Clinical outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy for gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical versus endoscopic gastroenterostomy for gastric outlet obstruction: a retrospective multicentric comparative study of technical and clinical success

PURPOSE

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is mainly due to advanced malignant disease. GOO can be treated by surgical gastroenterostomy (SGE), endoscopic enteral stenting (EES), or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) to improve the quality of life.

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2022, patients undergoing SGE or EUS-GE for GOO were included at three centers. Technical and clinical success rates, post-procedure adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day all-cause mortality, and recurrence of GOO were retrospectively analyzed and compared between SGE and EUS-GE. Predictive factors for technical and clinical failure after SGE and EUS-GE were identified.

RESULTS

Of the 97 patients included, 56 (57.7%) had an EUS-GE and 41 (42.3%) had an SGE for GOO, with 62 (63.9%) GOO due to malignancy and 35 (36.1%) to benign disease. The median follow-up time was 13,4 months (range 1 days-106 months), with no difference between the two groups (p = 0.962). Technical (p = 0.133) and clinical (p = 0.229) success rates, severe morbidity (p = 0.708), 30-day all-cause mortality (p = 0.277) and GOO recurrence (p = 1) were similar. EUS-GE had shorter median procedure duration (p < 0.001), lower post-procedure ileus rate (p < 0.001), and shorter median LOS (p < 0.001) than SGE. In univariate analysis, no risk factors for technical or clinical failure in SGE were identified and abdominal pain reported before the procedure was a risk factor for technical failure in the EUS-GE group. No risk factor for clinical failure was identified for EUS-GE. In the subgroup of GOO due to benign disease, SGE was associated with better technical success (p = 0.035) with no difference in clinical success rate compared to EUS-GE (p = 1).

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE provides similar long-lasting symptom relief as SGE for GOO whether for benign or malignant disease. SGE may still be indicated in centers with limited experience with EUS-GE or may be reserved for patients in whom endoscopic technique fails.

Propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy and enteral stenting for malignant gastric outlet

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) significantly reduce patients' quality of life. Endoscopic treatment involves enteral stenting or endoscopic ultrasonography to perform gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). Aim was to compare enteral stenting with EUS-GE for endoscopic treatment of malignant GOO.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared enteral stenting with EUS-GE for the treatment of malignant GOO. Patients treated at our institution were identified and a propensity score matching analysis was performed. Treatment failure was the primary outcome, while the secondary endpoints were time until treatment failure, technical and clinical success rates, and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were included in the final analysis. Of whom, 44 were included in each of the two treatment groups. Treatment failure occurred significantly more frequently in the enteral stenting group (13/44) compared with the EUS-GE group (4/44; hazard ratio: 4,9; 95% CI 1.6-15.1). A Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a median time until treatment failure of 22.0 weeks (95% CI 4.6-39.4) in the enteral stenting group compared with 76.0 weeks (95% CI 55.9-96.1) in the EUS-GE group (P = .002). No difference in technical success and clinical success was detected. Technical success was achieved in 43/44 patients (97.7%) in the enteral stenting group compared with 41/44 patients (93.2%) in the EUS-GE group, while clinical success was achieved in 32/44 (72.7%) and 35/44 (79.5%) patients, respectively. Nine adverse events were observed (9/44, 10.2%). There were no differences in 30-day adverse event rate and 30-day mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE was superior to enteral stenting in the treatment of malignant GOO in terms of treatment failure and time until treatment failure in a propensity score-matched cohort.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy with a direct technique without previous intestinal filling using a tubular fully covered self-expandable metallic stent

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastrojejunostomy is a minimally invasive method for the management of gastric outlet obstruction. Conventionally, a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is used to create an anastomosis. However, LAMS is expensive and not widely available. In this report, we described a tubular fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (T-FCSEMS) for this purpose.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients (15 men [71.4%]; median age, 66 years; range, 40-87 years) were included in this study. A total of 19 malignant (12 pancreatic, 6 gastric, and 1 metastatic rectal cancer) and 2 benign cases were observed. The proximal jejunum was punctured with a 19 G needle. The stomach and jejunum walls were dilated with a 6 F cystotome, and a 20×80 mm polytetrafluoroethylene T-FCSEMS (Hilzo) was deployed. Oral feeding was initiated after 12 to 18 hours and solid foods after 48 hours.

RESULTS

The median procedure time was 33 minutes (range, 23-55 minutes). After two weeks, 19 patients tolerated oral feeding. In patients with malignancy, the median survival time was 118 days (range, 41-194 days). No serious complications or deaths occurred. All patients with malignancy tolerated oral food intake until they expired.

CONCLUSION

T-FCSEMS is safe and effective. This stent should be considered as an alternative to LAMS for gastric outlet obstruction.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gastroenterostomy: Technical details updates, clinical outcomes, and adverse events

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has been transformed from an innovative technique, into a viable alternative to enteral stenting and surgical gastrointestinal anastomosis for patients with gastric outlet obstruction. Even EUS-GE guided ERCP and EUS-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis for the treatment of afferent loop syndrome have been performed, giving patients more less invasive options. However, EUS-GE is still a technically challenging procedure. In order to improve EUS-GE, several techniques have been reported to improve the technical details. With EUS-GE widely performed, more data about EUS-GE’s clinical outcomes have been reported. The aim of the current review is to describe technical details updates, clinical outcomes, and adverse events of EUS-GE.

Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastro-enterostomy for gastric outlet obstruction in a two-centre Australian Cohort (with video)

PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastro-enterostomy (EUS-GE) is a relatively novel technique that has been shown to require less re-intervention than standard endoscopic enteral stenting for gastric outlet obstruction and is less invasive, quicker, and more cost-effective than surgery. This study evaluated the outcomes and safety of EUS-GE in patients treated for gastric outlet obstruction across two Australian centers.

METHODS

Retrospective data on demographics, presenting symptoms, disease, endoscopic and clinical outcomes, and safety were collected on all patients who underwent EUS-GE from 2021 to 2022. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate outcomes and safety and survival were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent EUS-GE during the defined period, 10 of whom had a malignant etiology (median age 73 years, interquartile range [IQR] 13; 63.6% male). Technical success was 90.9%. Of those patients, clinical success (the ability to tolerate at least a full liquid diet during follow-up) was 100%. The median length of hospital stay post-procedure was 6 days (IQR 14 days). No severe adverse events occurred, and one patient (10%) required a repeat endoscopy. Median survival post-EUS-GE was 298 days (95% confidence interval 0-730.1 days) CONCLUSION: EUS-GE is an effective, safe, and durable therapy for patients with gastric outlet obstruction. This study presents Australian data on outcomes and safety that is comparable to international literature. EUS-GE should be considered for patients where local expertise allows.

Benefits of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy over surgical gastrojejunostomy in the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction: a large multicenter experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO) allows resumption of peroral intake. Although surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ) provides durable relief, it may be associated with a higher morbidity, interfere with chemotherapy, and require an optimum nutritional status. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. We aimed to conduct the largest comparative series to date between EUS-GE and SGJ for mGOO.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing SGJ or EUS-GE at 6 centers. Primary outcomes included time to resumption of oral intake, length of stay (LOS), and mortality. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success, reintervention rates, adverse events (AEs), and resumption of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 310 patients were included (EUS-GE, n = 187; SGJ, n = 123). EUS-GE exhibited significantly lower time to resumption of oral intake (1.40 vs 4.06 days, P < .001), at lower albumin levels (2.95 vs 3.33 g/dL, P < .001), and a shorter LOS (5.31 vs 8.54 days, P < .001) compared with SGJ; there was no difference in mortality (48.1% vs 50.4%, P = .78). Technical (97.9% and 100%) and clinical (94.1% vs 94.3%) success was similar in the EUS-GE and SGJ groups, respectively. EUS-GE had lower rates of AEs (13.4% vs 33.3%, P < .001) but higher reintervention rates (15.5% vs 1.63%, P < .001). EUS-GE patients exhibited significantly lower interval time to resumption of chemotherapy (16.6 vs 37.8 days, P < .001). Outcomes between the EUS-GE and laparoscopic (n = 46) surgical approach showed that EUS-GE had shorter interval time to initiation/resumption of oral intake (3.49 vs 1.46 days, P < .001), decreased LOS (9 vs 5.31 days, P < .001), and a lower rate of AEs (11.9% vs 17.9%, P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study to date showing that EUS-GE can be performed among nutritionally deficient patients without affecting the technical and clinical success compared with SGJ. EUS-GE is associated with fewer AEs while allowing earlier resumption of diet and chemotherapy.

EUS-Guided Gastroenterostomy in Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Comparative Study between First- and Second-Line Approaches after Enteral Stent Placement

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is increasingly used in the setting of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). However, little is known about the role of primary EUS-GE. The aim of the present study is to compare the outcomes of EUS-GE by using the freehand technique as a first- and second-line approach after enteral stenting (ES).

METHODS

This is an observational single-center study using a prospectively collected database. All consecutive patients who underwent an EUS-GE using the freehand technique due to malignant GOO were included. Patients with previous gastric surgery, a wire-guided EUS-GE technique, or those presenting without GOO were excluded. The primary outcome was the clinical success, defined as a solid oral intake at 1 week after the procedure (GOO Score, GOOSS ≥ 2). The secondary outcomes were technical success and adverse event (AE) rates. The impact on nutritional parameters was also assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent an EUS-GE for all indications. Finally, 28 patients (mean age: 63 ± 17.2 years, 57.1% male) with (n = 13, 46.4%) and without (n = 15, 53.6%) a previous ES were included. The technical success was achieved in 25 cases (89.3%), with no differences between the two groups (92.3% vs. 86.7%, p = 1). The median limb diameter and procedure time were 27 mm (range:15-48) and 37 min. Overall, clinical success was achieved in 22 cases (88%), with three failures due to AEs (n = 2) or peritoneal carcinomatosis (n = 1). The diet progression was quicker in patients with a previous ES (GOOSS at 48 h, 2 vs. 1, p = 0.023), but the GOOSS at 1 week (p = 0.299), albumin gain (p = 0.366), and BMI gain (0.257) were comparable in the two groups. The AE rate was 7.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-GE achieves a high technical and clinical success in patients with GOO regardless of the presence of a previous ES. Patients with previous ES may have a quicker progression of their diet, but the GOOSS and nutritional status in the long term at 1 week or 1 month are comparable. Primary EUS-GE might require fewer procedures and less discontinuation of chemotherapy to achieve a comparable result.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided interventions in the management of pancreatic cancer

There has been a growing interest in developing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions for pancreatic cancer, some of which have become standard of care. There are two main factors that drive these advancements to facilitate treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer, ranging from direct locoregional therapy to palliation of symptoms related to inoperable pancreatic cancer. Firstly, an upper EUS has the capability to access the entire pancreas-lesions in the pancreatic head and uncinate process can be accessed from the duodenum, and lesions in the pancreatic body and tail can be accessed from the stomach. Secondly, there has been a robust development of devices that allow through-the-needle interventions, such as placement of fiducial markers, brachytherapy, intratumoral injection, gastroenterostomy creation, and ablation. While these techniques are rapidly emerging, data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial for some procedures are awaited prior to their adoption in clinical settings.

Gastric Outlet Obstruction: Current Status and Future Directions

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a relatively common condition in which mechanical obstruction of the pylorus, distal stomach, or duodenum causes severe symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and early satiety. Its etiology includes both benign and malignant disorders. Currently, GOO has many treatment options, including initial conservative therapeutic protocols and more invasive procedures, such as surgical gastroenterostomy, stent placement and, the most recently implemented procedure, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). Each procedure has its merits, with surgery often prevailing in patients with longer life expectancy and stents being used most often in patients with malignant gastric outlet stenosis. The newly developed EUS-GE combines the immediate effect of stents and the long-term efficacy of gastroenterostomy. However, this novel method is a technically demanding process that requires expert experience and special facilities. Thus, the true clinical effectiveness, as well as the duration of the effects of EUS-GE, still need to be determined.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Futuristic Developments and Applications in Endoluminal Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is a well-established option for the treatment of malignant obstruction, temporary management of benign strictures, and sealing transmural defects, as well as drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and biliary obstruction. In recent years, in addition to expansion in indications for endoscopic stenting, considerable strides have been made in stent technology, and several types of devices with advanced designs and materials are continuously being developed. In this review, we discuss the important developments in stent designs and novel indications for endoluminal and transluminal stenting. Our discussion specifically focuses on (i) biodegradable as well as (ii) irradiating and drug-eluting stents for esophageal, gastroduodenal, biliary, and colonic indications, (iii) endoscopic stenting in inflammatory bowel disease, and (iv) lumen-apposing metal stent.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Personalized Approach to the Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Management of Pancreaticobiliary Malignancies

Pancreaticobiliary malignancies arise from different areas within the pancreas and biliary tree. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a well-recognized diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the treatment of pancreaticobiliary diseases, and more specifically, pancreaticobiliary malignancies. Traditionally used for diagnostic purposes, EUS plays a critical role in tissue sampling and cancer staging. The emergence of the new field of interventional EUS has allowed EUS to also play a critical role in therapeutic management. Novel interventional EUS procedures such as EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GE), EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GLB) can be utilized to treat complications of pancreaticobiliary malignancies such as gastric outlet obstruction, obstructive jaundice, and cholecystitis. In addition, interventional EUS procedures can be utilized for the palliation of unresectable malignancies both for source control with EUS-radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) and for the treatment of abdominal pain refractory to opioid medications with EUS-guided celiac axis neurolysis. However, patient selection remains a critical component in both diagnostic and therapeutic interventions and must be tailored to individual patient wishes, disease pathology, and overall prognosis.

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy versus enteral stenting for gastric outlet obstruction: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic and surgical techniques have been utilized for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Enteral stenting (ES) is an established technique with high clinical success and low morbidity rate. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel approach that aims to provide sustained palliation of GOO. We conducted a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness in terms of clinical and technical success, as well as the safety profile of EUS-GE and ES. Methods  We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2020 to identify studies that reported on safety and effectiveness of EUS-GE in comparison to ES. Pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 % and 95 % confidence interval. Results  Five studies including 659 patients were included in our final analysis. Pooled rate of technical and clinical success for EUS-GE was 95.2 % (CI 87.2-.98.3, I 2  = 42) and 93.3 % (CI 84.4-97.3, I 2  = 59) while for ES it was 96.9 % (CI 90.9-99, I 2  = 64) and 85.6 % (CI 73-92.9, I 2  = 85), respectively. Pooled rate of re-intervention was significantly lower with EUS-GE i. e. 4 % (CI 1.8-8.7, I 2  = 35) compared to ES, where it was 23.6 % (CI 17.5-31, I 2  = 35), p = 0.001 . Pooled rates of overall and major AEs were comparable between the two techniques. Conclusion  EUS-GE is comparable in terms of technical and clinical effectiveness and has a similar safety profile when compared to ES for palliation of GOO.