Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for distal malignant obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

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.

Impact of self-expandable metal stent deployment site on stent dysfunction during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Background and Objectives

Hyperplasia at the distal side of an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) stent is one of the most frequent causes of stent dysfunction. However, risk factors for hyperplasia during EUS-HGS remain unclear. The aim of the present study was to determine the most appropriate stent site during EUS-HGS to obtain prolonged stent patency.

Method

This study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent successful EUS-HGS using a partially covered, self-expandable, metal stent (PCSEMS) between January 2017 and September 2022. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the distal site of the PCSEMS at the intrahepatic bile duct, the peripheral side group and the central side group.

Results

There were 30 patients in the peripheral side group and 70 in the central side group. The diameter of the intrahepatic bile duct at the PCSEMS deployment site was significantly greater in the central side group (mean 7.90 mm) than in the peripheral side group (mean 4.25 mm; P < 0.05). Stent patency was significantly longer in the central side group than in the peripheral side group (median, 60 days vs. 144 days, P = 0.011), although overall survival was not significantly different. Hyperplasia was significantly more frequent in the peripheral side group. On multivariate analysis, the site of the PCSEMS (peripheral) was the only risk factor for stent dysfunction.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the distal site of the PCSEMS deployed at the hepatic hilar site from the confluence between B2 and B3 might play a role in obtaining longer stent patency.

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.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: a meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valid option for EUS-guided biliary drainage that has been increasingly used in the last decade. The aims of this study were to provide a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of the features and outcomes of this procedure.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for literature pertinent to EUS-HGS. Meta-analysis of the proportions and meta-regression of potential modifiers of the main outcome measures were applied. The main outcome was technical success; secondary outcomes were clinical success and procedure-related adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

33 studies, including 1644 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) was the underlying cause in almost all cases (99.6%); the main indications for EUS-HGS were duodenal/papillary invasion (34.8%), surgically altered anatomy (18.4%), and hilar stenosis (16.0%). The pooled technical success of EUS-HGS was 97.7% (95%CI 96.1%-99.0%; I 2 = 0%), the intention-to-treat clinical success rate was 88.1% (95%CI 84.7%-91.2%; I 2 = 33.9%), and procedure-related AEs occurred in 12.0% (95%CI 9.8%-14.5%; I 2 = 20.4%), with cholangitis/sepsis (2.8%) and bleeding (2.3%) the most frequent. The rate of procedure-related AEs was lower with the use of dedicated stents on univariable meta-regression analysis. Meta-regression showed that technical success and clinical success rates were modified by the centers' experience (>4/year).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS represents an effective and safe procedure for EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with MBO. Future studies should address the impact of center experience, patient selection, and the use of dedicated stents to improve performance of this technique.

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.

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.

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.

Biliary drainage in malignant biliary obstruction: an umbrella review of randomized controlled trials

Background

There are still many controversies about biliary drainage in MBO, and we aimed to summarize and evaluate the evidence associated with biliary drainage.

Methods

We conducted an umbrella review of SRoMAs based on RCTs. Through July 28, 2022, Embase, PubMed, WOS, and Cochrane Database were searched. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and appraised the methodological quality of the included studies. GRADE was used to evaluate the quality of the evidence.

Results

36 SRoMAs were identified. After excluding 24 overlapping studies, 12 SRoMAs, including 76 RCTs, and 124 clinical outcomes for biliary drainage in MBO were included. Of the 124 pieces of evidence evaluated, 13 were rated "High" quality, 38 were rated "Moderate", and the rest were rated "Low" or "Very low". For patients with MBO, 125I seeds+stent can reduce the risk of stent occlusion, RFA+stent can improve the prognosis; compared with PC, SEMS can increase the risk of tumor ingrowth and reduce the occurrence of sludge formation, and the incidence of tumor ingrowth in C-SEMS/PC-SEMS was significantly lower than that in U-SEMS. There was no difference in the success rate of drainage between EUS-BD and ERCP-BD, but the use of EUS-BD can reduce the incidence of stent dysfunction. For patients with obstructive jaundice, PBD does not affect postoperative mortality compared to direct surgery. The use of MS in patients with periampullary cancer during PBD can reduce the risk of re-intervention and stent occlusion compared to PC. In addition, we included four RCTs that showed that when performing EUS-BD on MBO, hepaticogastrostomy has higher technical success rates than choledochoduodenostomy. Patients who received Bilateral-ENBD had a lower additional drainage rate than those who received Unilateral-ENBD.

Conclusions

Our study summarizes a large amount of evidence related to biliary drainage, which helps to reduce the uncertainty in the selection of biliary drainage strategies for MBO patients under different circumstances.

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.

Double guidewire technique stabilization procedure for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy involving modifying the guidewire angle at the insertion site

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is often performed using a single guidewire (SGW), but the efficacy of the double guidewire (DGW) technique during endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage has been reported. We evaluated the efficacy of the DGW technique for EUS-HGS, focusing on the guidewire angle at the insertion site.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS between April 2012 and March 2021. We measured the guidewire angle at the insertion site using still fluoroscopic imaging. We compared the clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS with the DGW and SGW techniques. The factors associated with successful cannula insertion, need for additional fistula dilation and adverse event rate were assessed by a logistic regression multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

The DGW group showed higher technical (p = 0.020) and clinical success rates (p = 0.016) than the SGW group, which showed more adverse events (p = 0.017) than the DGW group. Successful cannula insertion was associated with a guidewire angle > 137° and an uneven double-lumen cannula. The DGW technique made the guidewire angle obtuse at the insertion site (p < 0.0001). A guidewire angle ≤ 137° (OR, 35.6; 95% CI, 1.70-744; p = 0.0045) and intrahepatic bile duct diameter of the puncture site ≤ 3.0 mm (OR, 14.4; 95% CI, 1.37-152; p = 0.0056) were risk factors for needing additional fistula dilation in a multivariate analysis, and additional dilation was a significant predictive factor for adverse events (OR, 8.3; 95% CI, 0.9-77; p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

The DGW technique can modify the guidewire angle at the insertion site and facilitate stent deployment with few adverse events.

Prospective comparison study between 19-gauge needle with .025-inch guidewire and 22-gauge needle with novel .018-inch guidewire during EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

If the diameter of the intrahepatic bile duct is much less dilated, bile duct puncture with a 19-gauge needle can be challenging during EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). These characteristics can decrease the difficulty of bile duct puncture, but use of a 22-gauge needle is less feasible because of poor visibility, maneuverability, and stiffness of the conventional .018-inch guidewire. A novel, improved .018-inch guidewire has recently become available. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of EUS-BD in patients with insufficient bile duct dilatation using a 22-gauge needle and the new .018-inch guidewire.

METHODS

A 22-gauge needle was used as the puncture needle for intrahepatic bile ducts of diameters <1.5 mm, and a 19-gauge needle was selected for diameters ≥1.5 mm. As the primary endpoint of the study, the technical success rate of EUS-BD using a 22-gauge needle with the novel .018-inch guidewire was evaluated in patients with insufficient dilation of the intrahepatic bile duct.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients who required EUS-BD were enrolled (22-gauge needle group, n = 18; 19-gauge needle group, n = 23). Technical success was obtained in all patients in the 19-gauge needle group. In the 22-gauge needle group, technical failure occurred in 2 patients because of nonidentification of the intrahepatic bile duct on EUS (technical success rate, 88.9%), and puncture of the bile duct itself was not performed in these patients. Mean procedure time was similar between the groups. Adverse events were observed in 16.7% of patients (3/16) in the 22-gauge needle group and in 34.8% of patients (8/23) in the 19-gauge needle group.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of using a 22-gauge needle with a novel .018-inch guidewire were comparable with a 19-gauge needle with a .025-inch guidewire, even in the case of insufficient intrahepatic bile duct dilatation. These results require verification in a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 19-gauge needles with a larger sample size. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000044441.).

Propensity score matching analysis for adverse events of EUS-guided biliary drainage in advanced elderly patients (PEACE study)

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested that elderly patients, as well as younger patients, can be safely treated using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has not been clinically evaluated for very elderly patients. The present multicenter, retrospective study aimed to determine the safety of EUS-BD for advanced elderly patients.

METHOD

Patients who underwent EUS-BD during this period were retrospectively enrolled, and they were divided into two groups based on age: group A (age  < 75 years) and group B (age ⩾ 75). In this study, capnographic monitoring was used only for elderly patients (age ⩾ 75 years).

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients who underwent EUS-BD were enrolled in this study (group A = 177, group B = 94). The types of adverse events that were associated with EUS-BD was observed in 38 patients, and they did not differ significantly between two groups (p = 0.855). This result was confirmed after propensity score matching (p = 0.510). Adverse events were associated with sedation after propensity score matching; hypoxemia (p = 0.012) and severe hypoxemia (p = 0.003) were significantly higher in group A compared with group B. According to logistic regression analysis, monitoring (non-capnography) was also only risk factor (odds ratio: 0.317, 95% confidence interval: 0.143-0.705; p = 0.005) for sedation-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, EUS-BD could be safety performed in advanced elderly patients, the same as in younger patients. Also, capnographic monitoring might be helpful in case of sedation by a gastroenterologist in a non-intubated patient. Further prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.

Endoscopic Management of Pancreatobiliary Malignancies

Pancreatobiliary malignancies have poor prognosis, and many patients are inoperable at the time of diagnosis. When surgical resection is impossible, systemic chemotherapy or radiotherapy is traditionally conducted with trial of immunotherapy or gene therapy lately. With the rapid development of endoscopic instruments and accessories in recent years, not only endoscopic early detection, characterization, and staging but also endoscopic palliative management of the pancreatobiliary malignancies is expanding the horizons. Endoscopic management is often preferred due to similar efficacy to surgical management with less morbidity. Here, we review the methodology and treatment outcome of various endoscopic management strategies in pancreatobiliary malignancies including endoscopic complication management, local palliative therapy, endoscopy-assisted therapy, and pain control utilizing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound.

Efficacy of primary drainage by endoscopic ultrasound‐guided biliary drainage for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Background and Aim

Obstructive jaundice induced by pancreatic adenocarcinoma is typically treated with biliary drainage with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)‐guided biliary drainage (ERCP‐BD). Recently, endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided biliary drainage (EUS‐BD) was employed as an alternative method after ERCP‐BD failed. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of EUS‐BD for primary biliary drainage.

Methods

Between December 2011 and February 2019, at Kawasaki General Medical Center, we retrospectively enrolled 33 patients who had undergone endoscopic biliary drainage with a metal stent, in a first attempt to relieve obstructive jaundice caused by unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We compared the technical and clinical outcomes between ERCP‐BD and EUS‐BD.

Results

Twenty‐three patients underwent ERCP‐BD and 10 underwent EUS‐BD. Both groups achieved 100% technical success. The clinical success rates were similar between the groups: 91% (21/23 patients) for ERCP‐BD and 100% (10/10 patients) for EUS‐BD (P = 0.48). Biliary obstruction recurred in 6/23 patients (26%) treated with ERCP‐BD and 1/10 patients (10%) treated with EUS‐BD (P = 0.40). Other adverse events occurred in 4/23 patients (17%) in the ERCP‐BD group and 1/10 patients (10%) in the EUS‐BD group (P = 0.99).

Conclusion

We suggest that EUS‐BD could be employed for primary biliary drainage in patients with obstructive jaundice caused by unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Endoscopic Reintervention for Recurrence of Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Developing the Best Strategy

Drainage therapy for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) includes trans-papillary endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD), percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), and trans-gastrointestinal endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). With the development of chemotherapy, many MBO cases end up needing endoscopic reintervention (E-RI) for recurrent biliary obstruction. To achieve a successful E-RI, it is necessary to understand the various findings regarding E-RI in MBO cases reported to date. Therefore, in this review, we focus on E-RI for ERBD of distal MBO, ERBD of hilar MBO, and EUS-BD. To plan an appropriate E-RI strategy for biliary stent occlusion for MBO, the following must be considered on a case-by-case basis: the urgency of the drainage, the cause of the occlusion, the original route of drainage (PTBD/ERBD/EUS-BD), the initial stent used (plastic stent or self-expandable metallic stent), and in the case of self-expandable metallic stents, the type used (fully covered or uncovered). Regardless of the original method of stent placement, if the inflammation caused by obstructive cholangitis is severe and/or the patient is in shock, PTBD should be considered as the first choice. Finally, it is important to keep in mind that in many cases, performing E-RI will be difficult.

Partially covered self-expandable metal stent with antimigratory single flange plays important role during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Background and study aims  Stent migration into the abdominal cavity, which can occur due to stent shortening or stomach mobility, is a critical adverse event (AE) in EUS-HGS. To prevent this AE due to stent shortening, a novel, partially covered self-expandable metal stent with an antimigratory single flange has recently become available in Japan. The present study evaluated the clinical feasibility and safety of EUS-HGS using this novel stent. Patients and methods  We measured stent length in the abdominal cavity and the luminal portion after EUS-HGS using computed tomography (CT) performed 1 day after EUS-HGS (early phase). To evaluate stent shortening and the influence of stomach mobility, we also measured stent length at the same sites on CT performed at least 7 days after EUS-HGS (late phase). Results  Thirty-one patients successfully underwent EUS-HGS using this stent. According to CT in the early phase, stent length in the abdominal cavity was 7.13 ± 2.11 mm and the length of the luminal portion was 53.3 ± 6.27 mm. Conversely, according to CT in the late phase, stent length in the abdominal cavity was 8.55 ± 2.36 mm and the length of the luminal portion was 50.0 ± 8.36 mm. Stent shortening in the luminal portion was significantly greater in the late phase than in the early phase ( P  = 0.04). Conclusions  CT showed that stent migration can occur even with successful stent deployment, due to various factors such as stent shortening. The antimigratory single flange may be helpful to prevent stent migration, but further prospective comparative studies are needed to confirm our results.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Interventions in Liver Disease

If endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails in cases of biliary obstruction and jaundice, percutaneous drains have been traditionally the current second-line option. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with choledocoduodenostomy or hepaticogastrostomy is alternative modality that have shown equivalent or better technical and clinical success compared with percutaneous drainage. Similarly, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage has emerged as a therapeutic option in acute cholecystitis as well. Furthermore, EUS-BD avoids some of the pitfalls of percutaneous drainage. Current research in EUS-BD involves optimizing devices to improve technical and clinical success. In centers with advanced endoscopists trained in these procedures, EUS-BD is an excellent second-line modality.

Expanding indications for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy for patients with insufficient dilatation of the intrahepatic bile duct using a 22G needle combined with a novel 0.018-inch guidewire (with video)

A prerequisite for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) is adequate dilation of the intrahepatic bile duct. Compared with a 19G needle, the 22G needle offers more flexible manipulation and superior ability to achieve bile duct puncture. However, evidence regarding EUS-HGS using a 22G needle remains limited. The present study evaluated the feasibility and safety of EUS-HGS using a novel 0.018-inch guidewire and 22G needle for patients with insufficient intrahepatic bile duct dilation. If the bile duct diameter was <1.5 mm, a 22G needle was used, and the diameter was ≥1.5 mm; puncture with a 19G needle was first attempted, with the 22G needle being inserted if initial bile duct puncture failed. EUS-HGS using the 22G needle was attempted in a total of 10 patients, including one patient with failed insertion of a 19G needle. Median diameter of the puncture site was 1.2 mm (range 0.5-2.5 mm). Bile duct puncture using the 22G needle was successful in all patients. Insertion of the novel 0.018-inch guidewire was also successful in all patients. However, since tract dilation using an ultra-tapered mechanical dilator failed in two patients, tract dilation was performed using a balloon dilator. Finally, stent deployment was successfully performed in all patients. EUS-HGS using a 22G needle with a novel 0.018-inch guidewire appears safe and feasible.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy using a novel laser-cut type partially covered self-expandable metal stent (with video)

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) is of clinical benefit in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, some endoscopists are concerned about the potential risk of adverse events. Bile peritonitis due to bile leakage through the fistula is one of the possible adverse events following EUS-HGS. Recently, a novel laser-cut type partially covered self-expandable metal stent (PCSEMS), which is a dedicated stent for EUS-HGS, has become available. This stent has an uncovered part, despite it being a laser-cut type stent, along with a flared end. In addition, it uses a 7-Fr stent delivery. Therefore, tract dilation might not be needed to deploy the stent, which might reduce the incidence of stent migration. In this study, the safety of EUS-HGS using this novel laser-cut type PCSEMS was evaluated by assessing technical success, which was defined as successful stent deployment, and clinical success, which was defined as reduction in serum total bilirubin levels by 50% and resolution of symptoms related to biliary tract obstruction within 2 weeks. Five patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction underwent EUS-HGS using the novel stent. Stent deployment was successfully performed without tract dilation in four patients, although tract dilation using a balloon catheter was needed in one patient. Clinical success was obtained in all patients, and adverse events including abdominal pain and bile peritonitis were not observed in any of the patients. EUS-HGS without tract dilation can be safely performed using a novel laser-cut type PCSEMS. A prospective comparative study evaluating this stent versus conventional stents is needed to corroborate our results.

Troubleshooting Difficult Bile Duct Access: Advanced ERCP Cannulation Techniques, Percutaneous Biliary Drainage, or EUS-Guided Rendezvous Technique?

Despite experienced hands and availability of various well-designed catheters and wires, selective bile duct cannulation may still fail in 10–20% of cases during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In case standard ERCP cannulation technique fails, salvage options include advanced ERCP cannulation techniques such as double-guidewire technique (DGW) with or without pancreatic stenting and precut papillotomy, percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided Rendezvous (EUS-RV) ERCP. If the pancreatic duct is inadvertently entered during cannulation attempts, DGW technique is a reasonable next step, which can be followed by pancreatic stenting to reduce risks of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Studies suggest that early precut papillotomy is not associated with a higher risk of PEP, while needle-knife fistulotomy is the preferred method. For patients with critical clinical condition who may not be fit for endoscopy, surgically altered anatomy in which endoscopic biliary drainage is not feasible, and non-communicating multisegmental biliary obstruction, PBD has a unique role to provide successful biliary drainage efficiently in this particular population. As endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage techniques advance, EUS-RV ERCP has been increasingly employed to guide bile duct access and cannulation with satisfactory clinical outcomes and is especially valuable for benign pathology at centres where expertise is available. Endoscopists should become familiar with each technique’s advantages and limitations before deciding the most appropriate treatment that is tailored to patient’s anatomy and clinical needs.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To update on recent advances in interventional endoscopic ultrasound (INVEUS) techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of linear echoendoscopes with larger instrument channels and the combined development of new tools and devices have enabled various new applications of minimally invasive endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal interventions of the pancreas, biliary system and peri-gastrointestinal structures. In this review, EUS-guided interventions are discussed and evaluated: drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, access and drainage of bile ducts, gallbladder and pancreatic duct, treatment of gastrointestinal haemorrhage, coeliac plexus block and coeliac plexus neurolysis, fiducial placement, solid and cystic tumour ablation, drug delivery and brachytherapy, gastroenterostomy, angiotherapy and other EUS-guided applications. The EUS-guided interventions are classified based on the available evidence as established or experimental, standardized or nonstandardized procedures in common or rare diseases with well or little known complications and their established or nonestablished treatment.

SUMMARY

Some EUS-guided interventions have sparse published evidence with only single-centre studies, case series or individual case reports, others like drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections have become widely accepted practice. INVEUS has been accepted as an alternative to several surgical approaches, EUS-guided techniques result in faster recovery times, shorter hospital stay and lower costs.

Technical feasibility and safety of one-step deployment of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy using an 8-mm diameter metal stent with a fine-gauge stent delivery system (with video)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Adverse events (AEs) such as bile peritonitis or pneumoperitoneum might occur during procedural steps for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), such as during device exchange and after fistula dilation until stent deployment. Reducing the steps to the EUS-HGS procedure might therefore be ideal to prevent the occurrence of AEs. Recently, a novel, fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) has become available. Because of the fine-gauge stent delivery system (5.9Fr), fistula dilation might not be needed before stent deployment during EUS-HGS. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of one-step EUS-HGS using a novel 8-mm diameter FCSEMS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The primary outcome in this study was technical success, and the secondary outcomes were procedure- and stent-related AEs and clinical success. The technical success of one-step EUS-HGS was defined as successful FCSEMS deployment without any fistula dilation. Procedure time was measured from scope insertion to successful FCSEMS deployment.

RESULTS

One-step EUS-HGS using the novel FCSEMS was attempted on 14 patients. Technical success with a short procedure time (median: 7 min) and clinical success were obtained in all patients. In addition, procedure-related AEs such as bleeding, bile peritonitis, and stent migration during the procedure were not observed in any patients.

CONCLUSIONS

One-step EUS-HGS using the novel FCSEMS with a fine-gauge stent delivery system is technically feasible and shortens the procedure time with no requirement for additional fistula dilation, resulting in a potential reduction in procedure-related AEs.

Evaluation and Management of Malignant Biliary Obstruction

There is no reason to be pollyannaish when approaching patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Although technology has allowed refining diagnosis and resectability of cancers causing biliary obstruction, outcomes have not improved significantly. The previous preponderant place of surgical procedures now is replaced by endoluminal and percutaneous techniques for the management of symptoms of MBO. Because quantity of life often is the primary and sole outcome for evaluation of various interventions, the main focus of patient quality of life may be erroneously deemphasized. Lagging behind scientific advances are the availability of palliative care services and studies of patient-related outcomes.

Relief of biliary obstruction: choosing between endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was originally devised as a novel diagnostic technique to enable endoscopists to stage malignancies and acquire tissue. However, it rapidly advanced toward therapeutic applications and has provided gastroenterologists with the ability to effectively treat and manage advanced diseases in a minimally invasive manner. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has gained considerable attention as an approach to provide relief in malignant and benign biliary obstruction for patients when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails or is not feasible. Such instances occur in those with surgically altered anatomy, gastroduodenal obstruction, periampullary diverticulum or prior transampullary duodenal stenting. While ERCP remains the gold standard, a multitude of studies are showing that EUS-BD can be used as an alternative modality even in patients who could successfully undergo ERCP. This review will shed light on recent EUS-guided advancements and techniques in malignant and benign biliary obstruction.

Endoscopic management of ampullary tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends against diagnostic/therapeutic papillectomy when adenoma is not proven.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasound and abdominal magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for staging of ampullary tumors.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends endoscopic papillectomy in patients with ampullary adenoma without intraductal extension, because of good results regarding outcome (technical and clinical success, morbidity, and recurrence).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends en bloc resection of ampullary adenomas up to 20-30 mm in diameter to achieve R0 resection, for optimizing the complete resection rate, providing optimal histopathology, and reduction of the recurrence rate after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests considering surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas when endoscopic resection is not feasible for technical reasons (e. g. diverticulum, size > 4 cm), and in the case of intraductal involvement (of > 20 mm). Surveillance thereafter is still mandatory.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends direct snare resection without submucosal injection for endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends long-term monitoring of patients after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy, based on duodenoscopy with biopsies of the scar and of any abnormal area, within the first 3 months, at 6 and 12 months, and thereafter yearly for at least 5 years.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Effect of echoendoscope angle on success of guidewire manipulation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND

With endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), guidewire manipulation might be a critically limiting step for nonexperts. However, the causes of difficult guidewire manipulation remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with successful guidewire manipulation.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS between October 2018 and October 2019. We measured scope angle between the long and needle axes of the echoendoscope using still fluoroscopic imaging immediately after puncturing the intrahepatic bile duct. Factors associated with successful guidewire insertion were assessed by multivariable analysis using logistic regression.

RESULT

The influence of the angle between the fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle and echoendoscope on failed guidewire insertion was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Area under the ROC curve was 0.86 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.00 - 0.76), and an angle of 135° offered 88.0 % sensitivity and 82.9 % specificity for predicting successful guidewire insertion. According to multivariable analysis, only angle between the FNA needle and echoendoscope > 135° was independently associated with successful guidewire insertion (odd ratio 0.03, 95 %CI 0.01 - 0.14; P < 0.05), whereas sex, puncture site, and diameter of puncture site were not significant factors. After multivariable analysis, all variables were adjusted using age ≥ 70 or < 70 years, yielding the same results.

CONCLUSION

The angle between the FNA needle and echoendoscope might be associated with successful guidewire manipulation during EUS-HGS. Adjusting this angle to 135° before puncturing the intrahepatic bile duct might be helpful in achieving successful guidewire manipulation during EUS-HGS.

EUS-guided intrahepatic biliary drainage: a large retrospective series and subgroup comparison between percutaneous drainage in hilar stenoses or postsurgical anatomy

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided intrahepatic biliary drainage (EUS-IBD) struggles to find a place in management algorithms, especially compared to percutaneous drainage (PTBD). In the setting of hilar stenoses or postsurgical anatomy data are even more limited. Patients and methods  All consecutive EUS-IBDs performed in our tertiary referral center between 2012 - 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Rendez-vous (RVs), antegrade stenting (AS) and hepatico-gastrostomies (HGs) were compared. The predefined subgroup of EUS-IBD patients with proximal stenosis/surgically-altered anatomy was matched 1:1 with PTBD performed for the same indications. Efficacy, safety and events during follow-up were compared. Results  One hundred four EUS-IBDs were included (malignancies = 87.7 %). These consisted of 16 RVs, 43 ASs and 45 HGs. Technical and clinical success rates were 89.4 % and 96.2 %, respectively. Any-degree, severe and fatal adverse events (AEs) occurred in 23.3 %, 2.9 %, and 0.9 % respectively. Benign indications were more common among RVs while proximal stenoses, surgically-altered anatomy, and disconnected left ductal system among HGs. Procedures were shorter with HGs performed with specifically designed stents (25 vs . 48 minutes, P  = 0.004) and there was also a trend toward less dysfunction with those stents (6.7 % vs . 30 %, P  = 0.09) compared with previous approaches. Among patients with proximal stenosis/surgically-altered anatomy, EUS-IBD vs. PTBD showed higher rates of clinical success (97.4 % vs. 79.5 %, P  = 0.01), reduced post-procedural pain (17.8 % vs. 44.4 %, p = 0.004), shorter median hospital stay (7.5 vs 11.5 days, P  = 0.01), lower rates of stent dysfunction (15.8 % vs. 42.9 %, P  = 0.01), and the mean number of reinterventions was lower (0.4 vs. 2.8, P  < 0.0001). Conclusions  EUS-IBD has high technical and clinical success with an acceptable safety profile. HGs show comparable outcomes, which are likely to further improve with dedicated tools. For proximal strictures and surgically-altered anatomy, EUS-IBD seems superior to PTBD.

Safety and outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage for malignant biliary obstruction using cautery-enabled lumen-apposing metal stent

Background and study aims  There is increasing evidence to suggest that EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a safe and effective treatment alternative for patients with malignant biliary obstructions (MBOs) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Patients and methods  We performed a retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected from patients with MBO who underwent choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) or gallbladder drainage (GBD) between August 2016 and June 2020 using the electrocautery-enabled lumen-apposing metal stents (ECE-LAMS). The primary endpoint was technical and clinical success. Secondary endpoints were adverse events (AEs) and reinterventions. Results  A total of 60 patients were included in the study, with 56 CDS and 4 GBD. Median age was 76 years with 57 % male (34/60). The most common indication for EUS-BD was pancreatic cancer (78 %). Technical success was achieved in 100 % of cases, with a clinical success rate of 91.7 %. Mean total bilirubin pre-procedure was 202 umol/L (normal < 20 umol/L) and 63.8 umol/L post procedure ( P  < .001). Twenty-one patients had bilirubin recorded at 2 weeks post EUS-BD with 20 of 21 patients demonstrating > 50 % reduction in bilirubin (mean bilirubin reduction 75 %). AEs occurred in 12 of 60 patients (20 %), all of which were mild. The reintervention rate was 11.7 % (7/60). Stent occlusion occurred in 10 of 60 patients (16.7 %) with a mean time to stent occlusion of 46.2 days (3-133). Stent patency of 83.3 % was observed with a mean follow up of 7.9 months. Conclusion  EUS-CDS and GBD using ECE-LAMS are effective EUS-based techniques for managing patients with MBO. AEs are usually mild and resolved by reintervention.

Antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant treatment does not increase hemorrhagic adverse events during EUS-guided biliary drainage

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

No data appear to have been reported regarding bleeding risk among patients receiving antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant treatment (AP/AC) during EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD) procedures. The aim of this study was to assess whether hemorrhagic adverse events associated with EUS-BD are increased in patients on AP/AC.

METHODS

Patients receiving AP/AC who underwent EUS-BD were retrospectively enrolled between May 2015 and August 2019. Patients who did not receive AP/AC and underwent EUS-BD in the same period were also enrolled as a control group.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-five patients who underwent EUS-BD were enrolled in this study. Among these, 154 patients were allocated to the control group and 41 patients to the AP/AC group. Overall frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly between the control group (16.2%, 25/154) and AC/AP group (17.1%, 6/41; P = .80). The overall bleeding event rate was 3.6% (7/195), with no significant difference between the 2 groups. No thromboembolic events were observed with or without interruption of AP/AC. According to logistic regression analysis, the use of AP/AC was not a risk factor significantly associated with bleeding events (odds ratio, 2.96; 95% confidence interval, .56-14.0; P = .18). On the other hand, a long procedure time (>20 minutes) was an independent risk factor associated with bleeding events.

CONCLUSIONS

Bleeding events appear to be infrequent among patients who undergo EUS-BD while continuing AP/AC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided anastomosis: Is it ready for prime time?

Significant advancements in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage procedures and EUS-guided anastomosis have recently been described. The described procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, biliary drainage, pancreatic duct drainage, gallbladder drainage, and gastroenterostomy. These procedures have been made possible with novel devices that can reduce the difficulties of the procedures and potentially reducing the risk of adverse events. The procedures are also becoming standardized, which is essential for dissemination of the techniques. Furthermore, results from randomized studies are becoming available showing definite benefits associated with these procedures. In this paper, we will provide a review on EUS-guided anastomotic procedures.

Comparison Study between Double Bare Covered and Fully Covered Metal Stent during Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy (with Video)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is a common technique for biliary drainage. However, EUS-CDS is associated with adverse events such as cystic duct obstruction, stent dislocation, and stent kinking caused by powerful axial force. A novel double-bare, covered self-expandable metal stent (DBSEMS) has recently become available in Japan. This pilot study evaluated the clinical outcomes of EUS-CDS using DBSEMS.

METHOD

We retrospectively enrolled patients with malignant lower bile duct obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS due to failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). EUS-CDS procedures performed between April 2017 and March 2018 used a conventional fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS), and those performed between April 2018 and April 2019 used DBSEMS. In all stents, the diameter was 10 mm and length was 6 cm.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients underwent EUS-CDS, performed using conventional FCSEMS (n = 12) and DBSEMS (n = 10). Four complications occurred with FCSEMS: cholangitis due to kinking (n = 3) and stent dislocation (n = 1). With DBSEMS, there were no instances of kinking, and reflux cholangitis that developed in 1 patient due to duodenal obstruction was resolved by duodenal stenting. Elapsed time to recurrent biliary obstruction was longer with DBSEMS than FCSEMS (200 vs. 99 days), although the difference was not significant (p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

BSEMS can help prevent cholangitis due to stent kinking after EUS-CDS, thus increasing stent patency.

ELEMENT TRIAL: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage of first intent with a lumen-apposing metal stent vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography in the management of malignant distal biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound guided-biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a promising alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, its growth has been limited by a lack of multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCT) and dedicated devices. A dedicated EUS-BD lumen- apposing metal stent (LAMS) has recently been developed with the potential to greatly facilitate the technique and safety of the procedure. We aim to compare a first intent approach with EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy with a dedicated biliary LAMS vs. standard ERCP in the management of malignant distal biliary obstruction.

METHODS

The ELEMENT trial is a multicenter single-blinded RCT involving 130 patients in nine Canadian centers. Patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or borderline resectable malignant distal biliary obstruction meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized to EUS-choledochoduodenostomy using a LAMS or ERCP with traditional metal stent insertion in a 1:1 proportion in blocks of four. Patients with hilar obstruction, resectable cancer, or benign disease are excluded. The primary endpoint is the rate of stent dysfunction needing re-intervention. Secondary outcomes include technical and clinical success, interruptions in chemotherapy, rate of surgical resection, time to stent dysfunction, and adverse events.

DISCUSSION

The ELEMENT trial is designed to assess whether EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a dedicated LAMS is superior to conventional ERCP as a first-line endoscopic drainage approach in malignant distal biliary obstruction, which is an important and timely question that has not been addressed using an RCT study design.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registry name: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: NCT03870386. Date of registration: 03/12/2019.