Durability and outcome of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoduodenostomy using a fully covered metal stent for segregated right intrahepatic duct dilatation

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoduodenostomy versus percutaneous drainage for right intrahepatic duct dilatation in malignant hilar obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is being increasingly performed as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) to treat malignant hilar obstruction (MHO) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, no study has compared EUS-guided hepaticoduodenostomy (EUS-HDS) with PTBD for right intrahepatic duct (IHD) obstruction after failed ERCP in patients with unresectable MHO.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of consecutive patients with right IHD obstruction developed by unresectable MHO who underwent EUS-HDS or PTBD after a previous placement of a stent in the left and/or right IHD between March 2018 and October 2021. Technical success, clinical success, stent or tube-related adverse events, frequency of reintervention, and stent patency were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients (18 EUS-HDS, 24 PTBD) were analyzed. Both groups did not show significant differences in technical success (EUS-HDS, 94% vs PTBD, 100%; P = 0.429), clinical success (83% vs 83%; P = 0.999), early adverse events (24% vs 46%; P = 0.144), and stent or tube-related late adverse events (29% vs 54%; P = 0.116). During follow-up, the EUS-HDS group had a longer median duration of patency (131 days vs 58.5 days; P = 0.041), and lower mean frequency of reinterventions per patient (0.35 vs 1.92; P = 0.030) than the PTBD group.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HDS showed comparable efficacy and safety to PTBD for drainage of the right biliary system and produced longer duration of patency and lower frequency of reinterventions in patients with unresectable MHO.

Endoscopic Management of Malignant Biliary Obstruction

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is commonly used for managing malignant biliary obstruction; however, it is impossible if the endoscope cannot reach the ampulla of Vater, and it carries a risk of procedure-related pancreatitis. Percutaneous approach is a traditional rescue method when ERCP fails and can be useful in advanced malignant hilar biliary obstruction; however, it is invasive and carries risks of tube dislodgement, recurrent infection, and tract seeding. Endoscopic ultrasound approach may be attempted if ERCP fails and is free from the risk of pancreatitis; however, it is only possible in limited centers, and training is still difficult. Malignant biliary obstruction should be managed by leveraging the complementary strengths of these methods.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cholangiocarcinoma

These guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology liver section. The guideline writing committee included a multidisciplinary team of experts from various specialties involved in the management of CCA, as well as patient/public representatives from AMMF (the Cholangiocarcinoma Charity) and PSC Support. Quality of evidence is presented using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) format. The recommendations arising are to be used as guidance rather than as a strict protocol-based reference, as the management of patients with CCA is often complex and always requires individual patient-centred considerations.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREA COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

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.

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.

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.

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

1:  ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6:  ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7:  ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

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.

Role of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound in gastrointestinal malignancy- current evidence and future directions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to an advanced therapeutic modality. With the advent of better technologies and accessories, EUS has found ground in the management of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, not only for diagnosis but also for therapeutic purposes. EUS can tackle a host of conditions, including hepato-pancreatico-biliary malignancies. Advances and experience in various EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques have enabled the endosonologist to tackle biliary obstruction when conventional techniques of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) fails. More and more emerging data not only establishes the safety of EUS-BD but also demonstrates superior efficacy over PTBD and sometimes even ERCP. Malignant gastric outlet obstruction can now be safely managed with EUS-guided gastroenterostomy. Starting from pain management in malignant tumors through celiac plexus neurolysis to various tumor ablative therapies, EUS has forged ahead over percutaneous treatment or surgical options in the management of GI malignancies. Additional data is now coming up on the prospects of EUS-guided immunotherapy and biological therapy for tumor management. The future of EUS therapeutics in the field of GI malignancies is bright. With increasing evidence, this modality becoming a key player in management of a host of complex clinical conditions arising out of GI malignancies is in the offing. This review focuses on elucidating the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of GI malignancies, a synopsis of various techniques, data on its safety and efficacy as well as future advancements in this domain.

Combined endoscopic retrograde and endosonography-guided (CERES) cholangiography for interventional repair of transected bile ducts after cholecystectomy: treatment approaches and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Post-cholecystectomy transected bile ducts (TBDs) are not amenable to standard endoscopic management. Combined ERCP and endosonography (CERES) including EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy enhance therapeutic biliary endoscopy. CERES treatment of post-cholecystectomy TBDs is evaluated.

METHODS

Among 165 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP for post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury (Amsterdam A/B/C/D grades [%] = 47/30/7/16) between January 2009-November 2020 at a tertiary-care center, 10/26 (38%) with TBDs (6 female; 32-92 years old) underwent CERES before attempted endoscopic repair (staged CERES, n = 7) or surgical repair (preoperative CERES, n = 1), or as destination therapy (definitive CERES, n = 2). Short-term clinical success rate, final clinical success rate and comprehensive complication index (CCI) were retrospectively determined. Additionally, number of follow-up procedures, adverse events, recurrences, final patency grades and definitive cure rate were determined in patients with staged CERES.

RESULTS

Index CERES (hepaticogastrostomy, 60%; hepaticoduodenostomy, 40%) achieved bile leak and jaundice resolution in 10 patients (100% short-term clinical success rate). Overall, 9/10 patients maintained good/excellent biliary drainage over a median 3.2 years without any unplanned percutaneous/surgical procedures (90% final clinical success rate; median CCI = 8.7). Staged CERES using recanalization (n = 6) or diversion (n = 1) strategies achieved Grade A patency in 5/7 (71%) patients after a median of 2 follow-up procedures over a median 12-month treatment period; 2 failed recanalization patients were salvaged by indefinite hepaticoenterostomy stent or elective surgery, respectively. Among staged CERES, 2 treatment-related cholangitis occurred (29%) and 2 recurring strictures (29%) developed over a median 8.4 year follow-up; recurring strictures were endoscopically remodeled (n = 1) or indefinitely stented (n = 1); final Grade A/B biliary patency was achieved in 5/7 (71%) and definitive cure in 4/7 (57%).

CONCLUSIONS

CERES controls acute symptoms in selected post-cholecystectomy TBD patients allowing subsequent staged endoscopic therapy. Definitive cure or long-term biliary drainage is possible in most cases and elective surgery can be facilitated in the remainder.

Technical Review of Developments in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage has been developed as an alternative method for biliary drainage. EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) can be attempted via the trans-gastric route. These procedures are technically complex for two reasons. First, puncture of the intrahepatic bile duct via the trans-gastric route can be more difficult than that by other approaches because of the small diameter of the target site, and guidewire insertion or manipulation is challenging during EUS-HGS. Second, critical adverse events, such as stent migration into the abdominal cavity, could occur because of the greater mobility of the stomach compared to the duodenum. Therefore, endoscopists should be cautious when performing EUS-HGS. An advantage of EUS-HGS is that it can be performed in patients with complications such as duodenal bulb obstruction or surgically altered anatomy. Recent advances in technique and improvements in devices and stents for EUS-HGS have shown promise for improving the technical success rate of EUS-HGS and reducing the rate of adverse events. However, endoscopists should remain aware of the possibility of critical adverse events such as stent migration.