EUS-cholangio-drainage of the bile duct: report of 4 cases

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy: practical tips and tricks

Background and Aims

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has gained traction as a reliable and safe method for definitive biliary drainage in patients who cannot undergo traditional transampullary procedures. Many of the newly developed single-stage devices are not yet approved for clinical use in Western practice.

Methods

We highlight key clinical and technical aspects of EUS-HGS using devices that are currently available in Western countries. The article is a comprehensive step-by-step technical review of EUS-HGS, and the video demonstrates high-level tips to overcome commonly encountered procedural challenges.

Results

Patients with biliary obstruction underwent EUS-HGS at our center. The technical difficulties that were encountered are highlighted in the article and the accompanying video. The article and video provide a detailed review of (1) preprocedural considerations, (2) puncture site selection, (3) biliary puncture, (4) contrast injection, (5) guidewire manipulation, (6) tract dilation, and (7) stent placement.

Conclusion

An understanding and implementation of the technical nuances highlighted in this article should help Western endoscopists navigate the complexities of EUS-HGS and ensure optimal outcomes.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous techniques for difficult biliary cannulation: Technical review

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard procedure for the diagnosis and treatment of biliary diseases. However, selective biliary cannulation, the essential first step in ERCP, can sometimes fail due to anatomical variations or technical limitations. In these cases, the endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous technique (EUS-RV) offers a valuable salvage option. Nevertheless, it is crucial to be aware of potential adverse events associated with bile duct puncture. To optimize the success rate and safety of EUS-RV, understanding the basic techniques, technical tips for each procedural step, and troubleshooting strategies for potential difficulties is essential. This review article summarizes the clinical outcomes and technical considerations of EUS-RV, including a comprehensive analysis of the current evidence.

History of the Interventional Pancreaticobiliary Endoscopy

With the introduction of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and linear endoscopic ultrasound, interventional pancreaticobiliary (PB) endoscopy has had an enormous impact in the management of pancreatic and biliary diseases. Continuous efforts to improve various devices and techniques have revolutionized these treatment modalities as viable alternatives to surgery. In recent years, trends toward combining endoscopic techniques with other modalities, such as laparoscopic and radiological interventions, for complex PB diseases have emerged using a multidisciplinary approach. Ongoing research and clinical experience will lead to refinements in interventional PB endoscopic techniques and subsequently improve outcomes and reduce complication rates.

Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

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

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failed ERCP: A propensity score-matched analysis

Background and study aims Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is the traditional second-line option after unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG) is a viable alternative to PTBD. Our study aimed to compare outcomes of EUS-HG and PTBD for benign and malignant biliary diseases following failed ERCP. Patients and methods This single-center study retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing EUS-HG and PTBD for benign and malignant biliary disorders. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed using age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. The primary outcome was clinical success, which we defined as a decrease in total bilirubin by ≥ 50% at 2 weeks for malignant disease and resolution of the biliary disorder for benign disease. Results In total, 41 patients underwent EUS-HG and 138 patients underwent PTBD. After propensity score matching in a 1:2 ratio, 32 EUS-HG patients were matched with 64 PTBD. Technical success was achieved in 29 of 32 (91%) for EUS-HG and 63 of 64 (98%) for PTBD ( P =0.11). Clinical success was 100% for EUS-HG and 75% for PTBD ( P =0.0021). EUS-HG was associated with a lower adverse event rate (EUS-HG 13% vs. PTBD 58%, P <0.0001), shorter procedure duration (median 60 vs. 115 minutes, P <0.0001), shorter post-procedure length of stay (median 2 vs. 4 days, P <0.0001), and fewer reinterventions (median 1 vs. 3, P <0.0001). Conclusions Our results suggest that EUS-HG is superior to PTBD in the treatment of benign and malignant biliary disorders after failed ERCP.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREA COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Efficacy of a dedicated plastic stent in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy during the learning curve: cumulative multi-center experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Currently, there are no reports on the learning curve of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) using dedicated plastic stents. Therefore, we evaluated the outcomes of EUS-HGS using dedicated plastic stents at tertiary referral centers during the initial development phase of EUS-HGS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was strictly prioritized over EUS-HGS. Twenty-three consecutive patients treated using EUS-HGS with a 7-Fr dedicated plastic stent over 4 years beginning in 2018 were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The most common primary disease was pancreatic cancer, and the most common reason for difficulty in ERCP was duodenal obstruction, followed by surgically altered anatomy. The overall technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 95.7% (22/23). One failed case was converted to EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy. The clinical success rate was 90.9% (20/22). Adverse events (AEs) related to the procedure were observed in four (17.4%) patients, including mild biliary peritonitis in three (13.0%) and mild cholangitis in one (4.3%) patient; all patients received conservative therapy. No serious AEs, such as stent migration, bleeding, or gastrointestinal perforation, were observed. Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) was observed in eight (34.8%) patients. Of these, HGS stent replacement was performed in four patients, and other treatments were performed in the remaining four patients. Another four (17.4%) patients did not develop RBO but underwent periodic HGS stent replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS using a dedicated plastic stent was performed safely even in its initial phase of introduction. The approach using this stent can be useful in case of ERCP failure for biliary decompression because of the high feasibility and low risk of serious adverse events.

Novel drill dilator facilitates endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Tract dilation is one of the most difficult stages of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), especially for beginners. To overcome this problem, we applied a special dedicated dilator. Herein, we retrospectively evaluate the safety and usefulness of a novel drill dilator in EUS-HGS. This single-center retrospective study included 20 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS with a novel drill dilator. The tip is 0.77 mm, and it becomes 7F at 3 cm from tip. The track is dilated to 7F by simple clockwise rotation. The technical success rate of both initial tract dilation and stent placement was 20/20 (100%). No cases required additional dilation such as balloon or electric cautery. In 13/20 cases (65.0%), EUS-HGS was performed by beginner endoscopists. Median time required for dilation was 62.5 s (range, 30-144 s). Median procedure time was 13 min (range, 7-25 min). Early adverse events were two cases of mild fever. There was no bile leakage or bleeding. The novel drill dilator appears to be safe and useful for EUS-HGS. As it is not necessary to press the device strongly, there is no pushback during dilation and the scope position is stable. These characteristics facilitate EUS-HGS even for beginners. This device may enable the further development and increased dissemination of EUS intervention.

A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Objectives

In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has been performed as an important salvage option for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary drainage. However, technical issues, such as puncture site (bile duct of segment 3 [B3] or bile duct of segment 2 [B2]), dilation method, stent selection, and procedural safety, need to be resolved for the optimization of EUS-HGS. The present study was to compare the safety, difficulty, and technical and functional success between biliary access via B2 and B3 during EUS-HGS.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective investigation of 161 consecutive EUS-HGS cases across a total of 6 facilities, including those at our hospital. The patients were divided into two groups according to the successful drainage route: the puncture to B2 (P-B2) or the puncture to B3 (P-B3). We compared the technical and functional success rates, technical difficulty, and adverse events between the two groups. We also conducted a subgroup analysis to show the factors related to the procedure time.

Results

There were 92 cases in the P-B2 group and 69 cases in the P-B3 group. There were no significant differences in the technical success, functional success, or adverse events between the groups; however, the procedure time was significantly shorter in P-B2 cases than in P-B3 cases. The multivariate analysis showed that the puncture site was the only factor related to the procedure time.

Conclusions

Based on these findings, P-B2 appears useful and safe. P-B2 is as effective as P-B3 and was able to be performed in a shorter period of time. The B2 approach can be considered a useful option for EUS-HGS.

Endoscopic palliation of malignant biliary obstruction

Malignant biliary obstruction often presents with challenges requiring the endoscopist to assess the location of the lesion, the staging of the disease, the eventual resectability and patient preferences in term of biliary decompression. This review will focus on the different modalities available in order to offer the most appropriate palliation, such as conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage as well as ablative therapies including photodynamic therapy or radiofrequency ablation.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with obstructive jaundice after failed or impossible endoscopic retrograde drainage: A multicenter, randomized phase II Study

Background and Objectives

Over the last two decades, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with biliary obstruction and failed ERCP. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) as the gold standard is associated with relevant morbidity and need for re-intervention. The aim of our work was to evaluate in a phase II study the safety and efficacy profile of EUS-HGS. A PTBD arm was considered a control group.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a prospective, randomized, noncomparative phase II study in three French tertiary centers involving patients with benign or malignant obstructive jaundice after failure of ERCP. Patients were randomized to either PTBD or EUS-HGS.

Results

Fifty-six patients (mean age 64 years) have been included between 2011 and 2015. Twenty-one underwent PTBD and thirty-five were drained using EUS-HGS. An interim analysis after the inclusion of 41 patients revealed an unexpected high 30-day morbidity rate for PTBD (13 out of 21 patients), justifying to stop randomization and inclusion in this control arm in 2013. The primary objective was reached with 10 out of the 35 EUS-HGS patients (28.6%) having observed complications (90%-level bilateral exact binomial confidence interval [CI] [16.4%-43.6%], left-sided exact binomial test to the objectified 50% unacceptable rate P = 0.0083). Both methods achieved comparable technical success rate (TSR) and clinical success rate (CSR) (TSR: PTBD 100% vs. EUS-HGS 94.3%, P = 0.28; CSR: PTBD 66.7% vs. EUS-HGS 80%, P = 0.35). Long-term follow-up showed EUS-HGS patients being at lower risk for re-intervention (relative risk = 0.47, 95% CI [0.27-0.83]).

Conclusion

In cases of ERCP failure, EUS-HGS is a valuable alternative for biliary drainage with a high TSR and CSR. PTBD is associated with an unacceptable 30-day morbidity rate, whereas EUS-HGS seems to have a decent safety profile, suggesting that it may be the treatment of choice in appropriately selected patients.

How to perform EUS-guided biliary drainage

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has recently gained widespread acceptance as a minimally invasive alternative method for biliary drainage. Even in experienced endoscopy centers, ERCP may fail due to inaccessibility of the papillary region, altered anatomy (particularly postsurgical alterations), papillary obstruction, or neoplastic gastric outlet obstruction. Biliary cannulation fails at first attempt in 5%-10% of cases even in the absence of these factors. In such cases, alternative options for biliary drainage must be provided since biliary obstruction is responsible for poor quality of life and even reduced survival, particularly due to septic cholangitis. The standard of care in many centers remains percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). However, despite the high technical success rate with experienced operators, the percutaneous approach is more invasive and associated with poor quality of life. PTBD may result in long-term external catheters for biliary drainage and carry the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) in up to 10% of patients, including bile leaks, hemorrhage, and sepsis. PTBD following a failed ERCP also requires scheduling a second procedure, resulting in prolonged hospital stay and additional costs. EUS-BD may overcome many of these limitations and offer some distinct advantages in accessing the biliary tree. Current data suggest that EUS-BD is safe and effective when performed by experts, although SAEs have been also reported. Despite the high number of clinical reports and case series, high-quality comparative studies are still lacking. The purpose of this article is to report on the current status of this procedure and to discuss the tools and techniques for EUS-BD in different clinical scenarios.

B2 puncture with forward-viewing EUS simplifies EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (with video)

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is in widespread use; however, there are few dedicated devices. The B2 route is technically easier than the B3 route for guidewire insertion, dilation, and stenting but if performed with conventional oblique-viewing (OV) EUS, B2 puncture can cause transesophageal puncture and severe adverse events. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of forward-viewing (FV) EUS, which we have developed to improve safety for B2 puncture in EUS-HGS (B2-EUS-HGS).

Patients and Methods:

This single-center retrospective study included 61 consecutive patients who underwent B2-EUS-HGS with FV between February 2020 and March 2021 at Aichi Cancer Center, Japan. The patients were prospectively enrolled, and clinical data were retrospectively collected for these 61 cases.

Results:

The overall technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 98.3% (60/61). The rate of EUS-HGS with FV was 95.0% (58/61) after three cases converted to OV, and that of B2-EUS-HGS with FV was 88.5% (54/61). The early adverse event rate was 6.5% (4/61). There were no instances of transesophageal puncture. Median procedure time was 24 min (range, 8–70), and no patient required cautery dilation.

Conclusions:

B2-EUS-HGS can be performed safely using FV, without transesophageal puncture, and supportability of the device is improved as FV is coaxial with the guidewire. FV was efficacious in B2-EUS-HGS, which shows promise for clinical application in the future.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Transmural Approach in the Management of Biliary Obstructions

BACKGROUND

Transpapillary biliary drainage in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an established method for treatment of patients with benign and malignant biliary obstruction. However, attempts to gain access to the biliary tract through the major duodenal papilla during ERCP have been unsuccessful in some patients. This study aims to determine the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided transmural approach in biliary endotherapy in case of failed ERCP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of the treatment outcomes of all 896 patients with obstructive jaundice secondary to biliary obstruction, who underwent endoscopic treatment in the years 2016-2021 at our institution.

RESULTS

Effective drainage of bile ducts through the major duodenal papilla during ERCP was achieved in 772/896 (86.16%) patients with biliary obstruction. In 124/896 (13.84%) patients [92 males, 32 females; mean age 63.52 (46 to 89) y] ERCP failed and EUS-guided transmural approach was performed. Benign biliary obstruction was identified in 17/124 (13.71%) patients; the remaining 107/124 (86.29%) were diagnosed with malignant biliary obstruction. EUS-guided endoscopic transpapillary biliary tract stenting with transmural access was performed in 21/124 (16.94%) patients; the remaining 103/124 (83.06%) required extra-anatomic transmural anastomosis of the bile ducts to the gastrointestinal tract. Technical success was achieved in 121/124 (97.58%) patients, while clinical success was achieved in 112/124 (90.32%). Complications were reported in 15/124 (12.1%) patients; with early complications in 12 and late complications in 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Various methods of EUS-guided transmural access to bile ducts improves endotherapy outcomes of patients with biliary obstruction. Endoscopic transmural access is highly effective and associated with an acceptable number of complications.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been continuously evolving for the past three decades and has become widely used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The efficacy of therapeutic EUS (TEUS) has proven to be superior and better tolerated than conventional percutaneous or surgical techniques. TEUS has allowed the performance of multiple procedures including gallbladder, pancreatic duct and biliary drainage as well as gastrointestinal anastomoses. TEUS procedures generally require the following critical steps: needle access, guidewire placement, fistula creation and stent deployment. The indications and contraindication for TEUS procedures vary with different procedures but common contraindications include hemodynamic instability, severe coagulopathy unable to be reversed, large volume ascites or the inability to obtain access to the target site. Proficiency and high volume in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and diagnostic EUS procedures are required for training in TEUS. The complexity of the cases performed can be seen as a pyramid with drainage of pancreatic fluid collections at the base, pancreaticobiliary decompression in the middle, and creation of digestive anastomosis at the top. The mastery of each level is crucial prior to reaching the next level of complexity. TEUS has been incorporated in our arsenal and is impacting on a daily basis the way we offer minimally invasive therapy.

Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Facilitates Decompression and Diagnosis in Patients With Suspected Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Case Series

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG) is increasingly being used as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP). This technique has also been utilized for diagnosis of malignant biliary obstruction by providing biliary access for antegrade cholangioscopy with biopsies and brushings for cytology and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). However, the potential impact of EUS-HG on surgical candidacy in cases with resectable disease remains unknown. We present three patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) for suspected distal malignant biliary obstruction following EUS-HG. Biliary drainage was achieved in all three patients preoperatively and a diagnosis of malignancy could be established in two of the three cases using this technique. There were no procedure-related complications. The HG metal stent was removed eight weeks post-operatively with cholangiogram showing a patent hepaticojejunostomy in all three patients. Mean length of follow-up after EUS-HG was 298 +/- 96 days. Our case series demonstrates that EUS-HG is an effective method to achieve biliary decompression in patients with an inaccessible papilla. The mature HG tract can subsequently be used to obtain a tissue diagnosis. Lastly, EUS-HG does not preclude patients from undergoing a curative Whipple procedure.

Practical Tips for Safe and Successful Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: A State-of-the-Art Technical Review

Currently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is widely performed worldwide for various benign and malignant biliary diseases in cases of difficult or unsuccessful endoscopic transpapillary cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Furthermore, its applicability as primary drainage has also been reported. Although recent advances in EUS systems and equipment have made EUS-HGS easier and safer, the risk of serious adverse events such as bile leak and stent migration still exists. Physicians and assistants need not only sufficient skills and experience in ERCP-related procedures and basic EUS-related procedures such as fine needle aspiration and pancreatic fluid collection drainage, but also knowledge and techniques specific to EUS-HGS. This technical review mainly focuses on EUS-HGS with self-expandable metal stents for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction and presents the latest and detailed tips for safe and successful performance of the technique.

EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage: a large single-center U.S. experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy has been performed for many years with most published experience from outside the United States. The luminal access point can be from the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, or jejunum; biliary access can be either into the right or left intrahepatic system. Thus, we prefer the term EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (ETBD). We describe what is believed to be the largest single-center U.S. experience of ETBD for management of benign and malignant biliary disease.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all ETBD conducted by 1 endoscopist between September 2014 and May 2021.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifteen patients underwent attempted ETBD: 85 for benign disease and 130 for malignant disease. Ninety-two patients (43%) had surgically altered anatomy (SAA). In 94 patients previously endoscopic attempts failed. The approach was transesophageal in 9, transgastric in 188, transduodenal in 5, and transjejunal in 5 patients. In 1 patient a bilateral approach was used. Standard fully covered self-expandable stents of 4- to 10-cm lengths and 8- or 10-mm diameters were used. Technical success was 95.3% and clinical success was 87.25%. Forty patients (18.6%) experienced adverse events (13 mild, 21 moderate, and 6 severe according to the modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon). Mean follow-up was 257.31 ± 308.11 days for all patients (124.53 ± 229.86 days for benign disease and 457.27 ± 466.31 days for malignant disease). Seventy-four patients (34.4%) had died at the time of data collection (66 in the malignant cohort, 8 in the benign cohort). Of those with malignancy surviving >6 months, 17.4% required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

ETBD is effective in the management of benign and malignant biliary obstruction for patients with SAA as well as native anatomy, with a modest adverse event rate.

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.

What You Need to Know Before Performing Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary treatment modality for bile duct obstruction. When ERCP is unsuccessful, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage can be an alternative method. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a treatment option for biliary obstruction, especially after ERCP failure. EUS-BD offers transluminal intrahepatic and extrahepatic drainage through a transgastric and transduodenal approach. EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an excellent choice for patients with hilar strictures or those with a surgically altered anatomy. The optimal steps in EUS-HGS are case selection, bile duct visualization, puncture-site selection, wire insertion and manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Caution should be taken at each step to prevent complications. Dedicated devices for EUS-HGS have been developed to improve the technical success rate and reduce complications. This technical review focuses on the essential practical points at each step of EUS-HGS.

Outcomes and limitations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy in malignant biliary obstruction

Background

Transpapillary biliary drainage in ERCP is an established method for symptomatic treatment of patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage frequently remains the treatment of choice when the transpapillary approach proves ineffective. Recently, EUS-guided extra-anatomical anastomoses of bile ducts to the gastrointestinal tract have been reported as an alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage. To assess the usefulness of extra-anatomical intrahepatic biliary duct anastomoses to the gastrointestinal tract as endotherapy for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction and to determine factors affecting the efficacy of treatment.

Methods

A prospective analysis of the treatment results of all patients with unresectable biliary obstruction treated with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy at our institution in the years 2016–2019.

Results

Transmural intrahepatic biliary drainage (EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy) was performed due to the ineffectiveness of ERCP in 53 patients (38 males, 15 females; mean age 74.66 [56–89] years) with unresectable biliary obstruction. Technical success of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was achieved in 52/53 (98.11%) patients. Complications of endoscopic treatment were observed in 10/53 (18.87%) patients. Clinical success of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was achieved in 46/53 (86.79%) patients. Bismuth type II–IV cholangiocarcinoma, hepatic metastases, ascites, suppurative cholangitis, and high blood bilirubin levels exceeding 30 mg/dL were independent factors for increased complications and inefficacy of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy.

Conclusions

In the event of transpapillary biliary drainage proving ineffective, extra-anatomical anastomoses of intrahepatic bile ducts to the gastrointestinal tract provide an effective method for the treatment of patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

EUS-guided biliary drainage for malignant hilar biliary obstruction: A concise review

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative to ERCP for distal biliary obstruction in expert hands. Various routes for EUS-guided access in distal biliary obstruction include EUS choledochoduodenostomy, EUS-guided rendezvous, and EUS-antegrade (EUS-AG) stent placement. While percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and ERCP are established modalities in management of malignant hilar biliary obstruction, the role of EUS-BD is emerging. Various methods of drainage in hilar obstruction include EUS hepaticogastrostomy, EUS hepaticoduodenostomy, EUS-guided bridging stent placement, and combined ERCP and EUS-guided biliary drainage. In this review, we discuss the role of EUS-BD in malignant hilar biliary obstruction with the currently available evidence, along with the limitations and challenges to the use of this modality in management of these patients.

EUS and ERCP: A rationale categorization of a productive partnership

ERCP and EUS are complementary techniques in the management of biliary and pancreatic diseases. Combination of these two techniques can reach different levels of complexity with increasing rates of adverse events. In this article we propose a categorization of the relationship between EUS and ERCP based on whether EUS indicates, complements, facilitates or replaces ERCP. It has implications for the complexity of the technique, the training of the endoscopist and the necessary hospital resources. This classification can also be useful in planning endoscopist training and patient management.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure has resulted in a paradigm shift toward endoscopic management of disease states that previously required percutaneous or surgical approaches. The past few years have seen additional techniques and devices that have enabled endoscopists to expand its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Some of these techniques initially were reported more than a decade ago; however, with further device development and refinement in techniques there is potential for expanding the application of these techniques and new technologies to a broader group of interventional gastroenterologists. Lack of formalized training, devices, and prospective data regarding their use in addition to a scarcity of guidelines on implementation of these technologies into clinical practice are contributing factors impeding the growth of the field of interventional EUS. In April 2019, the American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology conducted its annual Tech Summit and a key session focused on interventional EUS. This article is a White Paper generated from the conference, discusses the published literature pertaining to the topic of interventional EUS, and outlines a proposed framework for the implementation of interventional EUS techniques into clinical practice. Three primary areas of interventional EUS are addressed: (1) EUS-guided access; (2) EUS-guided tumor ablation; and (3) endohepatology. There was general agreement among participants on several key components. The introduction of these novel interventions requires better tools, more data on safety/outcomes, and improved training for endoscopists. Participants also agreed that widespread implementation and use of these techniques will require support from Gastrointestinal Societies and other key stakeholders including payers. Continued work by the Gastrointestinal Societies and manufacturers to provide training programs, appropriate equipment/work environments, and policies that motivate endoscopists to adopt new techniques is essential for growing the field of interventional EUS.

[EUS-guided therapy of cholangiolithiasis in surgically altered anatomy of the upper GI tract - a unicenter case study]

AIM

 To investigate feasibility and outcome the novel and favorable option of an endoscopic ultrasonography(EUS)-guided antegrade or even retrograde gall stone extraction via a transhepatic route in patients (pats.) with no option for the usual gold standard, ERCP.

MATERIAL/METHODS

 All consecutive pats. with cholangiolithiasis and surgically altered anatomy of the upper GI tract with and without previous attempts of an ERCP were enrolled in this unicenter case study and were characterized with regard to the technical and clinical success of this approach.

RESULTS

 From 2004 to 03/2020, overall 449 pats. underwent EUS-guided cholangiodrainage (n = 37 pats. with cholangiolithiasis). In 8 of these 37 pats., gall stone extraction was achieved using EUS-ERCP rendezvous technique (not included in the study since there was no surgically altered anatomy of the upper GI tract). In 13 of the remaining 29 subjects (45 %), there was a failure of previous attempts to reach the papilla of Vater or biliodigestive anastomosis using balloon-enteroscopy-guided ERCP. EUS-guided access to the biliary system was achieved in all 29 pats. Stone extraction was performed in 26 individuals (90 %) by means of antegrade push-technique after balloon dilatation of the papilla of Vater and biliodigestive anastomosis, respectively, before. In 11/29 cases (42 %), double pigtail prostheses were subsequently placed to track papilla of Vater/biliodigestive anastomosis ("ring drainage"), which were removed with gastroscopy three months later after previous ultrasound- and lab parameter-based follow-up control. In two pats. (7 %), gall stones were extracted via a retrograde route using a transhepatic access site; in one patient (3 %), stones were removed by means of a combined ante-/retrograde technique. In two subjects (7 %), cholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy was used.Technical as well as clinical success rate was 100 % (29 of 29 pats.). Re-interventions became necessary in 6/29 cases (21 %), complications occurred in 6 individuals (21 %).

CONCLUSION

 EUS-guided stone extraction in antegrade or retrograde technique for pats. with surgically altered anatomy of the upper GI tract can be considered a favorable and safe but challenging approach of interventional endoscopy/EUS. It can provide high technical and clinical success and low complication rates; it has the potential to substitute the time-consuming balloon-enteroscopy-guided ERCP as well as, in particular, PTCD and, thus, secundary and tertiary therapeutic alternatives.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage in pancreatic cancer and cholangitis: A case report

BACKGROUND

Head pancreatic cancers often present with clinical challenges requiring biliary drainage for chemotherapy or palliative scope. If usual endoscopic modalities fail or if percutaneous approach is not feasible, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided biliary drainage can be considered. Here we describe and discuss an interesting clinical case in which EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) was chosen to treat acute severe cholangitis in a patient with advanced pancreatic cancer.

CASE SUMMARY

An 84-year-old female with a previous EUS-biopsy proven diagnosis of head pancreatic cancer presented with clinical signs of acute cholangitis. In September 2018 she had positioned a biliary and duodenal stent to relieve jaundice and an initial duodenal substenosis. In the emergency ward, an abdominal computed tomography scan showed proximal biliary stent occlusion due to neoplastic progression, but endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was impossible because of worsening duodenal stenosis and the absence of a chance to reach the Vater’s papilla area. EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy was not technically feasible but because the cystic duct was free of neoplastic infiltration, an EUS-GBD using an Axios™ stent was successfully performed. The patient started to feed after 48 h and was discharged 1 wk later. No other hospitalizations due to cholangitis or symptoms of Axios™ stent occlusion/dysfunction were observed up until her death 6 mo later due to underlying disease.

CONCLUSION

This case demonstrated how different EUS therapeutic approaches could have a key role to treat critical and seemingly unsolvable situations and that they could play a more fundamental role in the next future.

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.

Outcomes and limitations: EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

One of the major roles of interventional EUS is biliary decompression as an alternative to ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Among EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with transmural stenting (EUS-HGS) may be the most promising procedure since this procedure can overcome the limitation of ERCP. However, EUS-HGS has disadvantages, and the safety issue is still not resolved. In this review, the clinical outcomes and limitations of EUS-HGS will be discussed.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD) is an option to treat obstructive jaundice when ERCP drainage fails. These procedures represent alternatives to surgery and percutaneous transhepatic BD and have been made possible through the continuous development and improvement of EUS scopes and accessories. The development of linear sectorial array EUS scopes in early 1990 brought a new approach to the diagnostic and therapeutic dimensions of echoendoscopy capabilities, opening the possibility to perform puncture over a direct ultrasonographic view. Despite the high success rate and low morbidity of BD obtained by ERCP, difficulty can arise with an ingrown stent tumor, tumor gut compression, periampullary diverticula, and anatomic variation. The EUS-guided technique requires puncture and contrast of the left biliary tree. When performed from the gastric wall, access is obtained through hepatic segment III. Diathermic dilation of the puncturing tract is performed using a 6F cystotome and a plastic or metallic stent. The technical success of hepaticogastrostomy is near 98%, and complications are present in 15%–20% of cases. The most common complications include pneumoperitoneum, bilioperitoneum, infection, and stent dysfunction. To prevent bile leakage, we used a special partially covered stent (70% covered and 30% uncovered). Over the last 15 years, the technique has typically been performed in reference centers, by groups experienced with ERCP. This seems to be a general guideline for safer execution of the procedure.

EUS-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy for Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction Using Electrocautery-Enhanced Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents: First US, Multicenter Experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biliary drainage has emerged as a technique to enable endobiliary drainage in failed ERCP. A newer model, lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), with a cautery-enhanced delivery system became available in the USA in late 2015. This cautery-tipped version may facilitate EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD), but data using this model are lacking.

METHODS

We reviewed outcomes of attempted EUS-CD using cautery-enhanced LAMS from 6, US centers. The following data were collected: patient and procedure details, technical success, adverse events, clinical success (resolution of jaundice or improvement in bilirubin > 50%), and biliary re-interventions.

RESULTS

EUS-CD was attempted in 67 patients (mean age 68.8) with malignant obstruction after failed ERCP between September 2015 and April 2018. EUS-CD was technically successful in 64 (95.5%). A plastic or metal stent was inserted through the lumen of the deployed LAMS in 50 of 64 (78.1%) patients to maintain a non-perpendicular LAMS axis into the bile duct. Adverse events occurred in 4 (6.3%) and included: abdominal pain (n = 2), peritonitis that responded to antibiotics (n = 1), and bleeding requiring transfusion (n = 1). Among 40 patients with follow-up of > 4 weeks, clinical success was achieved in 100%. Biliary re-interventions for obstruction were needed in 7(17.5%), in 3 of 6 (50.0%) that underwent EUS-CD with LAMS alone versus 4 of 34 (5%) with LAMS plus an axis-orienting stent (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

EUS-CD using LAMS with cautery-enhanced delivery systems has high technical and clinical success rates, with a low rate of adverse events. Inserting an axis-orienting stent through the lumen of the LAMS may reduce the need for biliary re-interventions.

[Relief of Obstruction in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer]

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

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.

Practical applications and learning curve for EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy: results of a large single-center US retrospective analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HE) is an effective method of endoscopic biliary drainage in cases where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has failed or is deemed impossible. Indications for EUS-HE have expanded, resulting in increased interest by endoscopists to learn the procedure; however, few data exist on breadth of application or experience needed to develop proficiency. We describe utilization of EUS-HE for biliary decompression at a large tertiary referral center along with procedural learning curve. Patients and methods  Retrospective evaluation of 60 consecutive patients who underwent attempted EUS-HE by one endoscopist from February 2016 through June 2018. Procedures were divided into chronological and summative experience quartiles. We compared procedural success rate, procedural utilization, and procedure duration over time. Results  Sixty patients underwent attempted EUS-HE during the study period: 35 with surgically altered anatomy, 23 with malignant biliary obstruction, 35 outpatients, 35 females; median age, 66 years. The procedure was technically successful in 53 patients. Success rates by summative experience quartile were 80 %, 80 %, 93.3 % and 100 % respectively. Beginning at patient number 40, the remaining cases had a success rate of 100 %. Utilization increased from eight cases in the first chronological quartile to 28 in the fourth. There was no significant reduction in procedure duration over time. Conclusion  For an experienced endoscopist, EUS-HE could be performed effectively and safely after the experience of 40 cases. Limitations of this study include a single endoscopist and heterogeneous patient population with variable anatomy that may affect procedural success. Future studies should include data from multiple centers and 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.

Palliative therapy in pancreatic cancer-interventional treatment with stents

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

Ex vivo assessment of anchoring force of covered biflanged metal stent and covered self-expandable metal stent for interventional endoscopic ultrasound

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage using a covered biflanged metal stent (CBFMS) and a conventional tubular biliary covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS) has recently been performed by EUS experts. However, appropriate traction force of the sheath to prevent the migration during stent deployment is well unknown. Herein, we assessed the anchoring force (AF) of the distal flange in CBFMSs and CSEMSs.

METHODS

The AFs of four CBFMSs (Stents AX, NG, PL, and SX) and six CSEMSs (Stents BF, BP, EG, HN, SP, and WF) were compared in an ex vivo setting. We assessed the AF produced by each stent using an EUS-guided transmural drainage model and an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy model consisting of sheet-shaped specimens of the stomach, gelatin gel, and gelatin tubes.

RESULTS

For CBFMSs, the maximum AF of Stent AX was significantly higher than those of Stents PL and SX (P < 0.05) in the porcine model. In the gelatin series, all stents except Stent NG showed a nearly similar AF. For CSEMSs, Stents HN, EG, BF, and WF showed gradual AF elevation in the porcine stomach. Stents SP and BP showed a lower AF than the other four stents. For the gelatin setting, the maximum AF of Stents HN, EG, and WF was higher than those of the other stents regardless of the type of specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

The significance of the AF and traction distance according to the property of various CBFMSs and CSEMSs could be elucidated using ex vivo models.

What should be known prior to performing EUS exams? (Part II)

In “What should be known prior to performing EUS exams, Part I,” the authors discussed the need for clinical information and whether other imaging modalities are required before embarking EUS examinations. Herewith, we present part II which addresses some (technical) controversies how EUS is performed and discuss from different points of view providing the relevant evidence as available. (1) Does equipment design influence the complication rate? (2) Should we have a standardized screen orientation? (3) Radial EUS versus longitudinal (linear) EUS. (4) Should we search for incidental findings using EUS?

EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy as a portal to allow definitive antegrade treatment of benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HE) usually is reserved for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or inaccessible biliary tree in surgically altered anatomy (SAA). We describe the outcome of EUS-HE and antegrade therapy for benign biliary disease in patients with SAA.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 20 consecutive patients with surgically altered anatomy and benign biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-HE performed by 1 endoscopist at a tertiary-care center over a 3-year period.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients underwent EUS-HE; 24 for benign disease. Of these, 20 patients had SAA and were analyzed (15 women, mean age, 62 years). SAA consisted of 9 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses, 6 Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, 2 Billroth II procedures, and 3 Whipple procedures. Indications for ERC were common bile duct stones (n = 8), benign postoperative strictures (n = 7), chronic pancreatitis (n = 3), inflammatory stricture (n = 1), and treatment of a bile leak (n = 1). Five patients had previously failed balloon enteroscopy-assisted ERCs. The approach was transgastric in 15 and transjejunal in 5. In all cases, a branch of the left hepatic duct with a mean diameter of 7.8 mm was accessed. Median stent length was 80 mm, with diameters of 8 or 10 mm. Antegrade, definitive endoscopic therapy via the HE was performed in 18 patients, with an average of 2.7 procedures performed for resolution of stones and/or downstream strictures. HE stents were removed in 17 patients after a mean of 91 days without adverse events. Three patients experienced mild adverse events (1 with postprocedural pancreatitis after placement of a 10F transpapillary stent, 1 with postprocedural abdominal pain, and 1 with postprocedural cholangitis) requiring hospitalization for fewer than 3 nights; no severe adverse events occurred. The average postprocedural hospital stay was 1.3 days. No deaths occurred during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HE is safe and effective in the management of benign biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy. It creates a portal to allow definitive, antegrade therapy and is a viable alternative to other endoscopic methods in this patient population.

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.).

Clinical outcome after biliary drainage for metastatic colorectal cancer: Survival analysis and prognostic factors

INTRODUCTION

Biliary obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer liver metastases is associated with a poor prognosis especially when chemotherapy cannot be re-started. The aim of this study was to determine the survival after biliary drainage and the associated prognostic factors.

METHODS

Patients from two French centers were included retrospectively after first biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography drainage for biliary obstruction secondary to liver metastases of colorectal cancer, occurring during chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 69 patients. Overall median survival was 115 days. In univariate analysis, a previous liver surgery, technical and functional success of drainage and restarted chemotherapy were significantly associated with an improved survival. Chemotherapy was restarted after a median of 27 days. When drainage was efficient, survival improved from 33 to 262days (p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, significant protective factors for survival included previous a hepatectomy (HR 0.41) and functional success of the drainage (HR 0.29). Predictive factors for death included increased lines of chemotherapy (HR 1.68) and fever before drainage (HR 2.97).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study concerning the benefits of biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction during the course of chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. A successful biliary drainage leads to improved survival and allows achievement of chemotherapy for 70% of patients.

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.

Recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly used as an alternative in patients with biliary obstruction who fail standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The two major endoscopic approach routes for EUS-BD are the transgastric intrahepatic and the transduodenal extrahepatic approaches. Biliary drainage can be achieved by three different methods, transluminal biliary stenting, transpapillary rendezvous technique, and antegrade biliary stenting. Choice of approach route and drainage method depends on individual anatomy, underlying disease, and location of the biliary stricture. Recent meta-analyses have revealed that cumulative technical success and adverse event rates were 90-94% and 16-23%, respectively. Development of new dedicated devices for EUS-BD would help refine the technical aspects and minimize the possibility of complications, making it a more promising procedure.

Present status and perspectives of endosonography 2017 in gastroenterology

Endoscopic ultrasound has become an essential tool in modern gastroenterology and abdominal surgery. Compared with all other endoscopic methods, it has the most potential for innovation and its future looks bright. Thus, we compiled this summary of established and novel applications of endoscopic ultrasound methods to inform the reader about what is already possible and where future developments will lead in improving patient care further. This review is structured in four parts. The first section reports on developments in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound, the second looks at semi-invasive endoscopic ultrasound, and the third discusses advances in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound. An overview on the future prospects of endoscopic ultrasound methods concludes this article.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography: Where are we headed?

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is an essential endoscopic tool within the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium of gastrointestinal and hepatic diseases. EUS-guided tissue acquisition will develop towards facilitating personalized treatment by obtaining large representative tissue specimens for elaborate immunohistochemical and biomolecular typing of the tumor. Intratumoral or intravascular delivery of drugs potentially offers many advantages over systemic injection. Intratumoral application of radiofrequency ablation and photodynamic therapy show promise but need to be explored further. Appositioning and connecting luminal structures within the gastrointestinal tract using fully covered expandable lumen-apposing stents will expand its indication far beyond the drainage of (infected) fluid collections and EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy is a particularly exciting development that could have significant impact on the management of gastric outlet obstruction.