Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and duodenal stenting in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer: one-step procedure by using linear echoendoscope

Choledochoduodenostomy: Outcomes and limitations

The EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has gained broad acceptance as the preferred approach after failed ERCP for malignant biliary obstruction. Despite the drainage route, namely, transhepatic or transduodenal, the technical and clinical success rates are high. Because of such good outcomes with tolerable adverse events (AEs) rate, the EUS-BD might soon even replace the ERCP for primary biliary decompression in patients at high risk of failed biliary cannulation. Among the EUS-BD techniques, the choledochoduodenostomy seems to carry the lower risk of AEs and should be considered the first-line EUS approach for biliary decompression.

Review of Simultaneous Double Stenting Using Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Techniques in Combined Gastric Outlet and Biliary Obstructions

Concomitant malignant gastric outlet obstruction and biliary obstruction may occur in patients with advanced cancers affecting these anatomical regions. This scenario presents a unique challenge to the endoscopist in selecting an optimal management approach. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of endoscopic techniques for treating simultaneous gastric outlet and biliary obstruction (GOBO) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance for biliary drainage. An extensive literature search for peer-reviewed published cases yielded 6 unique case series that either focused on or included the use of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with simultaneous gastroduodenal stenting. In our composite analysis, a total of 51 patients underwent simultaneous biliary drainage through EUS, with an overall reported technical success rate of 100% for both duodenal stenting and biliary drainage. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy or EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was employed as the initial technique. In 34 cases in which clinical success was ascribed, 100% derived clinical benefit. The common adverse effects of double stenting included cholangitis, stent migration, bleeding, food impaction, and pancreatitis. We conclude that simultaneous double stenting with EUS-BD and gastroduodenal stenting for GOBO is associated with high success rates. It is a feasible and practical alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage or surgery for palliation in patients with associated advanced malignancies.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO.

AIM

To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I² = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of −0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I² = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I² = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I² = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I² = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.

Treatment of pancreatic head cancer with obstructive jaundice by endoscopy ultrasonography-guided gastrojejunostomy: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Ultrasonography-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) might be a safe, innovative and minimally invasive interventional treatment for patients with gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) as an alternative to the surgical approach. To date, few cases have been reported in the literature.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A case of pancreatic head carcinoma with obstructive jaundice occurred in a 78-year-old man with a prior history of pancreatic head cancer. Biliary stent placement was conducted 1 year earlier.

DIAGNOSES

The patient was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, pulmonary infection, pyloric obstruction, and biliary stent implantation.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-GJ was performed. The wire and a double-balloon catheter reached the position of stenosis, then a double mushroom head bracket was released under EUS. The position was confirmed via X-ray.

OUTCOMES

The symptoms of obstruction were alleviated. No recurrence of obstruction, bleeding, perforation, and other complications occurred for the following 1.5 months while he died because of whole body spread of pancreatic cancer.

LESSONS

EUS-GJ may be reliable and effective for patients with GOO.

Outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent: a multicenter cohort study in West Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroduodenal and biliary obstruction may occur synchronously or asynchronously in advanced pancreatic cancer, and endoscopic double stent placement may be required. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) often is performed after unsuccessful placement of an endoscopic transpapillary stent (ETS), and EUS-BD may be beneficial in double stent placement. This retrospective multicenter cohort study compared the outcomes of ETS placement and EUS-BD in patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent (GDS).

METHODS

We recorded the clinical outcomes of patients at 5 tertiary-care medical centers who required biliary drainage after GDS placement between March 2009 and March 2014.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were included in this study. Patients' mean age was 68.5 years; 23 (59.0%) were men. The GDS overlay the papilla in 23 patients (59.0%). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (95.2%) than with ETS placement (56.0%; P < .01). Furthermore, the technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (93.3%) than with ETS placement (22.2%; P < .01) when the GDS overlies the papilla. The overall clinical success rate of EUS-BD also was significantly higher than for ETS placement (90.5% vs 52.0%, respectively; P = .01), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (ETS, 32.0% vs EUS-BD, 42.9%; P = .65).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic double stent placement with EUS-BD is technically and clinically superior to ETS placement in patients with an indwelling GDS. EUS-BD should be considered the first-line treatment option for patients with an indwelling GDS that overlies the papilla. ETS placement remains a reasonable alternative when the papilla is not covered by the GDS.

Long-term outcomes and risk factors of biliary stent dysfunction after endoscopic double stenting for malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Few reports describe the endoscopic double-stenting procedure for malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions. We evaluated the clinical outcomes from double stenting, and analyzed the risk factors for biliary stent dysfunction following double stenting.

METHODS

Eighty-one patients who underwent endoscopic double stenting for malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions were retrospectively analyzed. We determined the stent dysfunction rate and the biliary stent dysfunction risk factors, and analyzed the endoscopic reintervention results.

RESULTS

Overall survival time and survival time following double stenting were 365 (38-1673) days and 73 (20-954) days, respectively. After double stenting, the 3-month and 6-month duodenal stent dysfunction rates were 14% and 41%, respectively. Reintervention technical success rate was 100% (10/10), and mean gastric outlet obstruction scoring system scores improved from 0.7 to 2.4 points (P < 0.001). The 3-month and 6-month biliary stent dysfunction rates were 26% and 41%, respectively. The reintervention technical and clinical success rates were 95% (20/21) and 81% (17/21), respectively. Risk factors for biliary stent dysfunction following double stenting were events associated with duodenal stent dysfunction (odds ratio [OR], 11.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.09-87.4; P = 0.0044) and the biliary stent end's location (OR, 6.93; 95% CI, 1.37-40.2; P = 0.0019).

CONCLUSIONS

Some patients had stent dysfunction irrespective of the survival period after double stenting. Endoscopic reintervention was technically feasible and clinically effective even after double stenting. Duodenal stent dysfunction and biliary stent end's location were risk factors for biliary stent dysfunction.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided interventional treatment for refractory malignant left-sided liver tumors: a case series of 26 patients

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided ethanol injection and ¹²⁵I seed brachytherapy for malignant left-sided liver tumors which were difficult for trans-abdominal intervention. The study protocol was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02816944). Twenty-six patients were consecutively and prospectively hospitalized for EUS-guided interventional treatment of refractory malignant left-sided liver tumors between June 2014 and June 2016. Liver masses were detected using EUS in 25 of 26 (96.2%) patients. EUS-guided interventional treatment was completed uneventfully in 23 of 26 (88.5%) patients using anhydrous ethanol injection (n = 10) or iodine-125 seed implantation (n = 13). Six months later, complete response was achieved in 15 of 23 (65.2%) patients and partial response in 8 of 23 (34.8%) patients. Patients with tumor residual have second-look EUS-guided interventional treatment (n = 5), radiotherapy (n = 2) or surgical resection (n = 1). Complete response was achieved after repeated interventional treatment in 3 of 5 patients who underwent second EUS-guided intervention; 2 patients required additional surgical resection but one succeed. No significant complications occurred. Therefore EUS-guided ¹²⁵I seed brachytherapy is an effective and safe treatment modality for radical operation or promising palliative control of malignant left-sided liver tumors refractory to trans-abdominal intervention.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided interventional procedures

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as an important diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy. EUS provides access to many organs and lesions which are in proximity to the gastrointestinal tract and thus giving an opportunity to target them for therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. This modality also provides a real time opportunity to target the required area while avoiding adjacent vascular and other structures. Therapeutic EUS has found role in management of pancreatic fluid collections, biliary and pancreatic duct drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, drainage of gallbladder, celiac plexus neurolysis/blockage, drainage of mediastinal and intra-abdominal abscesses and collections and in targeted cancer chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Infact, therapeutic EUS has emerged as the therapy of choice for management of pancreatic pseudocysts and recent innovations like fully covered removable metallic stents have improved results in patients with organised necrosis. Similarly, EUS guided drainage of biliary tract and pancreatic duct helps drainage of these systems in patients with failed cannulation, inaccessible papilla as with duodenal/gastric obstruction or surgically altered anatomy. EUS guided gall bladder drainage is a useful emergent procedure in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not fit for surgery. EUS guided celiac plexus neurolysis and blockage is more effective and less morbid vis-à-vis the percutaneous technique. The field of interventional EUS is rapidly advancing and many more interventions are being continuously added. This review focuses on the current status of evidence vis-à-vis the established indications of therapeutic EUS.

Recent advances in diagnosis and treatment of primary duodenal tumors

Compared to tumors from other parts of the gastrointestinal tract, primary tumors of the duodenum are uncommon. Both benign tumors and malignancies are possible, although the majority are malignancies. The treatment of choice is surgical resection, mostly pancreaticoduodenectomy. With the development of endoscopy microsurgery and medical imaging technology, especially the advent of gastroduodenal fiberscopy, capsule endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopy, more duodenal neoplasms have been detected in recent years. Some advances have been achieved in the diagnosis and treatment of duodenal tumors. Endoscopic and segmental resections play a more and more important role in the management of duodenal tumors. In this paper, we describe the clinical features, pathological patterns, diagnosis and treatment of primary duodenal tumors.