Efficacy and safety in case of technical success of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transhepatic antegrade biliary drainage: A report of a monocentric study

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.

Current status of endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade intervention for biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy

Endoscopic management of biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy can be challenging because the altered anatomy makes it difficult to insert an endoscope into the biliary orifice. Even if insertion is feasible, the worse maneuverability of the endoscope and the restriction in available devices and techniques could complicate the procedure. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade intervention (EUS-AG) has been reported as a useful management method for biliary diseases, especially in patients with surgically altered anatomy. In EUS-AG, the biliary disease is managed in an antegrade fashion through a temporal fistula created under EUS guidance between the intrahepatic biliary duct and upper intestine. In this article, we reviewed the current status of EUS-AG for each biliary diseases, malignant biliary obstruction, bile duct stones, and benign biliary stricture in patients with surgically altered anatomy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Antegrade Stent Placement in Patients with Failed ERCP as a Modality of Preoperative and Palliative Biliary Drainage

BACKGROUND

No large studies have addressed the role of endoscopic-ultrasound biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction (MEBO). We aimed to discuss the outcomes of EUS antegrade stent placement (EUS-AG) in the preoperative and palliative setting.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent EUS-AG for MEBO between December 2019 and December 2021 was done. Primary outcome measures were technical success and clinical success. Secondary outcome measures were number of days of hospitalization postprocedure, adverse events related to EUS-AG procedure, morbidity related to surgery, and 3-month mortality after surgery.

RESULTS

54 patients underwent attempt for EUS-AG (mean age 54.8 ± 12.1 years; female 44.4%). Most common primary cancer was pancreatic cancer in 42.1% (23/54) patients. Indication was palliative in 34 (62.9%) patients and PBD in 20 (37%) patients. Level of block was distal in 35 (64.8%) and proximal in 19 (35.1%) patients. Technical success of EUS-AG was 88.7% (47/53). Clinical success was seen in 95.7% (45/47) patients. Median number of days of hospitalization postprocedure was 1 day. No procedure-related severe adverse events were seen. Of 20 patients who underwent EUS-AG as PBD, 19 had technical success (95%) with clinical success in 94.5% (18/19). Surgery was performed in 11 patients, of whom 10 patients underwent successful PPPD (one intraoperative liver metastasis). Two patients had Clavein-Dindo III/IV complication post-PPPD, with one mortality within 30 days of surgery.

CONCLUSION

EUS-AG is safe and effective after failed ERCP in both preoperative and palliative setting.

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.

Efficacy and safety of EUS biliary drainage in malignant distal and hilar biliary obstruction: A comprehensive review of literature and algorithm

Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) encompasses a variety of malignancies arising from the pancreaticobiliary system. This can be divided into malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) or malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) biliary obstruction to which clinical outcomes and technical considerations of various biliary drainage methods may differ. EUS biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been increasingly influential in the management of MBO together with other familiar biliary drainage methods such as ERCP and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). Conventionally, ERCP has always been the primary choice of endoscopic biliary drainage in both MHBO and MDBO and that PTBD or EUS-BD is used as a salvage method when ERCP fails for which current guidelines recommends PTBD, especially for MHBO. This review was able to show that with today's evidence, EUS-BD is equally efficacious and possesses a better safety profile in the management of MBO and should be on the forefront of endoscopic biliary drainage. Therefore, EUS-BD could be used either as a primary or preferred salvage biliary drainage method in these cases.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage: a comprehensive review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become widely accepted over the past several years for complicated biliary drainage. When conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not successful or feasible due to a variety of constraints, an ultrasound-guided technique through intrahepatic and extrahepatic approaches allows adequate management of hepatobiliary obstruction. Other management alternatives include percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainages (PTBD) and complicated surgical approaches, both of which can be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. There are various technical approaches to allow successful biliary drainage which will be reviewed in this article.

EUS-Guided Antegrade Biliary Stenting Using a Novel Fully Covered Metal Stent (with Video)

BACKGROUND

Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) combined with antegrade stenting (AS) has been reported to be associated with longer stent patency and reduced procedure-related adverse events. In EUS-AS, an uncovered metal stent is usually selected to prevent stent misplacement or dislocation. However, because patient survival has improved with advances in chemotherapy, longer stent patency may be required.

AIM

The technical feasibility and safety of EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage combined with EUS-AS using a novel covered metal stent were evaluated.

METHODS

Patients with malignant biliary obstruction leading to obstructive jaundice, in whom standard ERCP had failed or was contraindicated, were enrolled in this study between July 2015 and October 2017. As the control group, patients undergoing EUS-AS using an uncovered metal stent were enrolled between October 2014 and June 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, EUS-AS using a covered metal stent was performed in 17 patients and using an uncovered metal stent in the remaining 22 patients. Median stent patency including stent dysfunction and patient death was longer in the covered metal stent group (153 days) compared with that of the uncovered metal stent group (108 days) although there were no significant differences (P = 0.06). In only cases with stent dysfunction was median stent patency of the covered metal stent group significantly longer than that of the uncovered metal stent group (not available vs 150 days, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, EUS-guided transluminal biliary drainage combined with EUS-AS using a covered metal stent may be feasible and safe, although the indications for this procedure should be carefully considered.

A multi-institution consensus on how to perform EUS-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was shown to be useful for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). However, there is lack of consensus on how EUS-BD should be performed.

Methods:

This was a worldwide multi-institutional survey among members of the International Society of EUS conducted in February 2018. The survey consisted of 10 questions related to the practice of EUS-BD.

Results:

Forty-six endoscopists of them completed the survey. The majority of endoscopists felt that EUS-BD could replace percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failure of ERCP. Among all EUS-BD methods, the rendezvous stenting technique should be the First choice. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) were recommended by most endoscopists. For EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), superiority of partially-covered SEMS over fully-covered SEMS was not in agreement. 6-Fr cystotomes were recommended for fistula creation. During the HGS approach, longer SEMS (8 or 10 cm) was recommended. During the choledochoduodenostomy approach, 6-cm SEMS was recommended. During the intrahepatic (IH) approach, the IH segment 3 was recommended.

Conclusion:

This is the first worldwide survey on the practice of EUS-BD for MBO. There were wide variations in practice, and randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for the management of this condition.