Hepatogastrostomy by EUS for malignant afferent loop obstruction after duodenopancreatectomy

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis: Current status and future perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Both clinical experience and supporting data have improved drastically in the context of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis (EUS-GIA). Where outcomes used to be questioned, focus has now moved towards performing comparative studies, optimizing technical approaches, improving patient selection, and developing well-defined treatment algorithms.

METHODS

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of technical developments within EUS-GIA and to discuss the current status of EUS-GIA and future directions.

RESULTS

EUS-GIA techniques such as EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (EDGE) and EUS-guided treatment afferent loop syndrome have undergone further development, refining technical approaches, improving patient selection and subsequent outcomes. Retrospective evaluations of EUS-GE have shown similar safety when compared to enteral stenting, whilst attaining surgical range efficacy. Whereas, in patients with gastric bypass anatomy, EDGE seems less cumbersome and time consuming than enteroscopy-assisted ERCP, while preventing surgical morbidity associated with laparoscopy-assisted ERCP. Although less evidence is available on EUS-guided treatment of afferent loop syndrome, this technique has been associated with higher clinical success and fewer reinterventions and adverse events when compared to enteral stenting and percutaneous drainage, respectively. Several randomized studies are currently underway evaluating EUS-GE in malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), whereas more prospective data are still required on EDGE and long-term fistula management.

CONCLUSION

EUS-GIA has become a crucial alternative to established techniques, overcoming technical limitations and subsequently improving patient outcomes. Although we should focus on prospective confirmation of these results in the context of GOO and EDGE, the current evidence already allows for a prominent role for EUS-GIA in our everyday practice.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for patients with afferent loop syndrome: a comparison with EUS-guided gastroenterostomy or percutaneous drainage

OBJECTIVES

Where palliative surgery or percutaneous drainage used to be the only option in patients with afferent loop syndrome, endoscopic management by EUS-guided gastroenterostomy has been gaining ground. However, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy might also provide sufficient biliary drainage. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for the management of afferent loop syndrome and provide comparative data on the different approaches.

METHODS

The institutional databases were queried for all consecutive minimally invasive procedures for afferent loop syndrome. A retrospective, dual-centre analysis was performed, separately analysing EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy, EUS-guided gastroenterostomy and percutaneous drainage. Efficacy, safety, need for re-intervention, hospital stay and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 17 patients were included (mean age 59 years (± SD 10.5), 23.5% female). Six patients, which were ineligible for EUS-guided gastroenterostomy, were treated with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy and percutaneous drainage were performed in 6 and 5 patients respectively. Clinical success was achieved in all EUS-treated patients, versus 80% in the percutaneous drainage group (p = 0.455). Furthermore, higher rates of bilirubin decrease were seen among patients undergoing EUS: > 25% bilirubin decrease in 10 vs. 1 patient(s) in the percutaneously drained group (p = 0.028), with > 50% and > 75% decrease identified only in the EUS group. Using the ASGE lexicon for adverse event grading, adverse events occurred only in patients treated with percutaneous drainage (60%, p = 0.015). And last, the median number of re-interventions was significantly lower in patients undergoing EUS (0 (IQR 0.0-1.0) vs. 1 (0.5-2.5), p = 0.045) when compared to percutaneous drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

In the management of afferent loop syndrome, EUS seems to outperform percutaneous drainage. Moreover, in our cohort, EUS-guided gastroenterostomy and hepaticogastrostomy provided similar outcomes, suggesting EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy as the salvage procedure in situations where EUS-guided gastroenterostomy is not feasible or has failed.

Enteral stent placement for malignant afferent loop obstruction by the through-the-scope technique using a short-type single-balloon enteroscope

Background and study aims  A short-type single-balloon enteroscope with a 3.2-mm working channel makes it possible to insert an enteral stent by the through-the-scope technique in patients with malignant afferent loop obstruction. Here, we report five cases of malignant afferent loop obstruction treated with endoscopic enteral stenting. We also propose a new classification for three types of malignant afferent loop obstruction. Type 1: The obstruction site is located distal to the papilla or the bilioenteric anastomosis. Type 2: The obstruction site is located at the papilla or the bilioenteric anastomosis. Type 3: The obstruction site is located between the bilioenteric and pancreaticoenteric anastomosis. The patients with type 1 and 3 were simply treated by inserting an enteral stent endoscopically. The patient with type 2 was treated with an endoscopic enteral stent for malignant afferent loop obstruction and with percutaneous transhepatic biliary stenting for malignant biliary obstruction. Although double stenting for type 2 remains a difficult endoscopic procedure, the endoscopic approach has become the standard approach for malignant afferent loop obstruction.

Percutaneous Transhepatic Self-expanding Metallic Stent Placement for the Treatment of Malignant Afferent Loop Obstruction

We report the case of a 71-year-old man with afferent loop obstruction (ALO) after Roux-en-Y reconstruction due to gastric cancer. Computed tomography showed a distended afferent loop and a dilatated bile duct. We could not reach the stricture site in the afferent loop using a gastroscope. We performed percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and placed a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) in the duodenal stricture through the PTBD route. Although an endoscopic approach is preferable, when PTBD can be performed, percutaneous transhepatic SEMS placement might be an alternative option for treating ALO in cases in which it is not possible to reach the site of stenosis with an endoscope.