Comparison of the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and hepaticogastrostomy for malignant distal biliary obstruction: Multicenter, randomized, clinical trial

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.

Comparison of stent patency between EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging and endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage for hilar obstruction

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging between the left and right bile ducts is an alternative to endoscopic transpapillary drainage for malignant hilar biliary obstruction. We aimed to analyze the long-term stent patency of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging. Patients and methods Patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging between April 2018 and July 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. We retrospectively compared the stent patency of these patients with that of the individuals who underwent endoscopic transpapillary drainage-multi-stenting using unmatched (entire) and propensity score-matched cohorts. Results Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging had a technical success rate of 90% (18/20). Adverse events were minimal. The number of clinical success cases was 17 and 82 for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging using metallic stent and endoscopic transpapillary drainage-multi-stenting, respectively. The recurrent biliary obstruction rate was 17.6% and 58.5% for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging and endoscopic transpapillary drainage-multi-stenting, respectively; the median time to recurrent biliary obstruction (days) was significantly longer for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging in the entire (not reached vs. 104, P =0.03) and propensity score-matched (183 vs. 79, P =0.05) cohorts. The non-recurrent biliary obstruction rate for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging was 91.6% at 3 and 6 months and 57% at 12 months. Multivariate analyses revealed that endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging contributed to a lower recurrent biliary obstruction incidence (hazard ratio, 0.31, P =0.05) without significant difference. Conclusions Stent patency was significantly better for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with bridging. However, future prospective studies are needed.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus choledochoduodenostomy for malignant biliary obstruction: A meta-analysis

Objectives

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage encompasses techniques such as EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of EUS-CDS with that of EUS-HGS for the treatment of biliary obstruction.

Methods

A systematic meta-analysis of all relevant articles listed was performed by searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. We used random effects or fixed effects models to compare success rates, adverse events, procedure times, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction after EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS.

Results

This meta-analysis included 18 eligible studies. There was no significant difference between EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS with respect to technical success rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.73) and clinical success rate (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.43-1.04), or with respect to total procedure-related adverse events (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.00-1.93). Subgroup analysis of adverse events revealed that the rate of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) was significantly higher for EUS-HGS (OR 2.95; 95% CI 1.54-5.64). There was no significant difference between the two methods with respect to time to recurrent biliary obstruction (mean difference -11.93 days; 95% CI -47.77-23.91). However, the procedure time was longer for EUS-HGS (mean difference, 3.21 min; 95% CI 1.24-5.19).

Conclusion

EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS are comparable in terms of technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events; however, EUS-CDS is superior with respect to procedure time and preventing RBO.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), classified as choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), is a feasible and effective alternative for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. However, the preferred technique for better outcomes has not yet been evaluated.

Objectives

We compared the long-term outcomes between the techniques.

Design

Retrospective comparative study.

Methods

We reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS or EUS-HGS with transmural stent placement for distal MBO between 2009 and 2022. The primary outcome was the stent patency. The secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs) of each technique, and independent risk factors for stent dysfunction.

Results

In all, 115 patients were divided into EUS-CDS (n = 56) and EUS-HGS (n = 59) groups. Among them, technical success was achieved in 98.2% of EUS-CDS and 96.6% of EUS-HGS groups. Furthermore, clinical success was 96.4% in EUS-CDS and 88.1% in EUS-HGS groups, without significant difference (p = 0.200). The mean duration of stent patency for EUS-CDS was 770.3 days while that for EUS-HGS was 164.9 days (p = 0.010). In addition, the only independent risk factor for stent dysfunction was systematic treatment after EUS-BD [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.238 (0.066-0.863), p = 0.029]. The incidence of stent dysfunction of EUS-HGS was higher than EUS-CDS (35.1% versus 18.2%, 0.071), despite no significant differences even in late AEs.

Conclusion

In distal MBO, EUS-CDS may be better than EUS-HGS with longer stent patency and fewer AEs. Furthermore, systematic treatment after EUS-BD is recommended for the improvement of stent patency.

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.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

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.

Best Practices in Pancreatico-biliary Stenting and EUS-guided Drainage

Indications for endoscopic placement of endoluminal and transluminal stents have greatly expanded over time. Endoscopic stent placement is now a well-established approach for the treatment of benign and malignant biliary and pancreatic diseases (ie, obstructive jaundice, intra-abdominal fluid collections, chronic pancreatitis etc.). Ongoing refinement of technical approaches and development of novel stents is increasing the applicability and success of pancreatico-biliary stenting. In this review, we discuss the important developments in the field of pancreatico-biliary stenting, with a specific focus on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound-associated developments.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are currently first- and second-line therapeutic options, respectively, for the relief of biliary obstruction. In recent years, however, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become an established alternative therapy for biliary obstruction. There are multiple different techniques for EUS-BD, which can be distinguished based on the access point within the biliary tree (intrahepatic versus extrahepatic) and the location of stent placement (transenteric versus transpapillary). The clinical and technical success rates of biliary drainage for EUS-BD are similar to both ERCP and PTBD, and complication rates are favorable for EUS-BD relative to PTBD. As EUS-BD becomes more widely practiced and endoscopic tools continue to advance, the outcomes will likely improve, and the breadth of indications for EUS-BD will continue to expand.

Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy of India Consensus Guidelines on Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: Part I (Indications, Outcomes, Comparative Evaluations, Training)

Endoscopic management of bile duct obstruction is a key aspect in gastroenterology practice and has evolved since the first description of biliary cannulation by McCune et al in 1968. Over many decades, the techniques and accessories have been refined and currently, the first-line management for extrahepatic biliary obstruction is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). However, even in expert hands the success rate of ERCP reaches up to 95%. In almost 4 to 16% cases, failure to cannulate the bile duct may necessitate other alternatives such as surgical bypass or more commonly percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). While surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality, PTBD has a very high reintervention and complication rate (∼80%) and poor quality of life. Almost parallelly, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to a substantial therapeutic option in various pancreatico-biliary diseases. Biliary drainage using EUS-guidance (EUS-BD) has gained momentum since the first report published by Giovannini et al in 2001. The concept of accessing the bile duct through a different route than the papilla, circumventing the shortcomings of PTBD and sometimes bypassing the actual obstruction have enthused a lot of interest in this novel strategy. The three key methods of EUS-BD entail transluminal, antegrade, and rendezvous approach. Over the past decade, with growing experience, EUS-BD has been found to be equivalent to ERCP or PTBD for malignant obstruction with better success rates.

EUS-BD, albeit, is not devoid of adverse events and can carry fatal adverse events. However, neither the technique of EUS-BD, nor the accessories and stents for EUS-BD have been standardized.

Additionally, different countries and regions have different availability of the accessories making generalizability a difficult task. Thus, technical aspects of this evolving therapy need to be outlined. For these reasons, the Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy India deemed it appropriate to develop technical consensus statements for performing safe and successful EUS-BD.

Comparison of recurrent biliary obstruction with the use of metal and plastic stents in EUS-guided biliary drainage: A propensity score-matched analysis

Background and Objectives

In transpapillary biliary drainage, metal stents (MSs) exhibit a lower incidence of a biliary obstruction than plastic stents (PSs). However, few studies have compared recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) when MSs and PSs are used in EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). We retrospectively evaluated the RBO for both stents in each procedure.

Patients and Methods

: Between November 2012 and December 2020, 85 and 53 patients who underwent EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction, respectively, were enrolled. Factors associated with RBO were assessed. Clinical outcomes were compared between the MS and PS groups using propensity score matching.

Results

: The clinical success rate and procedure-related adverse events were similar in the MS and PS groups. Multivariate analysis identified the use of PS as a factor associated with RBO (EUS-HGS, P = 0.03; EUS-CDS, P = 0.02). After matching, the median time to RBO in EUS-HGS (MS: 313; PS: 125 days; P = 0.01) in the MS group was longer than that in the PS group. The cumulative incidence of RBO at 1, 3, and 6 months in the MS group was significantly lower than that in the PS group for EUS-HGS (MS: 4.0%, 8.2%, and 8.2%; PS: 12.4%, 24.9%, and 39.5%, respectively, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

: MS exhibited a lower rate of RBO than PS for EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS.

Feasibility and efficacy of endoscopic reintervention after covered metal stent placement for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy: A multicenter experience

Background and Objectives

Although the use of a long metal stent is favored for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) for the relief of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), endoscopic reintervention (E-RI) at the time of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) is challenging due to a long intragastric portion. This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of E-RI after a long partially covered metal stent (L-PCMS) placement during EUS-HGS.

Materials and Methods

We performed a multicenter retrospective study between January 2015 and December 2019 examining patients with MBO who underwent E-RI for RBO through the EUS-HGS route after the L-PCMS placement. Technical and clinical success rates, details of E-RI, adverse events (AEs), stent patency, and survival time were evaluated.

Results

Thirty-three patients at eight referral centers in Japan who underwent E-RI through the EUS-HGS route were enrolled. The location of MBO was distal in 54.5%. The median intragastric length of the L-PCMS was 5 cm. As the first E-RI attempt, E-RI via the distal end of the existing L-PCMS was successful in 60.6%. The overall technical and clinical success rates of E-RI were 100% and 81.8%, respectively. Liver abscess was noted in one patient. A proximal biliary stricture was associated with the clinical ineffectiveness of E-RI in multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 12.5, P = 0.04). The median survival and stent patency duration after E-RI were 140 and 394 days, respectively.

Conclusions

Our study findings suggest that E-RI for RBO after EUS-HGS with a L-PCMS is technically feasible and clinically effective, without any severe AEs, especially for patients with distal MBO.

Long-term outcomes and predictors of adverse events of EUS-guided hepatico-gastrostomy for malignant biliary obstruction: Multicenter, retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) may be a feasible and useful alternative in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). To date, the risk factors for adverse events (AEs) and long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS have not been fully explored according to stent type. Therefore, we evaluated potential risk factors for AEs and long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS.

METHODS

In total, 120 patients who underwent EUS-HGS were retrospectively reviewed. A multivariate analysis through Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression model was used to identify the risk factors for stent dysfunction and AEs, respectively. Stent patency and patient survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier plots with a log-rank test for each stent.

RESULTS

The technical and clinical success rates were 96.2% (102/106) and 83.0% (88/106). The median duration of stent patency was longer in self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) compared to plastic stents (PS) (158 vs. 108 days). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that the type of stent was not associated with stent patency (Hazard ratios [HR] 0.997, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.525-1.896]) or overall survival. In addition, multivariate analysis indicated that hilar MBO significantly associated with stent dysfunction (HR, 2.340; 95% CI, 1.028-5.326, p = 0.043) and late AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the lower incidence of AEs and better long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS, it can be considered a safe alternative to ERCP or percutaneous approaches regardless of which stent is used. Furthermore, hilar MBO was established as a potential risk factor for stent dysfunction and late AEs.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary interventions

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), even in expert hands, may fail in 5-10% of cases, especially in cases of papillary infiltration, malignant gastric outlet obstruction, or surgically altered anatomy. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) has represented the traditional rescue therapy, despite associated with high rate of adverse events, need for re-interventions and an inferior quality of life. The evolution of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic tool offers an effective and safe alternative for internal biliary drainage (BD) into the stomach or the duodenum. EUS-BD is reported to have similar or even improved efficacy and increased safety when compared to PTBD and can be performed in the same session of a failed ERCP. This review summarizes technical aspects of intra-hepatic and extra-hepatic EUS-BD (including hepatico-gastrostomy, choledocho-duodenostomy and rendezvous) together with current evidence and future perspectives that steadily cements EUS-BD's place in multidisciplinary management of bilio-pancreatic diseases.

Introduction of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoenterostomy - experience from a general hospital in Japan

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a widely used alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) when ERCP is unsuccessful or there are contraindications such as duodenal stenosis or postsurgical intestinal reconstruction. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated the therapeutic outcomes of EUS-BD in a medium-sized hospital.

Patients and methods We included 31 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-BD at the Kitasato University Medical Center between April 2018 and October 2021. Patient characteristics, technical and clinical success rates, stent patency, adverse events (AEs), and procedure time were analyzed.

Results Of the 31 patients included in this study, one underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) and 30 underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HES). The technical success rates were 100 % for EUS-CDS and 96.8 % for EUS-HES because EUS-HES was unsuccessful in one patient who then underwent EUS-CDS as an alternative treatment. The clinical success rates were 100 % for EUS-CDS and 96.7% for EUS-HES. The median follow-up period was 84 days (range: 14–483 days). Zero and 5 (16.6 %) patients who underwent EUS-CDS and EUS, respectively had stent dysfunction. The median stent patency (stent dysfunction and death) for EUS-HES was 124 days. AEs were observed in only two patients (6.7 %) who underwent EUS-HES.

Conclusions EUS-BD is now more widely used than before, and advances in the devices used have enabled the procedure to be performed more safely. Our results suggest that this introduction in medium-sized hospitals can be conducted safely.

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.

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.

Utility of Fine-Gauge Balloon Catheter for EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Background and Purpose: During endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), tract dilation is one of the most important steps, and the placement of conventional metal stents with 8.5 Fr delivery devices is difficult due to the large outer shape of the device. Fine-gauge balloon catheters have become popular because of their stricture penetration ability and ease of dilation. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of fine-gauge balloon catheters. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study involved 38 patients who underwent conventional metal stent placement. The patients were classified into two groups: those who underwent dilation with a fine-gauge balloon catheter before initial metal stenting (balloon dilation group) and those who underwent bougie dilation only (non-balloon dilation group). We evaluated the stenting success rate after initial dilation and adverse events. Results: Seventeen and twenty-one patients were included in the balloon dilation and non-balloon dilation groups, respectively. The stenting success rate after initial dilation was 100% (17/17) in the balloon dilation group and 71.4% (15/21) in the non-balloon dilation group (p = 0.024). As adverse events, peritonitis was observed in one case (4.8%) in the balloon dilation group, and in three cases (14.3%) in the non-balloon dilation group (p = 0.613). Conclusions: Dilation using a fine-gauge balloon catheter before conventional metal stent with 8.5 Fr delivery device placement is considered effective in EUS-HGS.

Current endoscopic approaches to biliary strictures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current status and future perspectives of the endoscopic management of biliary strictures.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to conventional diagnostic modalities, such as cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), per-oral cholangioscopy is helpful for indeterminate biliary strictures. It allows direct visualization of the biliary tract and targeted biopsy. For distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard of care. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an emerging alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in cases with failed ERCP. EUS-BD is also an effective salvage option for perihilar MBO, which can not be managed via ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Preoperative drainage is necessary for most jaundiced patients as neoadjuvant chemotherapy is widely administered for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and a SEMS is preferred in this setting, too. For benign biliary strictures, a covered SEMS can improve stricture resolution and reduce the number of endoscopic sessions as compared to plastic stents.

SUMMARY

ERCP and EUS play a central role in the diagnosis and drainage for both malignant and benign biliary strictures.

Safe Performance of Track Dilation and Bile Aspiration with ERCP Catheter in EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy with Plastic Stents: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Objectives: Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) with plastic stent placement is associated with a high incidence of adverse events that may be reduced using an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) contrast catheter in the track dilation step. In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of track dilation and bile aspiration performed with an ERCP contrast catheter in EUS-HGS with plastic stent placement. Methods: In a multicenter setting, 22 EUS-HGS cases dilated with an ERCP contrast catheter were analyzed retrospectively and compared between a bile aspiration group and no bile aspiration group. Results: Overall, adverse events occurred in three (13.6%) cases of bile leakage, three (13.6%) cases of peritonitis, and one (4.5%) case of bleeding. Comparing patients with and without bile aspiration, 6 of the 11 patients (54.5%) with no bile aspiration had adverse events, whereas only 1 of the 11 patients (9.1%) who had bile aspiration, as much bile as possible, had an adverse event (bleeding). In univariate analysis, the only factor affecting the occurrence of adverse events was bile aspiration whenever possible (odds ratio, 12.0; 95%CI 1.12–128.84). Conclusions: In EUS-HGS with plastic stent placement, track dilation and bile aspiration with an ERCP contrast catheter may be useful in reducing adverse events.

Methods for Drainage of Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction after ERCP Failure: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

There is scarce evidence on the comparison between different methods for the drainage of distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of these techniques. We searched main databases through September 2021 and identified five randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was clinical success. The secondary outcomes were technical success, overall and serious adverse event rate. Percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage was found to be inferior to other interventions (PTBD: RR 1.01, 0.88–1.17 with EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD); RR 1.03, 0.86–1.22 with EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG); RR 1.42, 0.90–2.24 with surgical hepaticojejunostomy). The comparison between EUS-HG and EUS-CD was not significant (RR 1.01, 0.87–1.17). Surgery was not superior to other interventions (RR 1.40, 0.91–2.13 with EUS-CD and RR 1.38, 0.88–2.16 with EUS-HG). No difference in any of the comparisons concerning adverse event rate was detected, although PTBD showed a slightly poorer performance on ranking analysis (SUCRA score 0.13). In conclusion, all interventions seem to be effective for the drainage of DMBO, although PTBD showed a trend towards higher rates of adverse events.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary interventions have evolved to become an integral part of advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy units. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an accepted alternative for patients with failed ERCP or altered surgical anatomy. The potential advantages of EUS-guided interventions include choice of biliary access from stomach or duodenum, choice of stent exit in stomach and duodenum, and possibility of avoiding traversing through the obstruction. A variety of procedures have been described depending on the level of obstruction. Maximum evidence is available for distal malignant obstruction, and more studies are needed for hilar obstruction and benign indications.

Investigator initiated clinical trial to validate usefulness of specific system for endoscopic ultrasound guided hepaticogastrostomy (HG01) in malignant biliary obstruction (HG01)

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a novel drainage option for patients with an inaccessible papilla. Although EUS-HGS has clinical benefits in patients for whom endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has failed, the rates of adverse events (AEs) associated with EUS-HGS, such as bile peritonitis and stent migration, are higher than for other procedures. The development of a dedicated system for EUS-HGS is therefore desirable to reduce the rate of AEs. We developed a dedicated system for EUS-HGS (HG01 system) which is composed of a 19-gauge needle, 0.025-inch guidewire, a thin delivery system for tract dilation, and an antimigration metal stent. This study is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS using the HG01 system in malignant biliary obstruction.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a single-arm multicenter prospective study involving 40 patients across six tertiary centers in Japan. Patients with an unresectable malignant biliary obstruction in whom biliary drainage with ERCP failed, is not possible, or is very difficult will be registered in the study. The primary endpoint is the clinical success rate. The secondary endpoints are the technical success rate, procedure-related AE rate, procedure time, procedure success rate using only the HG01 system, stent patency rate, re-intervention success rate, re-intervention method, survival rate, and distance of movement of the stent position.

DISCUSSION

We expect use of the HG01 system to reduce the rate of AEs during EUS-HGS, especially bile leakage and stent migration. If the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS using the HG01 system is confirmed in the present study, it is likely to be considered the first-choice device for use during EUS-HGS.

Relief of jaundice in malignant biliary obstruction: When should we consider endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy as an option?

BACKGROUND

Since it was first described in 2001, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative procedure for achieving an endoscopic internal drainage in case of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Biliary drainage can be achieved by either a transduodenal extrahepatic approach through EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), or a transgastric intrahepatic approach, namely EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) which already holds a remarkable place in the treatment of patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

For this review we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE from inception to May 31, 2021 for papers with a significant sample size (at least 20 patients enrolled) dealing with EUS-HGS. Data on technical success, clinical success and rate of adverse events were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies with different design, comprising 874 patients, were included. Technical success was achieved in about 96% of cases (ranging from 65% to 100%). Clinical success was obtained in almost 91% of cases (ranging from 76% to 100%). Overall rate of adverse events was 19% (ranging from 0% to 35%). Abdominal pain, self-limiting pneumoperitoneum, bile leak, cholangitis, bleeding, perforation and intraperitoneal migration of the stent were the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite both safety and efficacy profile, at the moment HGS still remains a challenging procedure at every single step and must therefore be conducted by a very experienced endoscopist in interventional EUS and ERCP procedures, who is able to deal with the possible severe adverse events of this procedure. A rapid introduction in clinical practice of dedicated devices is desiderable.

Usefulness of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has many associated adverse events. We evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (FCSEMS) for this procedure.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study included cases where EUS-HGS with a laser-cut FCSEMS was performed for malignant biliary obstruction. Technical and clinical success, time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), procedure time, adverse events, and re-interventions were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 95 eligible cases. Technical and clinical success rates were 100.0% and 95.8%, respectively. Median TRBO was 398 days. RBO causes were hyperplasia (7.4%), debris (3.2%), and migration (4.2%). Adverse events occurred in nine cases (9.5%). Non-occlusion and focal cholangitis occurred in four cases (4.2%) each. Nineteen patients (20%) underwent combined EUS-HGS (CH) procedures: antegrade stenting, bridging methods, plastic stent anchoring in SEMS, and EUS-hepaticoduodenostomy. The solely EUS-HGS (SH) group had significantly longer median TRBO than the CH group (398 vs. 246 days; P=0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events between the two groups. Re-intervention was performed in 29 cases (technical success rate: 100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-cut FCSEMS can be safely placed in the bile duct and easily applied during re-intervention, making it useful in EUS-HGS.

When ERCP Fails: EUS-Guided Access to Biliary and Pancreatic Ducts

Pancreaticobiliary (PB) endotherapy continues to progress in the era of therapeutic endosonography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary method for PB access in native and altered anatomy. In altered anatomy, PB access can be obtained via enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (e-ERCP) or laparoscopy-assisted ERCP; however, both approaches have significant limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary and pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-BPD) are increasingly becoming the preferred alternative when ERCP fails, with advantages over percutaneous drainage. EUS-BPD continues to evolve with better feasibility, safety and efficacy as dedicated procedural equipment continues to improve. In this article, we discuss the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) when ERCP fails and their indications, technique, and outcomes.

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.

Comparison of Choledochoduodenostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy for EUS-Guided Biliary Drainage: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as an option for patients of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), there has no agreement on which approach is preferred. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to examine the two methods.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search in databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library to find relevant studies reporting the efficacy and safety of the two EUS-guided biliary drainage methods.

Results

In total, 12 studies with 623 patients (EUS-CDS: 303 and EUS-HGS: 320) were included. The cumulative technical success and clinical success for EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was 95.0% (288/303), 93.1% (268/288), and 96.6% (309/320), 91.3% (282/309), respectively. Compared with EUS-HGS, the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.74 (95% CI 0.33–1.65; p = 0.46) for EUS-CDS technical success and 0.94 (95% CI 0.56–1.59; p = 0.83) for clinical success. The pooled difference in means of procedure time of EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was −2.68 (95% CI −5.12 to −0.24; p = 0.03). The cumulative early adverse events for EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was 12.2% (37/303) and 17.5% (56/320), respectively. Compared with EUS-HGS, the pooled OR of early adverse events for EUS-CDS was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.36–0.93; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis further suggests EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal high technical and clinical success, but EUS-CDS with a slightly short procedure time and with less early adverse events compared to EUS-HGS.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder and bile duct drainage with lumen apposing metal stent: A large multicenter cohort (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography are the gold standard for managing acute cholecystitis and malignant biliary obstruction, respectively. Recent advances in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have provided alternatives for managing patients in whom these approaches fail, namely, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) and EUS-guided bile duct drainage (EUS-BD). We aimed to assess the technical and clinical success of these techniques in the largest multicenter cohort published to date.

METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter, observational study involving 17 centers across Australia and New Zealand was conducted. All patients who had EUS-GB or EUS-BD performed in a participating center using a lumen apposing metal stent between 2016 and 2020 were included. Primary outcome was technical success, defined as intra-procedural successful drainage. Secondary outcomes included clinical success and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifteen patients underwent EUS-GB (n = 49) or EUS-BD (n = 66). EUS-GB was technically successful in 47 (95.9%) while EUS-BD was successful in 60 (90.9%). All failed cases were due to maldeployment of the distal flange outside of the targeted lumen. Clinical success of EUS-GB was achieved in 39 (79.6%). No patients required subsequent cholecystectomy. Clinical success of EUS-BD was achieved in 52 (78.8 %). Thirty-day mortality was 14.3% for EUS-GB and 12.1% for EUS-BD.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage and EUS-BD are promising alternatives for managing nonsurgical candidates with cholecystitis and malignant biliary obstruction following failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Both techniques delivered high technical success with acceptable clinical success. Further research is needed to investigate the gap between technical and clinical success.

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.

Choledochoduodenostomy Versus Hepaticogastrostomy in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to estimate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) for malignant biliary obstruction.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies that compared EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS were included in this study.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were eligible for inclusion. The technical [odds ratio (OR): 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-1.74) and clinical (OR: 1.13; 95%CI: 0.66-1.94) success rates of EUS-CDS were comparable to those of EUS-HGS. However, EUS-CDS had less reintervention (OR: 0.31; 95%CI: 0.16-0.63) and stent obstruction (OR: 0.48; 95%CI: 0.21-0.94) than EUS-HGS. Both groups had similar adverse events (OR: 1.00; 95%CI: 0.70-1.43) and overall survival (hazard ratio: 1.07; 95%CI: 0.58-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have comparable technical and clinical success rates, adverse events, and overall survival. However, EUS-CDS has less reintervention and stent obstruction.

Endoscopic Double Stenting for the Management of Combined Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction

Periampullary cancers are often diagnosed at advanced stages and can cause both biliary and duodenal obstruction. As these two obstructions reduce patients’ performance status and quality of life, appropriate management of the disease is important. Combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction is classified according to the location and timing of the duodenal obstruction, which also affect treatment options. Traditionally, surgical bypass (gastrojejunostomy and hepaticojejunostomy) has been performed for the treatment of unresectable periampullary cancer. However, it has recently been substituted by less invasive endoscopic procedures due to its high morbidity and mortality. Thus, endoscopic double stenting (transpapillary stenting and enteral stenting) has become the current standard of care. Limitations of transpapillary stenting include its technical difficulty and the risk of duodenal-biliary reflux. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided procedures have emerged as a novel platform and have been increasingly utilized in the management of biliary and duodenal obstruction. As the prognosis of periampullary cancer has improved due to recent advances in chemotherapy, treatment strategies for biliary and duodenal obstruction are becoming more important. In this article, we review the treatment strategies for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction based on the latest evidence.

Utility of dedicated bougie dilator for a 0.018-inch guidewire during EUS-guided biliary drainage: A multi-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

During endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), a combination of a 19-gauge needle and a 0.025-inch guidewire is generally used. However, a 19-gauge needle has poor maneuverability because of their stiffness and rigidity and might have poor penetrability in non-dilated bile ducts because of their large bore. In contrast, the application of a 22-gauge needle is expected to have improved maneuverability. However, only a 0.018-inch guidewire, which has less supportability, is applicable in the subsequent guidewire selection. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a dedicated bougie dilator for a 0.018-inch guidewire.

METHODS

From September 2019 to May 2020, 26 patients underwent fistula dilation using the dilator after accessing the bile duct using a 22-gauge needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire during EUS-BD. The success and adverse event rates of EUS-BD were evaluated.

RESULTS

Biliary access with a combination of a 22-gauge needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire was successful in all with a median bile duct diameter of 5 mm. Dilation of the fistula using the dedicated dilator was also successful in all cases. Subsequently, the dilator was successfully exchanged to an ERCP catheter that allowed for exchange to a 0.025-inch guidewire, except in one case where the catheter did not cross the fistula and a dilation balloon was inserted for an exchange to a 0.025-inch guidewire. The technical success rate of the EUS-BD was 100%. The adverse event rate was 19%.

CONCLUSION

The application of the dedicated dilator for a 0.018-inch guidewire was considered feasible and safe for EUS-BD.

Recent Advances of Interventional Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound for Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is considered to be the gold standard for diagnosis and interventions in biliopancreatic diseases. However, ERCP in patients with surgically altered anatomy (SAA) appears to be more difficult compared to cases with normal anatomy. Since the production of a balloon enteroscope (BE) for small intestine disorders, BE had also been used for biliopancreatic diseases in patients with SAA. Since the development of BE-assisted ERCP, the outcomes of procedures, such as stone extraction or drainage, have been reported as favorable. Recently, an interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), such as EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), has been developed and is available mainly for patients with difficult cases of ERCP. It is a good option for patients with SAA. The effectiveness of interventional EUS for patients with SAA has been reported. Both BE-assisted ERCP and interventional EUS have advantages and disadvantages. The choice of procedure should be individualized to the patient’s condition or the expertise of the endoscopists. The aim of this review article is to discuss recent advances in interventional ERCP and EUS for patients with SAA.

Technical tips and recent development of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy

Various efforts to improve technical success rates and decrease adverse event rates have also been described in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDS). In particular, lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) may open novel opportunities in EUS-biliary drainage (BD). To date, various studies have been reported with EUS-CDS using LAMS, so we should clarify the benefits and limitations of recent EUS-CDS based on developments in both techniques and devices. In this review, we provide technical tips and describe recent developments in EUS-CDS, along with a review of the recent literature (between 2015 and 2020). The overall technical success rate is 95.0% (939/988), and the overall clinical success rate is 97.0% (820/845). The most frequent adverse event is cholangitis or cholecystitis (24.5%, 27/110). According to previous review, pneumoperitoneum (28%, 9/34) or peritonitis associated with bile leak (23.5%, 8/34) was most commonly observed. This difference might be based on improvements in dilation devices or the use of covered metal stents. Several randomized controlled trials comparing EUS-CDS and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant biliary obstruction have recently been reported. To summarize, overall technical success rates for ERCP and EUS-CDS were 92.7% (101/109) and 91.1% (72/79), respectively (p = 0.788). Overall clinical success rates for ERCP and EUS-CDS were 94.1% (96/102) and 93.6% (72/78), respectively (p = 0.765). Further high-quality evidence is needed to establish EUS-CDS as a primary drainage technique.

Role of CH-EUS as guidance for EUS-biliary drainage malignant obstruction

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is the usual method of choice for patients with biliary obstructions difficult to treat by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. In some patients, however, the bile duct is difficult to detect during EUS-guided biliary drainage. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound has reportedly been useful for interventional EUS procedures. This study describes five patients who underwent EUS-guided biliary drainage with contrast-enhanced harmonic imaging between April 2017 and March 2020 for malignant biliary obstruction due to bile duct cancer. The procedure was performed through an intrahepatic bile duct approach in three patients and through an extrahepatic bile duct approach in the other two. Although fundamental B-mode EUS was unable to detect the target intrahepatic bile duct because the duct was filled with debris, contrast-enhanced harmonic imaging was able to detect the bile duct by clarifying its border with the hepatic parenchyma. Similarly, in patients who underwent extrahepatic bile duct approach, fundamental B-mode EUS could not distinguish between debris and tumor, whereas contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS was able to differentiate between them. The procedure was technically and clinically successful in all five patients. One patient experienced bleeding as an adverse event. Conclusions: EUS-guided biliary drainage with contrast-enhanced harmonic imaging is useful in detecting the fluid space in bile ducts filled with debris or filled with debris and tumor invasion.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: Technical Review and Tips to Prevent Adverse Events

Most patients who require biliary drainage can be treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided procedures. However, ERCP can be challenging in patients with complications, such as malignant duodenal obstruction, or a surgically-altered anatomy, such as a Roux-en-Y anastomosis, which prevent advancement of the duodenoscope into the ampulla of Vater. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage via transhepatic or transduodenal approaches has emerged as an alternative means of biliary drainage. Typically, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage or choledochoduodenostomy can be performed via both approaches, as can EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). EUS-HGS, because of its transgastric approach, can be performed in patients with malignant duodenal obstruction. Technical tips for EUS-HGS have reached maturity due to device and technical developments. Although the technical success rates of EUS-HGS are high, the rate of adverse events is not low, with stent migration still being reported despite many preventive efforts. In this review, we described technical tips for EUS-HGS related to bile duct puncture, guidewire insertion, fistula dilation, and stent deployment, along with a literature review. Additionally, we provided technical tips to improve the technical success of EUS-HGS.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction with surgically altered anatomy: a multicenter prospective registration study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in patients bearing surgically altered anatomy (SAA) is not well-established. Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a new treatment option for MBO, limited data are available regarding the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in patients with SAA. We conducted a multicenter prospective registration study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in this population.

METHODS

This study involved 10 referral centers in Japan. Patients with SAA who were scheduled to receive EUS-BD for unresectable MBO between May 2016 and September 2018 were prospectively registered. The primary endpoint was technical success and the secondary outcomes were clinical success, procedure time, procedure-related adverse events (AEs), stent patency, and overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were prospectively enrolled. The surgical reconstruction methods were gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (47.5%), gastrectomy with Billroth-II reconstruction (15%), pancreaticoduodenectomy (27.5%), and hepaticojejunostomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (10%). EUS-BD was performed for primary biliary drainage in 31 patients and for rescue biliary drainage in nine patients. Transmural stenting alone (60%), antegrade stenting alone (5%), and a combination of the two techniques (35%) were selected for patients treated with EUS-BD. Technical and clinical success rates were 100% (95% confidence interval, 91.2-100.0%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 83.1-99.4%), respectively. Mean procedure time was 36.5 min. Early AEs were noted in six patients (15%): three self-limited bile leak, one bile peritonitis, and two pneumoperitonea. Late AEs occurred in six patients (15%): one jejunal ulcer and five stent occlusions. Stent patency rate after 3 months of survival was 95.7% (22/23). Median overall survival was 96 days.

CONCLUSION

EUS-BD for MBO in patients with SAA appears to be effective and safe not only as a rescue drainage technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography but also as a primary drainage technique.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000022101.

Clinical utility of treatment method conversion during single-session endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage

BACKGROUND

Although several techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) are available at present, an optimal treatment algorithm of EUS-BD has not yet been established.

AIM

To evaluate the clinical utility of treatment method conversion during single endoscopic sessions for difficult cases in initially planned EUS-BD.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis using a prospectively accumulated database. Patients with biliary obstruction undergoing EUS-BD between May 2008 and April 2016 were included. The primary outcome was to evaluate the improvement in EUS-BD success rates by converting the treatment methods during a single endoscopic session. Secondary outcomes were clarification of the factors leading to the conversion from the initial EUS-BD and the assessment of efficacy and safety of the conversion as judged by technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

A total of 208 patients underwent EUS-BD during the study period. For 18.8% (39/208) of the patients, the treatment methods were converted to another EUS-BD technique from the initial plan. Biliary obstruction was caused by pancreatobiliary malignancies, other malignant lesions, biliary stones, and other benign lesions in 22, 11, 4, and 2 patients, respectively. The reasons for the difficulty with the initial EUS-BD were classified into the following 3 procedures: Target puncture (n = 13), guidewire manipulation (n = 18), and puncture tract dilation (n = 8). Technical success was achieved in 97.4% (38/39) of the cases and clinical success was achieved in 89.5% of patients (34/38). AEs occurred in 10.3% of patients, including bile leakage (n = 2), bleeding (n = 1), and cholecystitis (n = 1). The puncture target and drainage technique were altered in subsequent EUS-BD procedures in 25 and 14 patients, respectively. The final technical success rate with 95%CI for all 208 cases was 97.1% (95%CI: 93.8%-98.9%), while that of the initially planned EUS-BD was 78.8% (95%CI: 72.6%-84.2%).

CONCLUSION

Among multi-step procedures in EUS-BD, guidewire manipulation appeared to be the most technically challenging. When initially planned EUS-BD is technically difficult, treatment method conversion in a single endoscopic session may result in successful EUS-BD without leading to severe AEs.

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.

EUS-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ERCP is the current procedure of choice for patients with jaundice caused by biliary obstruction. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative to ERCP in patients requiring biliary drainage. The aim of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to report the overall efficacy and safety of EUS-BD. We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and LILACS databases (earliest inception to June 2018) to identify studies that reported EUS-BD in patients. The primary outcome was to look at the technical and clinical success of the procedure. The secondary analysis focused on calculating the pooled rate of re-interventions and all adverse-events, along with the commonly reported adverse-event subtypes. Twenty-three studies reporting on 1437 patients were identified undergoing 1444 procedures. Majority of the patient population were male (53.86%), with an average age of 67.22 years. The pooled technical success rates and clinical success rates were 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.7-94.2, I^[2] = 76.5) and 87% (95% CI: 82.3-90.6, I^[2] = 72.4), respectively. The total adverse event rates were 17.9% (95% CI: 14.3-22.2, I^[2] = 69.1). Subgroup analysis of three major individual adverse events was bile leak: 4.1% (2.7-6.2, I^[2] = 46.7), stent migration: 3.9% (2.5-6.2, I^[2] = 43.5), and infection: 3.8% (2.8-5.1, I^[2] = 0) Substantial heterogeneity was noted in the analysis. EUS-BD has high technical and clinical success rate and hence a very effective procedure. Concerns about publication bias exist. Careful consideration should be given to the adverse events and weighing the risks and benefits of the alternative nonsurgical/surgical approaches.