and limitations in early screening, diagnosis, and palliative care. Furthermore, this review explores potential future directions in the field, aiming to provide valuable insights to inform and enhance the clinical management of pancreatic cancer.

Endoscopic innovations in diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer: a narrative review and future directions

Pancreatic cancer serves as the third leading cause of cancer-associated morbidity and mortality in the United States, with a 5-year survival rate of only 12% with an expected increase in incidence and mortality in the coming years. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas constitute most pancreatic malignancies. Certain genetic syndromes, including Lynch syndrome, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, hereditary pancreatitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, familial pancreatic cancer mutation, and ataxia telangiectasia, confer a significantly higher risk. Screening for pancreatic malignancies currently targets patients with germline mutations or those with significant family history. Screening the general population is not currently viable owing to overall low incidence and lack of specific tests. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and its applied advances are increasingly being used for surveillance, diagnosis, and management of pancreatic malignancies and have now become an indispensable tool in their management. For patients with risk factors, EUS in combination with magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is used for screening. The role of endoscopic modalities has been expanding with the increased utilization of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, EUS-directed therapies include EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and EUS-fine-needle biopsy (FNB). EUS combined with FNB has the highest specificity and sensitivity for detecting pancreatic cancer amongst available modalities. Studies also recognize that artificial intelligence assisted EUS in the early detection of pancreatic cancer. At the same time, surgical resection has been historically considered the only curative treatment for pancreatic cancer, over 80% of patients present with unresectable disease. We also discuss EUS-guided therapies of physicochemicals (radiofrequency ablation, brachytherapy, and intratumor chemotherapy), biological agents (gene therapies and oncolytic viruses), and immunotherapy. We aim to perform a detailed review of the current burden, risk factors, role of screening, diagnosis, and endoscopic advances in the treatment modalities available for pancreatic cancer.

Endoscopic ultrasound- versus ERCP-guided primary drainage of inoperable malignant distal biliary obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

 We assessed efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as first-line intervention in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO).

METHODS

 PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until 01 /12 /2023 for randomized controlled trials of EUS-BD vs. ERCP for primary biliary drainage in patients with inoperable MDBO. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were clinical success, adverse events, mean procedure time, 1-year stent patency, and overall survival. Relative risk (RR) with 95 %CI were calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

 Five studies (519 patients) were included. RR (95 %CI) for EUS-BD was 1.06 (0.96 to 1.17; P = 0.27) for pooled technical success and 1.02 (0.97 to 1.08; P = 0.45) for clinical success. 1-year stent patency was similar between the groups (RR 1.15, 0.94 to 1.42; P = 0.17), with lower reintervention with EUS-BD (RR 0.58, 0.37 to 0.9; P = 0.01). The RR was 0.85 (0.49 to 1.46; P = 0.55) for adverse events and 0.97 (0.10 to 0.17; P = 0.98) for severe adverse events. On subgroup analysis, EUS-guided placement of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) outperformed ERCP in terms of technical success (RR 1.17, 1.01 to 1.35; P = 0.03). Procedure time was lower with EUS-BD (standardized mean difference -2.36 minutes [-2.68 to -2.05; P < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

 EUS-BD showed a statistically significant lower reintervention rate than ERCP, but with similar technical success, stent patency, clinical success, and safety. Technical success of EUS-BD with LAMS was better than ERCP.

Primary drainage of distal malignant biliary obstruction: A comparative network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of various primary upfront drainage techniques for distal malignant biliary obstructions (dMBO) is not well-established.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the technical and clinical success rates and adverse event (AE) rates of various primary drainage techniques.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed RCTs comparing the technical and clinical success and AE rates of EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) with lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), EUS-CDS with self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), ERCP, and PTBD performed upfront.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 583 patients were analyzed. EUS-CDS with LAMS showed significantly higher technical success compared to EUS-CDS with SEMS (RR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.07-1.37) and ERCP (RR 1.17, 95 % CI 1.07-1.28). EUS-CDS with LAMS had the highest rank in technical success (SUCRA = 0.86). The clinical success rate was also higher with EUS-CDS with LAMS than with ERCP (RR 1.12, 1.01-1.25). PTBD was the worst ranked procedure for safety (SUCRA score = 0.18), while EUS-CDS with LAMS was the top procedure for procedural time (SUCRA score = 0.83).

CONCLUSION

EUS-CDS with LAMS has the highest technical and clinical success rates and is significantly superior to ERCP as the upfront technique for dMBO treatment. PTBD should be abandoned as first-line treatment due to the poor safety profile.

Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference

BACKGROUND

Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.

METHODS

The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

III BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS STATEMENT ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND

BACKGROUND

•Since its inception in the 1980s, endoscopic ultrasound has increased relevance and usefulness in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

•Endoscopic ultrasound has evolved from solely diagnostic imaging to a valuable method for tissue sampling and therapeutic procedures, such as drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and creating gastrointestinal anastomoses under EUS guidance.

BACKGROUND

•Given the rapid advancements in EUS and new devices, an update to the last Consensus must include recent developments.

BACKGROUND

•Experts evaluated and discussed the best evidence on EUS-guided procedures and devices for tissue sampling, pancreatic and liver disease management, and biliary drainage.

BACKGROUND

In the past decades, endoscopic ultrasound has developed from a diagnostic tool to a platform for many therapeutic interventions. Various technological advancements have emerged since the last Brazilian Consensus, demanding a review and update of the recommendations based on the best scientific evidence.

METHODS

A group of 32 renowned echoendoscopists selected eight relevant topics to be discussed to generate clinical questions. After that, a literature review was conducted to answer these questions based on the most updated evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-three statements were formulated and voted on by the experts to reach a consensus. The Oxford System was used to grade the level of evidence.

CONCLUSION

There is mo-derate evidence to support that the needle shape, gauge, or aspiration technique does not influence the yield of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling of pancreatic solid lesions. There is moderate evidence to support using EUS-TTNB of the cyst wall to differentiate between mucinous and non-mucinous cystic neoplasms. There is little evidence to support the EUS-guided treatment of gastric varices. There is a high level of evidence to support that EUS-guided biliary drainage and ERCP present similar outcomes in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction. There is a high level of evidence for using EUS to diagnose neoplastic pancreatic cysts and detect necrosis before indicating drainage. There is moderate evidence to support EUS-GE over duodenal stent for malignant gastric outlet obstruction in patients with a life expectancy higher than 2 months. There is a high level of evidence to support the use of RFA in treating both functioning and non-functioning types of NET.

The New Potential for Using Franseen Needles in Interventional EUS

Objective Adverse events such as bile leakage and bleeding are among the issues that need to be resolved in EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). To overcome this problem, we developed a new EUS-CDS technique using a 19-G Franseen needle without tract dilation. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the new EUS-CDS technique. Methods This single-center retrospective study included 20 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS for primary drainage using a 19-G Franseen needle between March 2020 and May 2023. The primary endpoint was the technical success rate of EUS-CDS without tract dilation. Results The technical success rate of EUS-CDS was 20/20 (100%). None of the patients required any additional tract dilation, such as by using a balloon or electric cautery. The median procedure time was 7.8 [range, 3.2-19.4] min. No early adverse events were observed. Conclusion The 19-G Franseen needle appeared to have a sufficient dilatory effect during puncturing. This EUS-CDS technique appears to be safe and effective and has the advantages of no adverse events and it is also a simplified procedure, which suggests its potential for widespread use in primary drainage.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) includes EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AG) and EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV). While EUS-HGS, EUS-CDS and EUS-GBD are transluminal drainage procedures, EUS-AG is a traspapillary drainage procedure and EUS-RV is a procedure intended to facilitate endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) in instances of failed cannulation. These procedures were initially developed as options for endoscopic salvage of failed ERCP, but have evolved to become first-line interventions also for select indications over time as the technique and expertise improved. Several randomised controlled trials have demonstrated EUS-BD, especially EUS-CDS has similar or even better outcomes as compared to ERCP in malignant biliary obstruction. However, widespread adoption of these modalities is limited by the availability of expertise, steep learning curve, lack of standardization of techniques and cost. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of various EUS-BD procedures including the indications, accessories, technique, outcomes and follow-up of each of these procedures.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: The road is open for almighty biliopancreatic endoscopists!

Commentary on the article written and published by Peng et al, investigating the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). For 40 years endoscopic biliary drainage was synonymous with ERCP, and EUS was used mainly for diagnostic purposes. The advent of therapeutic EUS has revolutionized the field, especially with the development of a novel device such as electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents. Complete biliopancreatic endoscopists with both skills in ERCP and in interventional EUS, would be ideally suited to ensure patients the best drainage technique according to each individual situation.

Comparative Effectiveness of ERCP and EUS-Guided Techniques for "Primary Biliary Drainage" in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a viable alternative in cases with failed ERCP transpapillary drainage (ERCP-TPD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD for primary biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO).

METHODS

We searched Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD in DMBO, from inception until September 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical success and secondary endpoints included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Eight studies (815 patients, 56.1% male) were included in this analysis. Indications for biliary drainage were pancreatic carcinoma (75.1%), followed by cholangiocarcinoma (10.1%). Clinical success was comparable between EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.40; P=0.32). Technical success was similar between the 2 groups (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 0.83-5.25; P=0.12). There was a trend toward fewer adverse events in the EUS-BD group (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40-1.07; P=0.09), with significantly lower odds of post-procedure pancreatitis (OR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

EUS-BD is comparable to ERCP for primary biliary drainage in DMBO patients with shorter procedural time and a significantly reduced risk of post-procedure pancreatitis.

Multicenter study comparing EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy and ERCP for malignant biliary obstruction in patients with accessible papillae

BACKGROUND

One advantage of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is that it is difficult for reflux cholangitis, caused by duodenal pressure increasing due to duodenal obstruction, to occur. In addition, since stent deployment is performed away from the malignant stricture site, longer stent patency than with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may be obtained. However, no study has previously compared EUS-HGS and ERCP for patients without duodenal obstruction or surgically altered anatomy. The aim of the present study was to compare clinical outcomes between EUS-HGS and ERCP in normal anatomy patients without duodenal obstruction.

METHOD

In the ERCP group, patients who initially underwent biliary drainage were included. In the EUS-HGS group, patients who underwent EUS-HGS due to failed biliary cannulation were included. Patients with an inaccessible papilla, such as with surgically altered anatomy or duodenal obstruction, were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 314 patients who underwent ERCP and EUS-HGS were enrolled in this study. Of the 314 patients, 289 underwent biliary stenting under ERCP guidance, and 25 patients underwent biliary stenting under EUS-HGS. After propensity score-matching analysis, the adverse event rate tended to be lower in the EUS-HGS group than in the ERCP group. Although overall survival was not significantly different between the EUS-HGS and ERCP groups (p = .228), stent patency was significantly longer in the EUS-HGS group (median 366.0 days) than in the ERCP group (median 76.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS had a lower adverse event rate, shorter procedure time, and longer stent patency than ERCP in cases of normal anatomy without duodenal obstruction.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Impact of sarcopenia on recurrent biliary obstruction after EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with malignant biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sarcopenia is an important prognostic factor for cancer patients. The aim of this study was to assess the ability of sarcopenia to predict recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) in patients with unresectable cancer after EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD).

METHODS

The study enrolled 113 patients who underwent EUS-BD using the self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) between April 2016 and December 2021 at Wakayama Medical University Hospital. The skeletal muscle index at the third lumbar spine level (L3) was calculated from computed tomography images. We analyzed the cumulative incidence of RBO at 180 days after stent insertion. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify variables significantly associated with RBO.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients were assigned to the sarcopenia group, and 37 were assigned to the non-sarcopenia group. The 180-day cumulative incidence of RBO was 11% in the non-sarcopenia group and 29% in the sarcopenia group (p = 0.034). The time to RBO was significantly shorter for the sarcopenia group (p = 0.028; Gray's test). Multivariate analyses identified sarcopenia as an independent prognostic factor for RBO (present vs absent; HR 4.61; 95% CI 1.76-12.10, p = 0.001). The rates of biliary sludge/food impaction were significantly higher in the sarcopenia group for the causes of RBO (p = 0.048). There were no significant differences between the sarcopenia and the non-sarcopenia groups with respect to related EUS-BD adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Sarcopenia is an independent indicator of RBO in patients with MBO who receive EUS-BD with SEMS.

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.).

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.

Different percutaneous transhepatic biliary stent placements and catheter drainage in the treatment of middle and low malignant biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND

For cases of middle and low biliary obstruction with left and right hepatic duct dilatation, the type of approach and whether different approaches affect the difficulty of puncture operation and intraoperative and postoperative complications have not been discussed in detail.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of different percutaneous transhepatic biliary stent placements and catheter drainage in treating middle and low biliary obstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical records of 424 patients with middle and low biliary obstruction who underwent percutaneous liver puncture biliary stent placement and catheter drainage at the Department of Interventional Radiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital between March 2016 and March 2022. Based on the puncture path, patients were categorized into two groups: Subxiphoid left hepatic lobe approach group (Group A, 224 cases) and right intercostal, right hepatic lobe approach group (Group B, 200 cases). Liver function improvement, postoperative biliary bleeding incidence, postoperative pain duration, and abdominal effusion leakage around the drainage tube were compared between the two groups at 3 d and 1 wk after the surgery. Patient survival time was recorded during follow-up.

RESULTS

All 424 surgeries were successful without adverse events. Group A comprised 224 cases, and Group B had 200 cases. There was no statistically significant difference in basic data between Group A and Group B (P > 0.05). No significant difference in postoperative biliary bleeding incidence was observed between the groups (P > 0.05). The decreased rates for total bilirubin (Group A: 69.23 ± 4.50, Group B: 63.79 ± 5.65), direct bilirubin (Group A: 79.30 ± 11.19, Group B: 63.62 ± 5.64), and alkaline phosphatase (Group A: 60.51 ± 12.23, Group B: 42.68 ± 23.56) in the 1st wk after surgery were significantly faster in Group A than in Group B. The decreased rate of gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase was also significantly faster in Group A at both 3 d (Group A: 40.56 ± 10.32, Group B: 32.22 ± 5.12) and 1 wk (Group A: 73.19 ± 7.05, Group B: 58.81 ± 18.98) after surgery (P < 0.05). Group A experienced significantly less peritoneal effusion leakage around the drainage tube than Group B (P < 0.05). The patient survival rate was higher in Group A compared to Group B (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In treating jaundice patients with middle and low biliary obstruction, a percutaneous left liver puncture demonstrated better clinical efficacy than a percutaneous right liver puncture.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a rescue technique for patients with malignant biliary obstruction who fail conventional treatment with ERCP or EUS-guided biliary drainage. The technique has been successfully employed in the management of acute cholecystitis in patients not fit for surgery. However, the evidence for its use in malignant obstruction is less robust. This review article aims to evaluate the data available at present to better understand the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage.

METHODS

A detailed literature review was conducted and several databases were searched for any studies relating to EUS-GBD in malignant biliary obstruction. Pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for clinical success and adverse events.

RESULTS

Our search identified 298 studies related to EUS-GBD. The final analysis included 7 studies with 136 patients. The pooled rate of clinical success (95% CI) was 85% (78-90%, I2: 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events (95% CI) was 13% (7-19%, I2: 0%). Adverse events included: peritonitis, bleeding, bile leakage, stent migration, and stent occlusion. No deaths directly related to the procedure were reported; however, in some of the studies, deaths occurred due to disease progression.

CONCLUSION

This review supports the use of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage as a rescue option for patients who have failed conventional measures.

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.

Results of endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with malignant hilar stricture

In Malignant Hilar Biliary Stricture (MHBS) palliative biliary drainage is a frequent strategy, improving the quality of life, reducing pruritus, loss of appetite and relieving cholangitis. The endoscopic approach is an effective, although challenging procedure. This study aimed to evaluate technical and clinical success rates of biliary drainage by ERCP. This is a retrospective study including all patients with MHBS referred to Instituto do Cancer do Hospital de São Paulo (ICESP) submitted to biliary drainage by ERCP, between January 2010 and December 2017. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate predictors of clinical failure, as total bilirubin levels, Bismuth classification, number of hepatic sectors drained and presence of cholangitis. In total, 82 patients presenting unresectable MHBS were included in this study. 58.5% female and 41.5% male, with a mean age of 60±13 years. Bismuth classification grades II, IIIA, IIIB and IV were noted in 23.2%, 15.9%, 14.6% and 46.3%, respectively. Technical and clinical success was achieved in 92.7% and 53.7% respectively. At multivariable logistic-regression analyses, Bismuth IV strictures were related to higher clinical failure rates when compared to other strictures levels, with an Odds Ratio of 5.8 (95% CI 1.28‒20.88). In conclusion, endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant hilar biliary stricture had a high technical success but suboptimal clinical success rate. Proximal strictures (Bismuth IV) were associated with poor drainage outcomes.

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.