Endoscopic ultrasonography guided biliary drainage: Summary of consortium meeting, May 7th, 2011, Chicago

Comparative efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as first-line palliation in malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) is a challenging clinical condition commonly managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative, especially in complex cases where ERCP fails or is deemed risky. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of EUS-BD vs. ERCP in the palliation of MDBO.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, following PRISMA guidelines. Three databases were searched up to December 2023, including MEDLINE/PubMed, OVID and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for studies comparing EUS-BD with ERCP. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success rates, while secondary outcomes included procedural times, hospital stay duration, 30-day mortality, reintervention rates, and adverse events such as pancreatitis.

Results

Seven studies involving 1245 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that EUS-BD had a technical success rate of 92%, compared to 85% for ERCP. Clinical success rates were similar for both EUS-BD and ERCP, at approximately 89%. EUS-BD was associated with a significantly lower incidence of pancreatitis (2% vs. 10% for ERCP).

Conclusions

EUS-BD offers a viable and potentially superior alternative to ERCP for the primary palliation of MDBO, particularly in terms of technical success and a lower risk of pancreatitis. These findings support the adoption of EUS-BD in clinical settings equipped to perform this technique, though future research should focus on long-term outcomes and further economic analysis to solidify these recommendations.

Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

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

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.

EUS-Guided Biliary Drainage Versus ERCP in Malignant Biliary Obstruction Before Hepatobiliary Surgery: An International Multicenter Comparative Study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is the procedure of choice for patients who cannot undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The outcomes of patients undergoing surgery after EUS-BD for malignancy are unknown.

METHODS

We conducted an international, multicenter retrospective comparative study of patients who underwent hepatobiliary surgery after having undergone EUS-BD or ERCP from 6 tertiary care centers. Patient demographics, procedural data, and follow-up care were collected in a registry.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five patients were included: EUS-BD n=58 (mean age 66, 45% male), ERCP n=87 (mean age 68, 53% male). The majority of patients had pancreatic cancer, cholangiocarcinoma, or gallbladder malignancy. In the EUS-BD group, 29 patients had hepaticogastrostomy, 24 had choledochoduodenostomy, and 5 had rendezvous technique done. The most common surgery was Whipple in both groups (n=41 EUS-BD, n=56 ERCP) followed by partial hepatectomy (n=7 EUS-BD, n=14 ERCP) and cholecystectomy (n=2 EUS-BD, n=2 ERCP). Endoscopy clinical success was comparable in both groups (98% EUS-BD, 94% ERCP). Adverse event rates were similar in both groups: EUS-BD (n=10, 17%) and ERCP (n=23, 26%). Surgery technical success and clinical success were significantly higher in the EUS-BD group compared with the ERCP group (97% vs. 83%, 97% vs. 75%). Total Hospital stay from surgery to discharge was significantly higher in the ERCP group (19 d vs. 10 d, P =0.0082).

DISCUSSION

Undergoing EUS-BD versus ERCP before hepatobiliary surgery is associated with fewer repeat endoscopic interventions, shorter duration between endoscopy and surgical intervention, higher rates of surgical clinical success, and shorter length of hospital stay after surgery.

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.

Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography is a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure that involves inserting a needle into the biliary tree, followed by the immediate insertion of a catheter. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a novel technique that allows BD by echoendoscopy and fluoroscopy using a stent from the biliary tree to the gastrointestinal tract.

AIM

To compare the technical aspects and outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) and EUS-BD.

METHODS

Different databases, including PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses to obtain studies comparing PTBD and EUS-BD.

RESULTS

Among the six studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, PTBD patients underwent significantly more reinterventions (4.9 vs 1.3), experienced more postprocedural pain (4.1 vs 1.9), and experienced more late adverse events (53.8% vs 6.6%) than EUS-BD patients. There was a significant reduction in the total bilirubin levels in both the groups (16.4-3.3 μmol/L and 17.2-3.8 μmol/L for EUS-BD and PTBD, respectively; P = 0.002) at the 7-d follow-up. There were no significant differences observed in the complication rates between PTBD and EUS-BD (3.3 vs 3.8). PTBD was associated with a higher adverse event rate than EUS-BD in all the procedures, including reinterventions (80.4% vs 15.7%, respectively) and a higher index procedure (39.2% vs 18.2%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this systematic review revealed that EUS-BD is linked with a higher rate of effective BD and a more manageable procedure-related adverse event profile than PTBD. These findings highlight the evidence for successful EUS-BD implementation.

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.

Approach to management of pancreatic strictures: the gastroenterologist's perspective

Pancreatic strictures represent a complex clinical problem which often requires multidisciplinary management with a team of gastroenterologists, surgeons and radiologists. Dominant strictures are largely due to inflammatory processes of the pancreas like chronic pancreatitis. However, differentiating benign from malignant processes of the pancreas, leading to strictures is imperative and remains a challenge. With advances in endoscopic management, options for therapy include endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) in situations where ERCP is not feasible or fails. However, endoscopic therapy is suited for a select group of patients and surgery remains key to management in many patients. In this narrative review, we look at the gastroenterologist's perspective and approach to pancreatic ductal strictures, including endoscopic and surgical management.

EUS-guided biliary interventions for benign diseases and unsuccessful ERCP - a prospective unicenter feasibility study on a large consecutive patient cohort

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard for the treatment of biliary obstruction of any etiology. However, cannulation failure of the common bile duct (CBD) by ERCP occurs in 5-10%. Alternatives after a failed ERCP are re-ERCP by an expert endoscopist, percutaneous transhepatic cholangio drainage (PTCD), (balloon) enteroscopy-assisted ERCP, or surgery. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of the bile ducts (EUS-BD) is becoming the standard of care in tertiary referral centers for cases of failed ERCP in patients with malignant obstruction of the CBD. In expert hands, EUS-guided biliary drainage has excellent technical/clinical success rates and lower complication rates compared to PTCD. Despite the successful performance of EUS-BD in malignant cases, its use in benign cases is limited. The aim of this study (design, systematic prospective clinical observational study on quality assurance in daily clinical practice) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in benign indications.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cholestasis and failed ERCP were recruited from a prospective EUS-BD registry (2004-2020). One hundred and three patients with EUS-BD and benign cholestasis were extracted from the registry (n_Total = 474). Indications of EUS-BDs included surgically altered anatomy (n = 65), atypical bile duct percutaneous transhepatic cholangio orifice at the duodenal junction from the longitudinal to the horizontal segment (n = 1), papilla of Vater not reached due to the gastric outlet/duodenal stenoses (n = 6), papilla that cannot be catheterized (n = 24), and proximal bile duct stenosis (n = 7). The primary endpoint was technical and clinical success. Secondary endpoints were procedure-related complications during the hospital stay.

RESULTS

103 patients with EUS-BD and benign cholestasis were extracted from the registry (nTotal=474). Different transluminal access routes were used to reach the bile ducts: transgastric (n = 72/103); -duodenal (n = 16/103); -jejunal (n = 14/103); combined -duodenal and -gastric (n = 1/103). The technical success rate was 96 % (n = 99) for cholangiography. Drainage was not required in 2 patients; balloon dilatation including stone extraction was sufficient in 17 cases (16.5 %; no additional or prophylactic insertion of a drain). Transluminal drainage was achieved in n = 68/103 (66 %; even higher in patients with drain indication only) by placement of a plastic stent (n = 29), conventional biliary metal stents (n = 24), HotAXIOS stents (n = 5; Boston Scientific, Ratingen, Germany), Hanaro stents (n = 6; Olympus, Hamburg, Germany), HotAXIOS stents and plastic stents (n = 1), HotAXIOS stents and metal stents (n = 1) and metal stents and plastic stents (n = 2). Techniques for stone extraction alone (nSuccessful=17) or stent insertion (nTotal = 85; nSuccessful=85 - rate, 100 %) and final EUS-BD access pathway included: Rendezvous technique (n = 14/85; 16.5 %), antegrade internal drainage (n = 20/85; 23.5 %), choledochointestinostomy (n = 7/85; 8.2 %), antegrade internal and hepaticointestinostomy (n = 22/85; 25.9 %), hepaticointestinostomy (n = 21/85; 24.7 %), choledochointestinostomy and hepaticointestinostomy (n = 1/85; 1.2 %).The complication rate was 25 % (n = 26) - the spectrum comprised stent dislocation (n = 11), perforation (n = 1), pain (n = 2), hemorrhage (n = 6), biliary ascites/leakage (n = 3) and bilioma/liver abscess (n = 3; major complication rate, n = 12/68 - 17.6 %). Re-interventions were required in 19 patients (24 interventions in total).

DISCUSSION

EUS-BD can be considered an elegant and safe alternative to PTCD or reoperation for failed ERCP to achieve the necessary drainage of the biliary system even in underlying benign diseases. An interventional EUS-based internal procedure can resolve cholestasis, avoid PTCD or reoperation, and thus improve quality of life. Due to the often complex (pathological and/or postoperative) anatomy, EUS-BD should only be performed in centers with interventional endoscopy/EUS experience including adequate abdominal surgery and interventional radiology expertise in the background. This enables adequately adapted therapeutic management in the event of challenging complications. It seems appropriate to conduct further studies with larger numbers of cases to systematize the approach and peri-interventional management and to successively develop specific equipment.

Hepaticogastrostomy versus choledochoduodenostomy: An international multicenter study on their long-term patency

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) offers minimally invasive decompression when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Stents can be placed from the intrahepatic ducts into the stomach (hepaticogastrostomy [HG]) or from the extrahepatic bile duct into the small intestine (choledochoduodenostomy [CCD]). Long-term patency of these stents is unknown. In this study, we aim to compare long-term patency of CCD versus HG.

Methods:

Consecutive patients from 12 centers were included in a registry over 14 years. Demographics, procedure info, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Student's t-test, Chi–square, and logistic regression analyses were conducted. Only patients with at least 6-month follow-up or who died within 6-month postprocedure were included.

Results:

One-hundred and eighty-two patients were included (93% male; mean age: 70; HG n = 95, CCD n = 87). No significant difference in indication, diagnosis, dissection instrument, or stent type was seen between the two groups. Technical success was 92% in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 75/87 (86%) in the HG group and 80/80 (100%) in the CCD group. A trend toward higher adverse events was seen in the CCD group. A total of 25 patients out of 87 needed stent revision in the HG group (success rate 71%), while eight out of 80 were revised in the CCD group (success rate 90%). Chi square shows CCD success higher than HG (90% vs. 71%, P = 0.010). After adjusting for diagnosis, jaundice or cholangitis presentation, instrument used for dissection, and gender, CCD was 4.5 times more likely than HG to achieve longer stent patency or manage obstruction (odds ratio 4.5; 95% 1.1548–17.6500, P = 0.0302).

Conclusion:

CCD is associated with superior long-term patency than HG but with a trend toward higher adverse events. This is particularly important in patients with increased survival. Additional studies are required before recommending a change in practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality in western countries. Early diagnosis of pancreatic cancers plays a key role in the management by identification of patients who are surgical candidates. The advancement in the radiological imaging and interventional endoscopy (including endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic enteral stenting techniques) has a significant impact in the diagnostic evaluation, staging and treatment of pancreatic cancer. The multidisciplinary involvement of radiology, gastroenterology, medical oncology and surgical oncology is central to the management of patients with pancreatic cancers. This review aims to highlight the diagnostic and therapeutic role of EUS in the management of patients with pancreatic malignancy, especially pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Biliary Cannulation in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiography: How to Tackle the Difficult Papilla

BACKGROUND

In the setting of a naïve papilla, biliary cannulation is a key step in successfully performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Difficult biliary cannulation (DBC) is associated with an increased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and failure of the whole procedure.

SUMMARY

Recommendations for biliary cannulation can be divided into (a) measures to reduce the likelihood of a difficult papilla situation a priori and (b) rescue techniques in case the endoscopist is actually facing DBC. (a) Careful inspection of the papillary anatomy and optimizing its accessibility by scope positioning is fundamental. A sphincterotome in combination with a soft-tip hydrophilic guidewire rather than a standard catheter with a standard guidewire should be used in most situations. (b) The most important rescue techniques are needle-knife precut, double-guidewire technique, and transpancreatic sphincterotomy. In few cases, anterograde cannulation techniques are needed. To this regard, the EUS-guided biliary drainage followed by rendezvous is increasingly used as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Key Messages: Biliary cannulation can be accomplished with alternative retrograde or less frequently by salvage anterograde techniques, once conventional direct cannulation attempts have failed. Considering recent favorable data for the early use of transpancreatic sphincterotomy, an adopted version of the 2016 European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) algorithm on biliary cannulation is proposed.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: Techniques and Literature Review of Transmural Stenting

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has emerged as an option in patients with failure of retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) because of difficulty in cannulation or surgically altered anatomy. This article provides a comprehensive review of the techniques and outcomes of EUS-PD, especially EUS-guided pancreatic transmural stenting. The clinical data derived from a total of 401 patients were reviewed in which the overall technical and clinical success rates were 339/401 (85%, range 63%–100%) and 328/372 (88%, range 76%–100%), respectively. Short-term adverse events occurred in 25% (102/401) of the cases, which included abdominal pain (n=45), acute pancreatitis (n=17), bleeding (n=10), and issues associated with pancreatic juice leakage such as perigastric or peripancreatic fluid collection (n=9). In conclusion, although EUS-PD remains a challenging procedure with a high risk of adverse events such as pancreatic juice leakage, perforation, and severe acute pancreatitis, the procedure seems to be a promising alternative for PD drainage in patients with altered anatomy or unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Biliary Obstruction

Biliary obstruction is a serious condition that can occur in the setting of both benign and malignant pathologies. In the setting of acute cholangitis, biliary decompression can be lifesaving; for patients with cancer who are receiving chemotherapy, untreated obstructive jaundice may lead to biochemical derangements that often preclude continuation of therapy unless biliary decompression is performed (see the ACR Appropriateness Criteria® topic on "Jaundice"). Recommended therapy including percutaneous decompression, endoscopic decompression, and/or surgical decompression is based on the etiology of the obstruction and patient factors including the individual's anatomy. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Epidemiology, Role of EUS in Diagnosis, Role of ERCP, Endoscopic Palliation

Pancreatic cancer is the seventh leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide and is associated with a poor survival rate. The vast majority of pancreatic cancers are inoperable at the time of diagnosis. In the absence of metastatic disease, operability depends on the extent of local disease; in particular, the presence or absence of vascular and lymph node involvement. Adequate staging is vital in deciding an appropriate treatment plan. Cross sectional imaging including CT, MRI and PET-CT are commonly used for staging. However, EUS is a useful adjunct for accurate loco-regional staging in addition to allowing diagnostic tissue samples to be obtained. Emerging EUS-guided therapeutic techniques have opened up new horizons in the management of pancreatic malignancy. EUS guidance can be used for coeliac plexus neurolysis in patients with intractable pain and fiducial placement in directing stereotactic radiotherapy. The majority of patients with cancer of the pancreatic head present with biliary obstruction. ERCP can be used to drain the obstructed biliary system with plastic or metal stents and offers an opportunity to confirm the diagnosis by obtaining brush cytology and forceps biopsy specimens. EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy or hepatico-gastrostomy is increasingly being employed for draining the biliary system if ERCP is unsuccessful.

Comprehensive review on EUS-guided biliary drainage

Feasibility of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for biliary drainage is not always applicable due to anatomical alterations or to inability to access the papilla. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage has always been considered the only alternative for this indication. However, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage represents a valid option to replace percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage when ERCP fails. According to the access site to the biliary tree, two kinds of approaches may be described: the intrahepatic and the extrahepatic. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided rendez-vous transpapillary drainage is performed where the second portion of the duodenum is easily reached but conventional ERCP fails. The recent introduction of self-expandable metal stents and lumen-apposing metal stents has improved this field. However, the role of the latter is still controversial. Echoendoscopic transmural biliary drainage can be challenging with potential severe adverse events. Therefore, trained endoscopists, in both ERCP and endoscopic ultrasonography are needed with surgical and radiological backup.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A change in paradigm?

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been developed as an alternative means of biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EUS-BD offers effective internal drainage in a single session in the event of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and has fewer adverse events (AE). In choosing which technique to use for EUS-BD, a combination of factors appears to be important in decision-making; technical expertise, the risk of AE, and anatomy. With the advent of novel all-in-one EUS-BD specific devices enabling simpler and safer techniques, as well as the growing experience and training of endosonographers, EUS-BD may potentially become a first-line technique in biliary drainage for MBO.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the preferred procedure for biliary drainage in benign and malignant obstructions. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is an emerging technique for when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. It is a highly versatile procedure with several options of access point, stent direction, and drainage route. Based on the current literature, the cumulative success rate is 88% to 93%, with an overall complication rate of 13% to 20%. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage seems to be an effective and valuable alternative technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography when performed by highly skilled endoscopists.

Success and safety of endoscopic treatments for concomitant biliary and duodenal malignant stenosis: A review of the literature

Synchronous biliary and duodenal malignant obstruction is a challenging endoscopic scenario in patients affected with ampullary, peri-ampullary, and pancreatic head neoplasia. Surgical bypass is no longer the gold-standard therapy for these patients, as simultaneous endoscopic biliary and duodenal stenting is currently a feasible and widely used technique, with a high technical success in expert hands. In recent years, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has evolved from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure, and is now increasingly used to guide biliary drainage, especially in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The advent of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has expanded EUS therapeutic options, and changed the management of synchronous bilioduodenal stenosis. The most recent literature regarding endoscopic treatments for synchronous biliary and duodenal malignant stenosis has been reviewed to determine the best endoscopic approach, also considering the advent of an interventional EUS approach using LAMS.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasonography Guided Biliary Drainage and Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage in the Management of Malignant Obstructive Jaundice After Failed ERCP

AIMS

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasonography guided biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in the management of malignant obstructive jaundice after failed ERCP.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study on 66 consecutive patients with malignant obstructive jaundice admitted to our hospital between January 2014 and January 2016 [corrected]. Patients were performed endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage in 36 cases (group A) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in 30 cases (group B) according to the results of the draw. Data on the following variables were compared between the 2 groups: the technical success rate, the clinical success rate, complications, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

There was statistically significant difference in the clinical success rate (88.89% vs. 66.67%; χ=4.84), complications (5.56% vs. 23.33%; χ=4.39), length of hospital stay (11.54±3.73 d vs. 15.68±6.56 d; t=8.17) and hospital costs (23.52±8.44 thousand yuan vs. 32.81±6.06 thousand yuan; t=16.28) (P<0.05) between group A and group B. The technical success rate was higher in groups A than that in group B, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (94.44% vs. 86.67%; χ=1.20; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of malignant obstructive jaundice, endoscopic ultrasonography guided biliary drainage is safer and more effective than percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage when performed by experienced practitioners after failed ERCP. Its more widespread use is recommended.

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD) for Malignant Biliary Obstruction Associated with Ascites: Results of a Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that EUS-BD may be a feasible and safer alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed ERCP in patients with ascites. To date, no study has specifically evaluated the performance of EUS-BD in this context.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was done for patients with and without ascites who underwent EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP between July 2010 and September 2014. Complications and technical and clinical successes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were included: 20 patients without ascites (group 1) and 11 with ascites (group 2). Nineteen patients underwent EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (six in group 2), and 12 underwent EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (five in group 2). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical success was observed in 95% (n = 19) in group 1 and 64% (n = 7) in group 2 (p = 0.042). In three out of four patients without clinical success in group 2, the follow-up period was not long enough to observe the clinical response because of early death within the 2 weeks after EUS-BD secondary to disease progression or preprocedural unresponsive sepsis. No significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 either in the overall rates of procedural-related complications (20 and 9%, respectively, p = 0.63) or in the rates of major complications (15 vs 9%, respectively, p = 0.639). Stent migration occurred in one patient in each group, intra- or post-procedural bleeding occurred in two patients in group 1, which was conservatively managed, and one patient in group 1 presented biliary leakage. Stent patency and the number of re-interventions were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD is technically feasible in patients with ascites. Our results suggest that EUS-BD may be a clinically effective and safe alternative after failed ERCP in patients with ascites.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel

OBJECTIVES

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures.

METHODS

Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question.

RESULTS

A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Safety and Complications of Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become an essential tool for the diagnostic and therapeutic intervention of gastrointestinal diseases. Beyond the drainage of fluid collections, it enables decompression of inaccessible bile and pancreatic ducts, the gallbladder, and the creation of anastomosis within the gastrointestinal tract using fully lumen-apposing stents. This review explored the safety and efficacy of these novel procedures and discussed the training pathway that is necessary to perform them efficiently and safely.

Usefulness of combined percutaneous-endoscopic rendezvous techniques after failed therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in the era of endoscopic ultrasound guided rendezvous

The rendezvous approach is a salvage technique after failure of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). In certain circumstances, percutaneous-endoscopic rendezvous (PE-RV) is preferred, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV) is difficult to perform. We aimed to evaluate PE-RV outcomes, describe the PE-RV techniques, and identify potential indications for PE-RV over EUS-RV.Retrospective analysis was conducted of a prospectively designed ERC database between January 2005 and December 2016 at a tertiary referral center including cases where PE-RV was used as a salvage procedure after ERC failure.During the study period, PE-RV was performed in 42 cases after failed therapeutic ERC; 15 had a surgically altered enteric anatomy. The technical success rate of PE-RV was 92.9% (39/42), with a therapeutic success rate of 88.1% (37/42). Potential indications for PE-RV over EUS-RV were identified in 23 cases, and either PE-RV or EUS-RV could have effectively been used in 19 cases. Endoscopic bile duct access was successfully achieved with PE-RV in 39 cases with accessible biliary orifice using one of PE-RV cannulation techniques (classic, n = 11; parallel, n = 19; and adjunctive maneuvers, n = 9).PE-RV uses a unique technology and has clinical indications that distinguish it from EUS-RV. Therefore, PE-RV can still be considered a useful salvage technique for the treatment of biliary obstruction after ERC failure.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Techniques for Accessing and Draining the Biliary System and the Pancreatic Duct

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails to decompress the biliary system or the pancreatic duct, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary or pancreatic access and drainage can be used. Data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. The outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage seem equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP, whereas only retrospective studies are available for pancreatic duct drainage. In this article, revision of the technical and clinical status and the current evidence of interventional EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage are presented.

Progress in Endoscopic Ultrasonography: Training in Therapeutic or Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound is a rapidly expanding field, requiring training beyond the 3-year gastroenterology fellowship and at least an additional year in a structured advanced endoscopy fellowship program with mentorship from an expert at a sufficiently high-volume center. Simulation models can provide initial instruction on technique and increase familiarity with the rapidly changing devices. Trainees must also be given a graduated level of independence to perform each step and, eventually, be able to practice on a variety of endoscopic targets. With structured competency markers, trainees can learn methods to maximize success and minimize the risk of complications.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis

The failure rate of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary cannulation is approximately 6%–7% in cases of obstructive jaundice. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is the procedure of choice in such cases. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD) is a novel technique that allows biliary drainage by echoendoscopy and fluoroscopy using a stent from the biliary tree to the gastrointestinal tract. Information in PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane review were analyzed to obtain studies comparing EGBD and PTBD. Six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Technical (odds ratio (OR): 0.34; confidence interval (CI) 0.10–1.14; p=0.05) and clinical (OR: 1.48; CI 0.46–4.79; p=0.51) success rates were not statistically significant between the EGBD and PTBD groups. Mild adverse events were nonsignificantly different (OR: 0.36; CI 0.10–1.24; p=0.11) but not the moderate-to-severe adverse events (OR: 0.16; CI 0.08–0.32; p≤0.00001) and total adverse events (OR: 0.34; CI 0.20–0.59; p≤0.0001). EGBD is equally effective but safer than PTBD.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Access, with Focus on Technique and Practical Tips

In 1980, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was introduced as a diagnostic tool for evaluation of the pancreas. Since the introduction of curvilinear-array echoendoscopy, EUS has been used for a variety of gastrointestinal interventions, including fine needle aspiration, tumor ablation, and pancreatobiliary access. One of the main therapeutic roles of EUS is biliary drainage as an alternative to endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). This article summarizes three different methods of EUS-guided biliary access, with focus on technique and practical tips.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy in Surgically Altered Anatomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become the mainstay of therapy for pancreatobiliary diseases. While ERCP is safe and highly effective in the general population, the procedure remains challenging or impossible in patients with surgically altered anatomy (SAA). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) allows transmural access to the bile or pancreatic duct (PD) prior to ductal drainage using ERCP-based techniques. Also known as endosonography-guided cholangiopancreatography (ESCP), the procedure provides multiple advantages over overtube-assisted enteroscopy ERCP or percutaneous or surgical approaches. However, the procedure should only be performed by endoscopists experienced in both EUS and ERCP and with the proper tools. In this review, various EUS-guided diagnostic and therapeutic drainage techniques in patients with SAA are examined. Detailed step-by-step procedural descriptions, technical tips, feasibility, and safety data are also discussed.

Dilation of Strictures in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Who, When and How

Stricture formation occurs in up to 40% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients are often symptomatic, resulting in significant morbidity, hospitalizations, and loss of productivity. Strictures can be managed endoscopically in addition to traditional surgical management (sphincteroplasty or resection of the affected bowel segments). About 3% to 5% patients with IBD develop primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), which results in stricture formation in the biliary tree, managed for the most part by endoscopic therapies. In this article, we discuss endoscopic management of strictures both in the alimentary tract and biliary tree in patients with IBD and/or PSC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage: predictors of successful outcome in patients who fail endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are conventionally offered percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). While PTBD is effective, it is associated with catheter-related complications, pain, and poor quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a minimally invasive endoscopic option increasingly offered as an alternative to PTBD. We compare outcomes of EUS-BD and PTBD in patients with biliary obstruction at a single tertiary care center.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed in patients with biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-BD or PTBD after failed ERCP from June 2010 through December 2014 at a single tertiary care center. Patient demographics, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were documented for each group. The aim was to compare efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and PTBD and evaluate predictors of success.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were included (mean age 67.5 years, 65 % male). Forty-seven underwent EUS-BD, and thirteen underwent PTBD. Technical success rates of PTBD and EUS-BD were similar (91.6 vs. 93.3 %, p = 1.0). PTBD patients underwent significantly more re-interventions than EUS-BD patients (mean 4.9 versus 1.3, p < 0.0001), had more late (>24-h) adverse events (53.8 % vs. 6.6 %, p = 0.001) and experienced more pain (4.1 vs. 1.9, p = 0.016) post-procedure. In univariate analysis, clinical success was lower in the PTBD group (25 vs. 62.2 %, p = 0.03). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, EUS-BD was the sole predictor of clinical success and long-term resolution (OR 21.8, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Despite similar technical success rates compared to PTBD, EUS-BD results in a lower need for re-intervention, decreased rate of late adverse events, and lower pain scores, and is the sole predictor for clinical success and long-term resolution. EUS-BD should be the treatment of choice after a failed ERCP.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Variable success and adverse event rates have been reported for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) utilizing either extrahepatic or intrahepatic approach. We aimed to conduct a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and to compare the two approaches and transluminal methods of EUS-BD.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus from January 2001 through January 5, 2015, to identify studies reporting technical success and adverse events of EUS-BD. A sample size of more than 20 patients was a further criterion. Weighted pooled rate (WPR) for technical success and post-procedure complications was calculated for overall studies and predefined subgroups. Pooled odds ratios were calculated for technical success and adverse events for two approaches and transluminal methods of EUS-BD for distal common bile duct (CBD) strictures.

RESULTS

The WPR with 95% confidence interval (CI) for technical success and post-procedure adverse events was 90% (86, 93%) and 17% (13, 22%), respectively, with considerable heterogeneity (I(2) = 77%). For high-quality studies, the WPR for technical success was 94% (91, 96 %), I(2) = 0% and WPR for post-procedure adverse event was 16% (12, 19%), I(2) = 39%. In meta-regression model, distal CBD stricture and transpapillary drainage were associated with higher technical success and intrahepatic access route was associated with higher adverse event rate. There was no difference in technical success using either approach OR 1.27 (0.52, 3.13), I(2) = 0% or transluminal method OR 1.32 (0.51, 3.38), I(2) = 0%. However, the extrahepatic approach appeared significantly safer as compared to the intrahepatic approach OR 0.35 (0.19, 0.67), I(2) = 27%. Likewise, choledochoduodenostomy was found to have less adverse events as compared to hepaticogastrostomy, OR 0.40 (0.18, 0.87), I (2) = 0%.

CONCLUSION

In cases of failure of traditional ERC to achieve biliary drainage, EUS-BD appears to be an emerging therapeutic modality with a cumulative success rate of 90% and cumulative adverse events rate of 17%. Randomized controlled trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of the procedure along with the comparison to traditional modalities like percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage.

Biliary and pancreatic stenting: Devices and insertion techniques in therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasonography

Stents are tubular devices made of plastic or metal. Endoscopic stenting is the most common treatment for obstruction of the common bile duct or of the main pancreatic duct, but also employed for the treatment of bilio-pancreatic leakages, for preventing post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and to drain the gallbladder and pancreatic fluid collections. Recent progresses in techniques of stent insertion and metal stent design are represented by new, fully-covered lumen apposing metal stents. These stents are specifically designed for transmural drainage, with a saddle-shape design and bilateral flanges, to provide lumen-to-lumen anchoring, reducing the risk of migration and leakage. This review is an update of the technique of stent insertion and metal stent deployment, of the most recent data available on stent types and characteristics and the new applications for biliopancreatic stents.

Therapeutic role of endoscopic ultrasound in pancreaticobiliary disease: A comprehensive review

With the development of technology and accessories, the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from diagnostics to therapeutics. In order to characterise the therapeutic role of EUS, we searched Web of Knowledge database and reviewed articles associated with therapeutic EUS. There are two modalities for the therapeutic purpose: drainage and fine-needle injection. EUS-guided drainage is a promising procedure for the treatment of peripancreatic fluid collection and biliary obstruction; EUS-guided fine-needle injections such as celiac plexus neurolysis, for the purpose of pain relief for pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis, has emerged as a promising procedure. The aim of the study was to perform a comprehensive and conscientious review on the techniques, complications and clinical outcomes of those EUS-based procedures.

Reality named endoscopic ultrasound biliary drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used for diagnosis and evaluation of many diseases of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. In the past, it was used to guide a cholangiography, but nowadays it emerges as a powerful therapeutic tool in biliary drainage. The aims of this review are: outline the rationale for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD); detail the procedural technique; evaluate the clinical outcomes and limitations of the method; and provide recommendations for the practicing clinician. In cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), patients are usually referred for either percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or surgical bypass. Both these procedures have high rates of undesirable complications. EGBD is an attractive alternative to PTBD or surgery when ERCP fails. EGBD can be performed at two locations: transhepatic or extrahepatic, and the stent can be inserted in an antegrade or retrograde fashion. The drainage route can be transluminal, duodenal or transpapillary, which, again, can be antegrade or retrograde [rendezvous (EUS-RV)]. Complications of all techniques combined include pneumoperitoneum, bleeding, bile leak/peritonitis and cholangitis. We recommend EGBD when bile duct access is not possible because of failed cannulation, altered upper GI tract anatomy, gastric outlet obstruction, a distorted ampulla or a periampullary diverticulum, as a minimally invasive alternative to surgery or radiology.

Feasibility and safety of a novel dedicated device for one-step EUS-guided biliary drainage: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been proposed as an alternative for patients after failed ERCP. To date, the evaluation of dedicated device for one-step EUS-BD has been limited. To determine feasibility and safety of a newly designed 7F stent introducer with tapered metal tip as a push-type dilator for one-step metal stent placement without additional fistula dilation in EUS-BD.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients with malignant biliary obstruction and failed ERCP were randomly assigned to a dedicated stent introducer with a modified hybrid metal stent (DH group, n = 16) or a conventional 8.5F biliary metal stent introducer with a fully covered metal stent (FC group, n = 16). The technical success, procedural times, clinical success rate, and adverse event rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

One-step technical success without additional fistula dilation in the DH was 88% (14/16). Multi-step process in a stent placement was performed in all patients of the FC group. The procedural time in the DH was significantly shorter than the FC (10 vs. 15 min, P = 0.007). No difference in overall technical or clinical success was seen between the groups. The rate of an early adverse event was common in the FC compared with the DH (31.3% [5/16] in the FC vs. 6.3% [1/16] in the DH, P = 0.172), although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

A dedicated device for one-step EUS-BD may be technically feasible, safe, and shorten the procedural times with less chance of an additional fistula dilation process, resulting in a potential reduction of the early adverse events.

Endoscopic management of benign biliary strictures

Endoscopic management of biliary obstruction has evolved tremendously since the introduction of flexible fiberoptic endoscopes over 50 years ago. For the last several decades, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become established as the mainstay for definitively diagnosing and relieving biliary obstruction. In addition, and more recently, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has gained increasing favor as an auxiliary diagnostic and therapeutic modality in facilitating decompression of the biliary tree. Here, we provide a review of the current and continually evolving role of gastrointestinal endoscopy, including both ERCP and EUS, in the management of biliary obstruction with a focus on benign biliary strictures.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) technology has evolved dramatically over the past 20 years, from being a supplementary diagnostic aid available only in large medical centers to being a core diagnostic and therapeutic tool that is widely available. Although formal recommendations and practice guidelines have not been developed, there are considerable data supporting the use of EUS for its technical accuracy in diagnosing pancreaticobiliary and gastrointestinal pathology. Endosonography is now routine practice not only for pathologic diagnosis and tumor staging but also for drainage of cystic lesions and celiac plexus neurolysis. In this article, we cover the use of EUS in biliary and pancreatic intervention, ablative therapy, enterostomy, and vascular intervention.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: a review

OPINION STATEMENT

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) has become the standard tool for diagnosis and treatment of patients with biliary obstruction. However, despite the reported success rate of >90 % in expert centers, the common bile duct may still be occasionally inaccessible due to anatomical or technical issues. Over the past decade, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an effective alternative over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or surgical bypass for biliary drainage after unsuccessful ERCP. EUS-BD includes rendezvous techniques (EUS-RV), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), and EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy (EUS-HGS). Published data demonstrated high success rates especially for EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS. Complication rates, however, are also higher in these two techniques. The indications and anatomical requirements for the three techniques differ and should be considered complementary to each other. Most reported studies only included a small number of patients, and larger-scaled randomized trials are required to establish the efficacy among various EUS techniques and to compare to traditional means of radiological or surgical drainage.

Hepaticogastrostomy or choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP: is there any difference?

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD) is an evolving alternative technique for patients with malignant biliary obstruction for which ERCP failed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of 2 nonanatomic EUS-guided BD routes: hepaticogastrostomy (HPG) and choledochoduodenostomy (CD).

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized trial.

SETTING

Tertiary endoscopic referral center.

PATIENTS

Forty-nine patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction and failed ERCP were included. The HPG group had 25 patients and the CD group had 24 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-guided HPG or CD. In all procedures, a biliary puncture with a 19-gauge needle followed by cholangiography, wire advancement, track dilation, and self-expandable metal stent deployment were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical and clinical success, quality of life, adverse events, and survival.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 96% for HPG and 91% for CD. The clinical success rate was 91% for HPG and 77% for CD. The mean procedural time was 47.8 minutes for HPG and 48.8 minutes for CD. The mean scores of quality of life were similar during follow-up. The overall adverse event rate was 16.3% (20% for the HPG group and 12.5% for the CD group). One patient with a bile leak required percutaneous biloma drainage. There was no statistical difference between the 2 techniques and no difference with regard to survival time between the 2 groups.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center study.

CONCLUSION

HPG and CD techniques are similar in efficacy and safety. Both HPG and CD seem valid alternative options for BD in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary intervention in patients with surgically altered anatomy

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) in patients with surgically altered anatomies.

METHODS

We performed a search of the MEDLINE database for studies published between 2001 to July 2014 reporting on EUS-BD in patients with surgically altered anatomy using the terms "EUS drainage" and "altered anatomy". All relevant articles were accessed in full text. A manual search of the reference lists of relevant retrieved articles was also performed. Only full-text English papers were included. Data regarding age, gender, diagnosis, method of EUS-BD and intervention, type of altered anatomy, technical success, clinical success, and complications were extracted and collected. Anatomic alterations were categorized as: group 1, Billroth I; group 2, Billroth II; group 4, Roux-en-Y with gastric bypass; and group 3, all other types.

RESULTS

Twenty three articles identified in the literature search, three reports were from the same group with different numbers of cases. In total, 101 cases of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy were identified. Twenty-seven cases had no information and were excluded. Seventy four cases were included for analysis. Data of EUS-BD in patients categorized as group 1, 2 and 4 were limited with 2, 3 and 6 cases with EUS-BD done respectively. Thirty four cases with EUS-BD were reported in group 3. The pooled technical success, clinical success, and complication rates of all reports with available data were 89.18%, 91.07% and 17.5%, respectively. The results are similar to the reported outcomes of EUS-BD in general, however, with limited data of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy rendered it difficult to draw a firm conclusion.

CONCLUSION

EUS-BD may be an option for patients with altered anatomy after a failed endoscopic-retrograde-cholangiography in centers with expertise in EUS-BD procedures in a research setting.

Endoscopic ultrasonography guided drainage: summary of consortium meeting, May 21, 2012, San Diego, California

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the preferred procedure for biliary and pancreatic drainage. While ERCP is successful in about 95% of cases, a small subset of cases are unsuccessful due to altered anatomy, peri-ampullary pathology, or malignant obstruction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage is a promising technique for biliary, pancreatic and recently gallbladder decompression, which provides multiple advantages over percutaneous or surgical biliary drainage. Multiple retrospective and some prospective studies have shown endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage to be safe and effective. Based on the currently reported literature, regardless of the approach, the cumulative success rate is 84%-93% with an overall complication rate of 16%-35%. endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage seems a viable therapeutic modality for failed conventional drainage when performed by highly skilled advanced endoscopists at tertiary centers with expertise in both echo-endoscopy and therapeutic endoscopy.