Prospective clinical study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy with direct metallic stent placement using a forward-viewing echoendoscope

Forward viewing liner echoendoscopy for therapeutic interventions

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures using the forward-viewing convex EUS (FV-EUS) have been reviewed based on the articles reported to date. The earliest reported procedure is the drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts using FV-EUS. However, the study on drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts focused on showing that drainage is possible with FV-EUS rather than leveraging its features. Subsequently, studies describing the characteristics of FV-EUS have been reported. By using FV-EUS in EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy, double punctures in the gastrointestinal tract can be avoided. In postoperative modified anatomical cases, using the endoscopic function of FV-EUS, procedures such as bile duct drainage from anastomosis, pancreatic duct drainage from the afferent limb, and abscess drainage from the digestive tract have been reported. When a perpendicular puncture to the gastrointestinal tract is required or when there is a need to insert the endoscope deep into the gastrointestinal tract, FV-EUS is considered among the options.

Clinical utility of the forward-viewing echoendoscope in patients after pancreatoduodenectomy: A prospective study

Background and Objectives

Endoscopic treatment of obstructive jaundice and pancreatitis due to hepaticojejunostomy (H-J), pancreatojejunostomy (P-J) strictures, and tumor recurrence after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is technically challenging. Treatment of P-J strictures results in poor outcomes. Although conventional EUS that has an oblique view is not suitable for such patients, forward-viewing EUS (FV-EUS) may become a useful option. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of FV-EUS in patients who have undergone PD.

Methods

Patients with PD who were scheduled to undergo diagnosis and treatment using FV-EUS for H-J or P-J lesions were enrolled in this single-center prospective study. After observation of the P-J and H-J using FV-EUS according to a predetermined protocol, treatment using FV-EUS was performed as needed.

Results

A total of 30 patients were enrolled, and FV-EUS was used to observe P-J and H-J in 24 and 28 patients, respectively. The detection rates of P-J and H-J by endoscopy were 50% (12/24) and 96.4% (27/28), respectively, and by EUS were 70.8% (17/24) and 100% (28/28), respectively. Of these, P-J and H-J were found by endoscopy only after EUS observation in 3 and 1 patient, respectively. The success rates of endoscopic treatment using FV-EUS were 66.7% (2/3), 95.2% (20/21), and 25% (1/4) for benign P-J strictures, benign H-J strictures, and tumor recurrence, respectively.

Conclusions

Endoscopic treatment using FV-EUS is feasible and effective for patients after PD. Moreover, FV-EUS increases the P-J lesion detection rate by adding EUS observation.

Refractory benign biliary stricture due to chronic pancreatitis in two patients treated using endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy fistula creation: case reports

Benign biliary stricture (BBS) is a complication of chronic pancreatitis (CP). Despite endoscopic biliary stenting, some patients do not respond to treatment, and they experience recurrent cholangitis. We report two cases of CP with refractory BBS treated using endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) fistula creation. A 50-year-old woman and a 60-year-old man both presented with obstructive jaundice secondary to BBS due to alcoholic CP. They underwent repeated placement of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent for biliary strictures. However, the strictures persisted, causing repeated episodes of cholangitis. Therefore, an EUS-CDS was performed. The stents were eventually removed and the patients became stent-free. These fistulas have remained patent without cholangitis for more than 2.5 years. Fistula creation using EUS-CDS is an effective treatment option for BBS.

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.

Comparable Efficacy of Laser-Cut and Braided Self Expanding Metallic Biliary Stent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), endoscopic biliary drainage is the treatment of choice. Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are mainly used for this purpose, and data is limited on the comparative outcomes of laser-cut versus braided SEMS. Herein, we performed the first systematic review and meta-analysis to study the effectiveness and safety of braided and laser-cut SEMS in MBO.

METHODS

Multiple databases, including Medline, Scopus, and Embase, were searched (in May 2022) using specific terms for studies evaluating the outcomes of braided and laser-cut SEMS in MBO. Outcomes of interest were technical and clinical success, recurrent biliary obstruction, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in the final analysis. (Laser-cut: 271 patients, 46% females, mean age 70 years; and braided: 282 patients, 47% females, mean age 72 years). The pooled rate of technical success and clinical success with laser-cut SEMS was 99% (95% CI [95-99; I2 = 0%]), 86% [60-96; I2 = 74%], and 98% [96-99; I2 = 0%], 89% [74-95; I2 = 78%] with braided. The pooled rate of recurrent biliary obstruction with laser-cut SEMS was 26% [14-43; I2 = 88%] and 12% [5-27; I2 = 56%) with braided. Pooled total adverse events were 11% [5-21; I2 = 77%] in laser-cut and 12% [6-24; I2 = 63%] in braided.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis demonstrates similar clinical outcomes with laser-cut and braided SEMS in MBO. Given the comparable performance, a cost-effectiveness analysis might help in choosing one type versus another in patients with MBO.

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.

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.

Efficacy, Feasibility, and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle biopsy (FNB) has become an efficient method for diagnosing gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs). However, recent guidelines have not regarded FNB as the primary strategy for diagnosing GI SELs. We performed this study to systematically measure the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of EUS-FNB in diagnosing GI SELs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relevant studies were searched in PubMed and EMBASE and published after January 2015 were included. The overall rates of diagnostic yield, technical success, and adverse events were calculated as outcome measures. The Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to evaluate the quality of the trials, funnel plots and Egger's test were used to measure publication bias, and sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to explore the variance of heterogeneity and sensitivity, respectively.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies analyzing 969 patients between 2015 and 2020 were included. Studies showed little change in sensitivity, and 13 were considered high quality. A certain degree of publication bias existed in the diagnostic accuracy rate. The overall rates of diagnostic yield, technical success, and adverse events were [85.69% (95% confidence interval (CI): 82.73-88.22, I2=41.8%), 98.83% (95% CI: 96.73-99.97, I2=54.3%), and 1.26% (95% CI: 0.35-2.54, I2=0.0%)]. No clinical influencing factors were identified in the subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB is a promising technology with a relatively superior diagnostic yield, technical success, and security, which is an optimal option for the diagnosis of SELs.

Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided choledochoduodenostomy without fistula dilation using a stent with a 5.9‐Fr delivery system: Comparison to a conventional procedure with fistula dilation

Objectives

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS‐CDS) without fistula dilation using a novel self‐expandable metal stent (SEMS).

Methods

This retrospective study examined patients who underwent EUS‐CDS for malignant distal biliary obstruction between October 2017 and May 2021 at the National Cancer Center, Japan. The primary outcome was a technical success without fistula dilation. Secondary outcomes were the overall technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), procedure time, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and time to RBO (TRBO).

Results

Forty‐one patients were enrolled; 31 patients underwent EUS‐CDS with fistula dilation using a conventional SEMS with 7.5–8.5‐Fr delivery system (conventional SEMS group), and 10 patients underwent EUS‐CDS without fistula dilation using the novel SEMS with a 5.9‐Fr delivery system (novel SEMS group). In the novel SEMS group, the rate of technical success without fistula dilation was 90%. There were no differences in overall technical success (100% vs. 97%, p = 1.00), clinical success (80% vs. 90%, p = 0.58), and overall AEs (10% vs. 23%, p = 0.65) rates between the novel and conventional SEMS groups. In the novel SEMS group, no early AEs were observed and no bile leakage into the abdominal cavity was observed on the computed tomography scan after the procedure. The median procedure time was significantly shorter in the novel SEMS group (17 min vs. 24 min, p = 0.03). RBO and median TRBO did not differ between the 2 groups.

Conclusions

EUS‐CDS without fistula dilation using the novel SEMS with a 5.9‐Fr delivery system is technically feasible, straightforward, quick, and safe.

Clinical value of preferred endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade surgery in the treatment of extrahepatic bile duct malignant obstruction

OBJECTIVES

To explore the clinical value of preferred ultrasound endoscopic guided biliary drainage in patients with extrahepatic biliary obstruction with intrahepatic biliary ectasis.

METHODS

A total of 58 patients with malignant obstruction and intrahepatic bile duct expansion, including 32 males, 26 females and median age 65 (58‒81) were selected. A prospective randomized controlled study was randomized into EUS-AG and ERCP-BD, with 28 patients in EUS-AG and 30 in ERCP-BD. The efficacy of the two treatments, operation success rate, operation time, the incidence of complications, hospitalization days, cost, unimpeded stent duration, and survival time were compared.

RESULTS

1) The surgical success rate in group EUS-AG was 100%, and in group, ERCP-BD was 96.67%. There was no statistical difference in surgical success rate in the two groups (p>0.05). 2) Average operating time in EUS-AG was (23.69±11.57) min, and in ERCP-BD was (36.75±17.69) min. The difference between the two groups has statistical significance (p<0.05). 3) The clinical symptoms of successful patients were significantly relieved. Compared with the preoperative procedure, the differences in group levels had statistical significance (p<0.05); TBIL, ALP, WBC and CRP levels, no statistical significance difference in groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

EUS-AG operation has short time, low incidence of complications, safe, effective, and can be used as the preferred treatment plan for patients with extrahepatic biliary duct malignant obstruction associated with intrahepatic biliary duct expansion; EUS-AG operation has more unique clinical advantages for patients with altered gastrointestinal anatomy or upper gastrointestinal obstruction.

Efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents or self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is becoming an option for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are replacing self-expandable metal stents (SEMS). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAMS and SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA protocols. Electronic databases were searched for studies on EUS-CDS. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success, reintervention, and adverse events. We used the random effects model with the DerSimonian-Laird estimation, and the results were depicted using forest plots. Subgroup analyses were also performed with data stratified by selected variable.

RESULTS

Overall, 31 studies (820 patients) were included. The pooled rates of clinical and technical success were 93.6 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 88.6 %-96.5 %) and 94.8 % (95 %CI 90.2 %-97.3 %) for LAMS, and 91.7 % (95 %CI 88.1 %-94.2 %) and 92.7 % (95 %CI 89.9 %-94.9 %) for SEMS, respectively. The pooled rates of adverse events were 17.1 % (95 %CI 12.5 %-22.8 %) for LAMS and 18.3 % (95 %CI 14.3 %-23.0 %) for SEMS. The pooled rates of reintervention were 10.9 % (95 %CI 7.7 %-15.3 %) for LAMS and 13.9 % (95 %CI 9.6 %-19.7 %) for SEMS. Subgroup analyses confirmed these results.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that LAMS and SEMS are comparable in terms of efficacy for EUS-CDS. Clinical and technical success, post-procedure adverse events, and reintervention rates were similar between LAMS and SEMS use; however, adverse events require further investigation.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: Are we there yet?

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the mainstay procedure of choice for management of obstructive biliary disease. While ERCP is widely performed with high success rates, the procedure is not feasible in every patient such as cases of non-accessible papilla. In the setting of unsuccessful ERCP, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become a promising alternative to surgical bypass and percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD). A variety of different forms of EUS-BD have been described, allowing for both intrahepatic and extrahepatic approaches. Recent studies have reported high success rates utilizing EUS-BD for both transpapillary and transluminal drainage, with fewer adverse events when compared to PTBD. Advancements in novel technologies designed specifically for EUS-BD have led to increased success rates as well as improved safety profile for the procedure. The techniques of EUS-BD are yet to be fully standardized and are currently performed by highly trained advanced endoscopists. The aim of our review is to highlight the different EUS-guided interventions for achieving biliary drainage and to both assess the progress that has been made in the field as well as consider what the future may hold.

Advances in stent therapy for malignant biliary obstruction

Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), result of pancreatobiliary diseases is a challenging condition. Most patients with MBO are inoperable at the time of diagnosis, and the disease is poorly controlled using external-beam radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Biliary stent therapy emerged as a promising strategy for alleviating MBO and prolonging life. However, physicians find it difficult to determine the optimal type of biliary stent for the palliation of MBO. Here, we review the safety and efficacy of available biliary stents, used alone or in combination with brachytherapy, photodynamic therapy and advanced chemotherapeutics, in patients with pancreatobiliary malignancies and put forward countermeasures involving stent obstruction. Furthermore, 3D-printing stents and nanoparticle-loaded stents have broad application prospects for fabricating tailor-made biliary stents.

GRUPUGE PERSPECTIVE: Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an alternative to percutaneous and surgical drainage in bile duct obstruction when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. EUS-BD can be achieved with several techniques, including EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), anterograde transpapillary stent placement, choledochoduodenostomy (CDS), and rendez-vous technique. Lately, with increased experience and development of directed equipment, elevated technical and clinical success as well of lower adverse event rates have been reported. In this article, GRUPUGE presents an updated perspective of the potential role of EUS-guided biliary drainage, addressing the selection criteria and technical issues of different techniques and analyzing recent data on their safety and efficacy.

Risk factor analysis for adverse events and stent dysfunction of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although the technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is becoming standardized, its safety issues have not been sufficiently investigated. Therefore, we aimed to identify factors associated with adverse events and stent patency in EUS-CDS.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS between September 2003 and July 2017 were included. Technical/clinical success, adverse events and stent dysfunctions were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 151 patients underwent EUS-CDS. In nine patients, procedures were discontinued before puncture. Technical and clinical success rates were 96.5% (137/142) and 98.5% (135/137), respectively. The adverse event rate was 20.4% (29/142). As a risk factor for peritonitis, plastic stents (PS) showed a significantly high odds ratio (OR) compared with covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMS; OR, 4.31; P = 0.030). CSEMS cases showed a significantly longer patency period than PS cases (329 vs 89 days; HR, 0.35; P < 0.001). As a risk factor for early stent dysfunction (within 14 days), stent direction to the oral side showed a significantly high OR (OR, 43.47; P < 0.001). In cases with oblique-viewing EUS, double penetration of the duodenum occurred at significantly higher frequency than in cases with forward-viewing EUS (7.0 vs 0.0%; P = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Plastic stents and stent direction to the oral side were risk factors for peritonitis and early stent dysfunction, respectively. Using covered self-expandable metal stents and changing stent direction to the anal side seemed appropriate to prevent peritonitis and early stent dysfunction.

Outcomes of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy as primary drainage for distal biliary obstruction with covered self-expandable metallic stents

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is an alternative therapy for percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Outcomes of EUS-CDS for distal biliary tract obstruction with a covered self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a primary drainage technique are unclear because there are few relevant reports. This study aimed to determine outcomes in patients undergoing EUS-CDS using SEMS as the primary drainage technique for malignant distal biliary duct obstruction. Patients and methods  This retrospective study was conducted at Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, from January 2010 to July 2018, using data from our database. Results  EUS-CDS was performed as a primary drainage technique for 92 patients. The technical success rate was 92.8 %, and the clinical success rate was 91.6 %. The overall incidence of adverse events was 15.7 %. The median stent patency time for the EUS-CDS was 396 days. Nineteen patients required re-intervention because of cholangitis or jaundice. Conclusion  EUS-CDS as a primary drainage technique using SEMS has high technical and clinical success rates. It should be considered an effective drainage method with respect to long-term stent patency, low re-intervention rates, and absence of severe complications.

Radiologic Assessment for Endoscopic US-guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic US-guided biliary drainage (BD) is performed for various types of biliary obstruction and is mainly indicated for unsuccessful conventional transpapillary endoscopic retrograde cholangiodrainage. In endoscopic US BD, an extra-anatomic drainage route between the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and the biliary system is created with a covered metallic stent or plastic stent. Procedural types of endoscopic US BD include hepaticogastrostomy, hepaticojejunostomy (after gastrectomy), choledochoduodenostomy, hepaticoduodenostomy, and endoscopic US-guided gallbladder drainage. The technical and clinical success rates of endoscopic US BD are reported to be 94%-97% and 88%-100%, respectively. CT is crucial both in preprocedural assessment and postprocedural monitoring. CT is used to determine the indications for endoscopic US BD, which include the type of biliary obstruction, collateral vessels in the puncture route, ascites, the volume of the liver segment, the distribution of an intrahepatic tumor, and GI tract patency. After endoscopic US BD, common subclinical findings are a small amount of intraperitoneal gas, localized edematous change in the GI tract, a notch in the placed stent, and localized biliary dilatation caused by stent placement. Stent malfunction after endoscopic US BD is caused by impaction of debris and/or food, stent migration into the GI tract, or tumor overgrowth and/or hyperplasia. Complications that can occur include internal stent migration, intraperitoneal biloma, arterial bleeding or pseudoaneurysm, perforation of the GI tract, and portobiliary fistula. The incidence of clinical endoscopic US BD-related complications is 11%-23%. ^©RSNA, 2020.

EUS-guided biliary drainage for difficult cannulation

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been recognized as a new alternative to failed ERCP. The alternatives for failed/impossible ERCP in cases of difficult and selective bile duct cannulation include percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) with precut papillotomy. EUS-BD is reportedly more convenient than PTBD and more successful than precut papillotomy, suggesting that EUS-BD is the next step following failed/impossible ERCP.

Lumen-apposing metal stents in interventional endoscopy: a state-of-the-art review with focus on technical and clinical successes and complications

Endoscopic transmural drainage is considered the initial treatment option for pancreatic fluid collections. Recently, lumen-apposing metal stents have been introduced for pancreatic fluid collections drainage under endoscopic ultrasound guidance, in addition to evolving data in bile duct and gallbladder drainage. We aimed to perform systematic review with reporting pooled data analysis on technical success, clinical success and complications rate of endoscopic ultrasound-guided lumen-apposing metal stents uses. A MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE search for all studies on lumen-apposing metal stents uses in pancreatic, biliary and other indications was conducted. Data regarding safety, complications and yield were extracted and included in the final pooled analysis. Overall, 19 articles dealing with pancreatic fluid collections drainage, 18 articles reporting on bile duct drainage and 19 articles relevant to gallbladder drainage were identified. Technical and clinical successes in all disease conditions were high and reached more than 95%. Complications rate in pancreatic fluid collections, bile duct and gallbladder drainages were 12%, 11.2% and 9.8%, respectively. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided lumen-apposing metal stents is technically feasible with very high success rate and acceptable complications rate.

EUS-guided biliary drainage is equivalent to ERCP for primary treatment of malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Although endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is standard of care for malignant biliary obstruction, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a primary treatment has become increasingly utilized. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of EUS-BD for primary treatment of malignant biliary obstruction and comparison to traditional ERCP. Methods  Individualized search strategies were developed through November 2018 using PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A cumulative meta-analysis was performed by calculating pooled proportions. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies comparing EUS-BD versus ERCP. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran Q test or I ² statistics, and publication bias by funnel plot and Egger's tests. Results  Seven studies (n = 193 patients; 57.5 % males) evaluating primary EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction were included. Mean age was 67.4 years (2.3) followed an average of 5.4 months (1.0). For primary EUS-BD, pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse event (AE) rates were 95 % (95 % CI 91 - 98), 97 % (95 % CI 93 - 100), and 19 % (95 % CI 11 - 29), respectively. Among EUS-BD and ERCP comparator studies, technical and clinical success, and total AEs were not different with lower rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis and reintervention among the EUS-BD group. Conclusion  Primary EUS-BD is an effective treatment with few AE. Comparing EUS-BD versus ERCP, EUS-BD has comparable efficacy and improved safety as a primary treatment for malignant biliary obstruction. Further randomized trials should be performed to identify patient populations and clinical scenarios in which primary EUS-BD would be most appropriate.

New Era of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition: Next-Generation Sequencing by Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a lethal cancer with an increasing incidence. Despite improvements in chemotherapy, patients with pancreatic cancer continue to face poor prognoses. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the primary method for obtaining tissue samples of pancreatic cancer. Due to advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, multiple parallel sequencing can be applied to EUS-TA samples. Genomic biomarkers for therapeutic stratification in pancreatic cancer are still lacking, however, NGS can unveil potential predictive genomic biomarkers of treatment response. Thus, the importance of NGS using EUS-TA samples is becoming recognized. In this review, we discuss the recent advances in EUS-TA application for NGS of pancreatic cancer.

Diagnostic-therapeutic management of bile duct cancer

Biliary tract cancer, or cholangiocarcinoma, comprises a heterogeneous group of malignant tumors that can emerge at any part of the biliary tree. This group is the second most common type of primary liver cancer. Diagnosis is usually based on symptoms, which may be heterogeneous, and nonspecific biomarkers in serum and biopsy specimens, as well as on imaging techniques. Endoscopy-based diagnosis is essential, since it enables biopsy specimens to be taken. In addition, it can help with locoregional staging of distal tumors. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is a key technique for the evaluation and treatment of malignant biliary tumors. Correct staging of cholangiocarcinoma is essential in order to be able to determine the degree of resectability and assess the results of treatment. The tumor is staged based on the TNM classification of the American Joint Committee on Cancer. The approach will depend on the classification of the tumor. Thus, some patients with early-stage disease could benefit from surgery; complete surgical resection is the cornerstone of cure. However, only a minority of patients are diagnosed in the early stages and are suitable candidates for resection. In the subset of patients diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease, chemotherapy has been used to improve outcome and to delay tumor progression. The approach to biliary tract tumors should be multidisciplinary, involving experienced endoscopists, oncologists, radiologists, and surgeons.

Current Status of Endoscopic Ultrasound Techniques for Pancreatic Neoplasms

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) now plays an important role in the management of pancreatic neoplasms. There are various types of pancreatic neoplasms, from benign to malignant lesions, and the role of EUS ranges from the imaging diagnosis to treatment. EUS is useful for the detection, characterization, and tissue acquisition of pancreatic lesions. Recent advancement of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS and elastography enables better characterization of pancreatic lesions. In addition to these enhanced EUS imaging techniques, EUS-guided tissue acquisition is now the standard procedure to establish the pathological diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasms. While these diagnostic roles of EUS have been established, EUS-guided interventions such as ablation and drainage are also increasingly utilized in the management of pancreatic neoplasms. However, most of these EUS-guided interventions are not yet standardized in terms of techniques and devices and thus need further investigations.

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

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

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

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

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of the biliary system: Techniques, indications and future perspectives

Over the last decade, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has evolved into a widely accepted alternative to the percutaneous approach in cases of biliary obstruction with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). The available evidence suggests that, in experienced hands, EUS-BD might even replace ERCP as the first-line procedure in specific situations such as malignant distal bile duct obstruction. The aim of this review is to summarize the available data on EUS-BD and propose an evidence-based algorithm clarifies the role of the different EUS-BD techniques in the management of benign and malignant biliary obstructive disease.

What should be known prior to performing EUS?

Direct referral of patients for EUS – instead of preprocedural consultation with the endosonographer – has become standard practice (like for other endoscopic procedures) as it is time- and cost-effective. To ensure appropriate indications and safe examinations, the endosonographer should carefully consider what information is needed before accepting the referral. This includes important clinical data regarding relevant comorbidities, the fitness of the patient to consent and undergo the procedure, and the anticoagulation status. In addition, relevant findings from other imaging methods to clarify the clinical question may be necessary. Appropriate knowledge and management of the patients’ anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, antibiotic prophylaxis, and sedation issues can avoid unnecessary delays and unsafe procedures. Insisting on optimal preparation, appropriate indications, and clear clinical referral questions will increase the quality of the outcomes of EUS. In this paper, important practical issues regarding EUS preparations are raised and discussed from different points of view.

Prospective multicenter study of primary EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a covered metal stent

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly reported as a salvage technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, but it is still controversial whether EUS-BD can replace transpapillary biliary stenting. Therefore, we conducted this multicenter, prospective study of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) using a covered metallic stent (CMS) as primary biliary drainage for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO).

Methods:

Patients with unresectable distal MBO without any prior drainage are enrolled. Primary endpoint is a technical success and secondary endpoints are adverse events, functional success, and recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) of EUS-CDS. Clinical outcomes were compared between EUS-CDS and transpapillary stenting as a control.

Results:

A total of 34 patients were enrolled in 10 Japanese institutions. The cause of MBO was pancreatic cancer in 28 patients. Median tumor size and common bile duct diameter were 31 and 13 mm, respectively. Technical success rate was 97% with a median procedure time of 25 min and functional success rate was 100%. The rate of RBO was 29% and the causes of RBO were nontumor related: Migration in 18%, sludge/food impaction in 9%, and stent impaction to the duodenal wall in 3%. Other adverse events were abdominal pain in 6% and cholecystitis in 9%. A median cumulative time to RBO was 11.3 months. The rate of RBO and cumulative time to RBO of EUS-CDS were comparable to those of transpapillary stenting (36% and 9.1 months, respectively).

Conclusion:

EUS-CDS using a CMS as primary biliary drainage was technically feasible and its safety appeared comparable to transpapillary stenting.

Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Success and event rates of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage vary with techniques, and results from different studies remain inconsistent.

Objective

We conducted a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage and compare the outcomes of current procedures.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Web of knowledge to identify studies reporting technical success, clinical success and complication rates of EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques to estimate their clinical and technical efficacy and safety.

Results

We identified 17 studies including a total of 686 patients. The overall clinical success and technical success rates were respectively 84% confidence interval (CI) 95% (80-88) and 96% CI 95% (93-98) for hepaticogastrostomy, and respectively 87% CI 95% (82-91) and 95% CI 95 (91-97) for choledochoduodenostomy. Reported adverse event rates were significantly higher (p = 0.01) for hepaticogastrostomy (29% CI 95% (24-34)) compared to choledochoduodenostomy (20% CI 95% (16-25)). Compared with hepaticogastrostomy, the pooled odds ratio for the complication rate of choledochoduodenostomy was 2.01 (1.25; 3.24) (p = 0.0042), suggesting that choledochoduodenostomy might be safer than hepaticogastrostomy.

Conclusion

The available literature suggests choledochoduodenostomy may be a safer approach compared to hepaticogastrostomy. Randomized controlled trials with sufficiently large cohorts are needed to compare techniques and confirm these findings.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasonography Guided Biliary Drainage and Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage in the Management of Malignant Obstructive Jaundice After Failed ERCP

AIMS

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasonography guided biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in the management of malignant obstructive jaundice after failed ERCP.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study on 66 consecutive patients with malignant obstructive jaundice admitted to our hospital between January 2014 and January 2016 [corrected]. Patients were performed endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage in 36 cases (group A) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in 30 cases (group B) according to the results of the draw. Data on the following variables were compared between the 2 groups: the technical success rate, the clinical success rate, complications, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

There was statistically significant difference in the clinical success rate (88.89% vs. 66.67%; χ=4.84), complications (5.56% vs. 23.33%; χ=4.39), length of hospital stay (11.54±3.73 d vs. 15.68±6.56 d; t=8.17) and hospital costs (23.52±8.44 thousand yuan vs. 32.81±6.06 thousand yuan; t=16.28) (P<0.05) between group A and group B. The technical success rate was higher in groups A than that in group B, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (94.44% vs. 86.67%; χ=1.20; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of malignant obstructive jaundice, endoscopic ultrasonography guided biliary drainage is safer and more effective than percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage when performed by experienced practitioners after failed ERCP. Its more widespread use is recommended.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ERCP-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) is a criterion standard treatment for malignant biliary obstruction when curative surgery is not an option. Alternative methods such as percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage would significantly lower the quality of life. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been developed and performed by experienced endoscopists. Therefore, the aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD compared with ERCP in malignant biliary obstruction.

METHODS

The prospective randomized controlled study was conducted, and 30 patients were enrolled: 15 for each EUS-BD and ERCP-BD arms. The technical success, procedural time, clinical success, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty patients had extrahepatic malignant biliary tract obstruction (19 men, 11 women). Twenty-seven patients had unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas, 1 patient had distal common bile duct cancer, and 2 patients had metastatic malignant lymphadenopathy. There were no significant differences both in terms of technical success rate and clinical success rate (100% vs 93% and 93% vs 100% in ERCP-BD vs EUS-BD, respectively; P = 1.00, P = 1.00). Four patients (31%) had tumor ingrowth-caused stent dysfunction in the ERCP-BD group, whereas 2 patients had food impaction and 2 patients had stent migration in the EUS-BD group. No significant procedure-related adverse events occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective randomized controlled study suggests that EUS-BD has similar safety to ERCP-BD. EUS-BD was not superior to ERCP-BD in terms of relief of malignant biliary obstruction. EUS-BD may have fewer cases of tumor ingrowth but may also have more cases of food impaction or stent migration. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01421836.).

Efficacy of the 6-mm fully covered self-expandable metal stent during endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy as a primary biliary drainage for the cases estimated difficult endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is performed as an alternative to the percutaneous or surgical approach. Despite high success rates, the adverse events rate is high. Recently, we used 6-mm fully covered self-expandable metal stents to prevent adverse events and allow easy re-intervention. The purposes were to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and clinical efficacy.

METHODS

A prospective study to confirm the safety of EUS-HGS was carried out in six patients, followed by a trial to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of EUS-HGS in approximately 12 additional patients. We permitted a total of 18 to 20 patients in consideration of possibility such as the deviation after providing informed consent.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent EUS-HGS. No treatment-related adverse events described in the safety assessment criteria were seen. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 95%. The adverse event rate was 15%. Focal cholangitis was seen in two patients and fever in one patient. All cases were treated conservatively. Stent dysfunction was seen in 10 patients. The causes of stent dysfunction were biliary sludge (n = 6) and stent dislocation (n = 4). In nine cases, a new stent was easily inserted. Percutaneous drainage was selected in only one patient because of worsening general condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The 6-mm fully covered self-expandable metal stent is safe and effective, especially for avoiding serious adverse events and allowing easy re-intervention. (UMIN000006785).

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

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

Long-term outcomes of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a lumen-apposing metal stent for malignant distal biliary obstruction: a prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) using conventional tubular stents has been successfully performed. However, EUS-CDS carries a high risk of bile leakage with attendant adverse events. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the long-term outcome of EUS-CDS using a dedicated lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS).

METHODS

Nineteen patients (mean age, 70.6 years; 12 men) with unresectable malignant diseases were treated in 5 tertiary referral centers. EUS-CDS was performed using a fully covered LAMS with a cautery-enhanced delivery system for EUS-CDS.

RESULTS

All stents were successfully deployed without any adverse events. Jaundice improved in 79% of the patients within 7 days and finally in 95%. In 95% of patients the stents remained in good anastomotic position without migration or dislocation during the follow-up period (median, 184 days; range, 12-819). One patient had a fever the day after stent placement. During the follow-up period 5 patients had secondary stent obstruction because of food residue (n = 2), kinking (n = 1), suspected tumor ingrowth (n = 1), and spontaneous dislodgement (n = 1). Five patients developed obstruction in the second portion of the duodenum. The overall adverse event rate was 36.8% (7/19), mostly with mild severity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the novel dedicated LAMS used has high technical and clinical success rates for EUS-CDS. The adverse events and patency rates are inferior to the historically reported data of a conventional transpapillary metal stent. Development of a more suitable dedicated LAMS is anticipated.

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

Background and Objectives:

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

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusion:

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

EUS-guided biliary drainage: A comprehensive review of the literature

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a technique for gaining biliary access when ERCP fails. This article gives a comprehensive review on the role and technique of EUS-BD. Moreover, we propose an algorithm guiding the clinician when to consider EUS-BD after failed ERCP or in anticipated difficult cannulations.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Techniques for Accessing and Draining the Biliary System and the Pancreatic Duct

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails to decompress the biliary system or the pancreatic duct, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary or pancreatic access and drainage can be used. Data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. The outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage seem equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP, whereas only retrospective studies are available for pancreatic duct drainage. In this article, revision of the technical and clinical status and the current evidence of interventional EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage are presented.

Efficacy of a newly developed dilator for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of a newly developed dilator for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage (ES Dilator).

METHODS

Fourteen consecutive patients who had undergone EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) with the ES Dilator were identified from a prospectively maintained database and enrolled in the study group. Fourteen other patients who had undergone EUS-CDS without the dilator just prior to its introduction were analyzed as the control group. A historical cohort study was carried out comparing the two groups. The main outcome measurement was the procedure time. The technical success rate and early AE rate were also compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, sex and etiology of biliary obstruction. The utilization rate of a plastic stent was higher in the control group (36% vs 0%). The technical success rate was 100% in both groups. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the study group than in the control group (27 ± 7 min vs 44 ± 26 min, P = 0.026). Additionally, there were no patients who required more than 40 min for the procedure in the study group. Early adverse events occurred in 29% (4/14) of the control group whereas none in the study group. The adverse events in all 4 patients was bile peritonitis, including pan-peritonitis in one patient. All patients recovered with conservative treatment by medication.

CONCLUSION

The newly developed dilator was found to be useful for shortening procedure time and would prevent adverse events related to bile leakage in EUS-CDS.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions

Drainage of obstructed bile duct and pancreatic duct under endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance has evolved into viable techniques suitable for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or altered surgical anatomy. One of the major advantages of EUS guidance is the possibility of multiple access points depending upon patient and ductal anatomy. Unlike ERCP, an approachable papilla is not a requisite for successful EUS-guided biliary or pancreatic ductal drainage. Moreover, as the access is away from the papilla, there is the possibility of reduced pancreatitis. A variety of procedures have become available for EUS-guided drainage, and it is important to develop standard terminology and procedural details. EUS-specific stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents have recently become available, and are likely to impact the outcomes of these procedures. Available data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. Success rate appears to be low for pancreatic duct drainage because of a variety of reasons. Outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage appear equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage appears promising for patients requiring gallbladder drainage but unfit for surgery. Further large controlled studies are needed to evaluate the exact role of these procedures.

Indications for endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary intervention: Does EUS always come after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), first reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), is increasingly reported as a primary procedure without failed ERCP. The present study aims to evaluate the outcomes of therapeutic biliary ERCP and to compare the safety and effectiveness of primary EUS-BD with those of ERCP, rescue EUS-BD and PTBD.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied therapeutic biliary ERCP as well as subsequent rescue PTBD and EUS-BD. Additionally, indications, safety and technical success of primary EUS-BD were evaluated.

RESULTS

Between August 2013 and September 2015, a total of 520 therapeutic biliary ERCP with a native papilla were analyzed. We encountered 23 cases with inaccessible papilla and 22 cases with failed cannulation, which were rescued by 21 PTBD, 16 EUS-BD and two repeat ERCP. Additionally, 40 primary EUS-BD were carried out during the same period as a result of 10 recurrent cholangitis cases after transpapillary drainage, five outside failed cannulation, four altered anatomy, two history of ERCP-related adverse events (AE), two technical difficulties in stenting under enteroscopy-assisted ERCP and 17 on study protocol. Technical success and AE rates were 95.6% and 14.5% in ERCP, 90.5% and 33.3% in rescue PTBD, 93.8% and 18.8% in rescue EUS-BD, and 95.0% and 22.5% in primary EUS-BD, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Rescue EUS-BD was used in 3.1% among all ERCP. Given the comparable technical success and AE rates of both primary and rescue EUS-BD, primary EUS-BD without failed ERCP can be a treatment option if it provides advantages over ERCP.

Efficacy and safety in case of technical success of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transhepatic antegrade biliary drainage: A report of a monocentric study

Background and Objectives:

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage techniques are alternative procedures in cases of obstructive jaundice with altered anatomy or failed ERCP. Complications related to EUS-guided antegrade drainage (EUS-AD) are still present in up to 10% of cases, and combination of procedures is sometimes suggested to avoid adverse events. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-AD with transhepatic access in case of technical success.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent EUS-AD in a single, tertiary care center.

Results:

Twenty patients were included (mean age 68), malignant stenosis in 95%. The reasons for EUS-AD were failed ERCP in 13/20, duodenal stenosis in 4/20, and altered anatomy after surgery in 3/20. A cystostome 6 Fr was always used to create the hepaticogastric tract, without puncture site closure. Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) was transpapillary in 95%. Drainage was completed in intraoperative stage by a EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) in 1/20 and by percutaneous drainage of the right liver (percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage) in one out of 20. Overall clinical success was 17/20 (85%). One out of 20 presented a persistent obstructive cholangitis treated by another SEMS through ERCP. Two out of 20 patients died of infectious complications with incomplete drainage, in case of advanced neoplastic disease. One of these two patients was treated by EUS-AD and EUS-HGS at the same time. None of the 20 patients developed bilioma or bile leakage.

Conclusion:

EUS-AD by transhepatic way is clinically effective and safe. Closure of the gastric puncture site is not mandatory and complementary methods for biliary decompression should be combined in case of incomplete drainage and not to prevent potential adverse events.

Endoscopic management of combined malignant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction

Patients with periampullary cancer or gastric cancer often develop malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and combined MBO and GOO is not rare in these patients. Combined MBO and GOO is classified by its location and sequence, and treatment strategy can be affected by this classification. Historically, palliative surgery, hepaticojejunostomy and gastrojejunostomy were carried out, but the current standard treatment is combined transpapillary stent and duodenal stent placement. Although a high technical success rate is reported, the procedure can be technically difficult and duodenobiliary reflux with subsequent cholangitis is common after double stenting. Recent development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures enables the management of MBO as well as GOO under EUS guidance. EUS-guided biliary drainage is now increasingly reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and GOO is one of the major reasons for failed ERCP. In addition to EUS-guided biliary drainage, the feasibility of EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass for MBO was recently reported, and EUS-guided double stenting can potentially become the treatment of choice in the future. However, as each procedure has its advantages and disadvantages, treatment strategy should be selected based on the type of obstruction and the prognosis and performance status of the patient.