Use of partially covered and uncovered metallic prosthesis for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: Results of a retrospective monocentric study

Endoscopic biliary drainage for distal bile duct obstruction due to pancreatic cancer

Approximately 60% of pancreatic cancers occur in the pancreatic head and may present as obstructive jaundice due to bile duct invasion. Obstructive jaundice often leads to poor general conditions and acute cholangitis, interfering with surgery and chemotherapy and requiring biliary drainage. The first choice of treatment for biliary drainage is the endoscopic transpapillary approach. In unresectable tumors, self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are most commonly used and are classified into uncovered and covered SEMSs. Recently, antireflux metal stents and large- or small-diameter SEMSs have become commercially available, and their usefulness has been reported. Plastic stents are infrequently used in patients with resectable biliary obstruction; however, owing to the recent trend in preoperative chemotherapy, SEMSs are frequently used because of the long time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is often performed in patients who are not eligible for the transpapillary approach, and favorable outcomes have been reported. Different EUS-BD techniques and specialized stents have been developed and can be safely used in high-volume centers. The indications for EUS-BD are expected to further expand in the future.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Interventions

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) encompasses an array of procedures to manage pancreaticobiliary and luminal gastrointestinal disorders. Therapeutic EUS procedures include EUS-guided rendezvous of the pancreatic and biliary ducts, as well as direct drainage of the bile duct, pancreatic duct, and gallbladder, drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, and luminal anastomosis creation. These procedures have a range of required equipment, approaches, clinical outcomes, and adverse events dependent on both procedure-related and patient-related factors. In expert hands, these procedures provide patients with less invasive options and can achieve excellent clinical outcomes.

Advances in self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions have evolved rapidly in recent years, with dedicated metal stents playing a crucial role in this process. Specifically, the invention of biflanged short metal-covered stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), and modifications in a variety of tubular self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), have led to innovations in EUS-guided interventions. LAMS or non-LAMS stents are commonly used in the EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, especially in cases of walled-off necrosis. Additionally, LAMS is commonly considered for drainage of the EUS-guided gallbladder or dilated common bile duct and EUS-guided gastroenterostomy. Fully or partially covered tubular SEMS with several new designs are being considered for EUS-guided biliary drainage. This review focuses on advances in SEMS for EUS-guided interventions and discusses related research results.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: a meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valid option for EUS-guided biliary drainage that has been increasingly used in the last decade. The aims of this study were to provide a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of the features and outcomes of this procedure.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for literature pertinent to EUS-HGS. Meta-analysis of the proportions and meta-regression of potential modifiers of the main outcome measures were applied. The main outcome was technical success; secondary outcomes were clinical success and procedure-related adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

33 studies, including 1644 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) was the underlying cause in almost all cases (99.6%); the main indications for EUS-HGS were duodenal/papillary invasion (34.8%), surgically altered anatomy (18.4%), and hilar stenosis (16.0%). The pooled technical success of EUS-HGS was 97.7% (95%CI 96.1%-99.0%; I 2 = 0%), the intention-to-treat clinical success rate was 88.1% (95%CI 84.7%-91.2%; I 2 = 33.9%), and procedure-related AEs occurred in 12.0% (95%CI 9.8%-14.5%; I 2 = 20.4%), with cholangitis/sepsis (2.8%) and bleeding (2.3%) the most frequent. The rate of procedure-related AEs was lower with the use of dedicated stents on univariable meta-regression analysis. Meta-regression showed that technical success and clinical success rates were modified by the centers' experience (>4/year).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS represents an effective and safe procedure for EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with MBO. Future studies should address the impact of center experience, patient selection, and the use of dedicated stents to improve performance of this technique.

Outcomes of partially covered self-expandable metal stents with different uncovered lengths in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: a Japanese retrospective study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The optimal length of the uncovered portion of partially covered self-expandable metal stents (PCSEMSs) used in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) remains unclear. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of PCSEMSs with different uncovered lengths, with a focus on stent migration and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO).

METHODS

Outcomes of patients undergoing EUS-HGS using PCSEMSs with 5-mm and 20-mm uncovered portions at our institution from January 2016 to December 2021 were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients underwent EUS-HGS using PCSEMS (5/20-mm uncovered portions: 32/30). Stent migration occurred only in the 5-mm group. There were no differences in RBO rates (28.1% vs. 40.0%) or median time to RBO (6.8 vs. 7.1 months) between the two groups. Median overall survival (OS) was longer in the 20-mm group (3.1 vs. 4.9 months, p=0.037) due to the higher number of patients that resumed chemotherapy after EUS-HGS (56.7% vs. 28.1%, p=0.029). Good performance status, absence of hepatic metastases, and chemotherapy after EUS-HGS were independent predictors of longer OS.

CONCLUSIONS

No migration was observed in patients treated with PCSEMS with 20-mm uncovered portions. Patients treated with PCSEMS with 20-mm uncovered portions performed at least as well as those treated with 5-mm uncovered portions in all material respects.

Management of iatrogenic perforations during endoscopic interventions in the hepato-pancreatico-biliary tract

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided interventions are among the most challenging procedures performed by interventional endoscopists and are associated with a significant risk of complications. Early recognition and classification of perforations allows immediate therapy which improves clinical outcomes. In this article we review the different aspects of iatrogenic perforations associated with pancreatico-biliary interventions, elucidating risk factors, diagnostic challenges and the latest therapeutic interventions.

Practice guidelines for managing extrahepatic biliary tract cancers

Backgrounds/Aims

Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021.

Methods

Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop.

Results

In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing.

Conclusions

The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Endoscopic management of malignant biliary obstructions

Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), both distal and hilar, represents an ensemble of different clinical conditions frequently encountered in everyday practice. Given the frequent unresectability of the disease at presentation and the increasing indications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, endoscopic biliary drainage is generally required during the course of the disease. With the widespread use of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the introduction of dedicated devices, EUS-guided biliary drainage has rapidly gained acceptance, together with transpapillary endoscopic biliary drainage and the percutaneous approach. This comprehensive review describes the current role of endoscopy for distal and hilar MBO supported by evidence, with a focus on the current hot topics in this field.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), classified as choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), is a feasible and effective alternative for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. However, the preferred technique for better outcomes has not yet been evaluated.

Objectives

We compared the long-term outcomes between the techniques.

Design

Retrospective comparative study.

Methods

We reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS or EUS-HGS with transmural stent placement for distal MBO between 2009 and 2022. The primary outcome was the stent patency. The secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs) of each technique, and independent risk factors for stent dysfunction.

Results

In all, 115 patients were divided into EUS-CDS (n = 56) and EUS-HGS (n = 59) groups. Among them, technical success was achieved in 98.2% of EUS-CDS and 96.6% of EUS-HGS groups. Furthermore, clinical success was 96.4% in EUS-CDS and 88.1% in EUS-HGS groups, without significant difference (p = 0.200). The mean duration of stent patency for EUS-CDS was 770.3 days while that for EUS-HGS was 164.9 days (p = 0.010). In addition, the only independent risk factor for stent dysfunction was systematic treatment after EUS-BD [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.238 (0.066-0.863), p = 0.029]. The incidence of stent dysfunction of EUS-HGS was higher than EUS-CDS (35.1% versus 18.2%, 0.071), despite no significant differences even in late AEs.

Conclusion

In distal MBO, EUS-CDS may be better than EUS-HGS with longer stent patency and fewer AEs. Furthermore, systematic treatment after EUS-BD is recommended for the improvement of stent patency.

Complications and management of interventional endoscopic ultrasound: A critical review

In the last decades, Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has rapidly grown and evolved from being mainly a diagnostic procedure, to being an interventional and therapeutic tool in several pathological clinical scenarios. With the progressive growth in technical expertise and dedicated devices, interventional endoscopic ultrasound procedures (IEUSP) have shown high rates of technical and clinical success, together with a relatively safe profile. However, the description and the standardization of different and specific types of adverse events (AEs) are still scarce in literature, and, consequently, even less the management of AEs. The aim of this study is to critical review and to describe AEs related to each of the main IEUSP, and to provide an overview on the possible management strategies of endoscopic complications. Future studies and guidelines are surely required to reach a better standardization of different AEs and their best management.

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.

Best Practices in Pancreatico-biliary Stenting and EUS-guided Drainage

Indications for endoscopic placement of endoluminal and transluminal stents have greatly expanded over time. Endoscopic stent placement is now a well-established approach for the treatment of benign and malignant biliary and pancreatic diseases (ie, obstructive jaundice, intra-abdominal fluid collections, chronic pancreatitis etc.). Ongoing refinement of technical approaches and development of novel stents is increasing the applicability and success of pancreatico-biliary stenting. In this review, we discuss the important developments in the field of pancreatico-biliary stenting, with a specific focus on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound-associated developments.

Drainage Approach for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Changing Paradigm

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care in the management of unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. However, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage has become widely accepted over the past several years for complicated biliary drainage in cases when ERCP is unsuccessful or not feasible. Recent emerging evidence suggests EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy are noninferior, and possibly even superior to conventional ERCP for primary palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. This article reviews the procedural techniques and considerations of the different techniques as well as comparative literature on safety and efficacy between techniques.

Development of devices for interventional endoscopic ultrasound for the management of pancreatobiliary diseases

A variety of devices have been developed for interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). EUS-guided drainage of the bile duct and pancreatic duct, as well as fluid collection adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract, is performed by a procedure involving puncture, guidewire manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Devices specialized for interventional EUS are being developed for each step of the procedure. Mechanical dilators such as bougie, balloon, and electrocautery dilators are used for tract dilation. Various types of plastic stents, self-expandable metal stents, and lumen-apposing metal stents specifically designed for interventional EUS are now available, including one-step devices developed to improve the efficacy and safety of interventional EUS. In addition, radiofrequency ablation and the placement of fiducial markers and radioactive seeds under EUS guidance are now becoming established for pancreatic neoplasms. Such development of specialized devices has expanded the indications for interventional EUS, increased the success rate, and lowered the adverse event rate.

Efficacy of a dedicated plastic stent in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy during the learning curve: cumulative multi-center experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Currently, there are no reports on the learning curve of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) using dedicated plastic stents. Therefore, we evaluated the outcomes of EUS-HGS using dedicated plastic stents at tertiary referral centers during the initial development phase of EUS-HGS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was strictly prioritized over EUS-HGS. Twenty-three consecutive patients treated using EUS-HGS with a 7-Fr dedicated plastic stent over 4 years beginning in 2018 were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The most common primary disease was pancreatic cancer, and the most common reason for difficulty in ERCP was duodenal obstruction, followed by surgically altered anatomy. The overall technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 95.7% (22/23). One failed case was converted to EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy. The clinical success rate was 90.9% (20/22). Adverse events (AEs) related to the procedure were observed in four (17.4%) patients, including mild biliary peritonitis in three (13.0%) and mild cholangitis in one (4.3%) patient; all patients received conservative therapy. No serious AEs, such as stent migration, bleeding, or gastrointestinal perforation, were observed. Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) was observed in eight (34.8%) patients. Of these, HGS stent replacement was performed in four patients, and other treatments were performed in the remaining four patients. Another four (17.4%) patients did not develop RBO but underwent periodic HGS stent replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS using a dedicated plastic stent was performed safely even in its initial phase of introduction. The approach using this stent can be useful in case of ERCP failure for biliary decompression because of the high feasibility and low risk of serious adverse events.

Long-term outcomes and predictors of adverse events of EUS-guided hepatico-gastrostomy for malignant biliary obstruction: Multicenter, retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) may be a feasible and useful alternative in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). To date, the risk factors for adverse events (AEs) and long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS have not been fully explored according to stent type. Therefore, we evaluated potential risk factors for AEs and long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS.

METHODS

In total, 120 patients who underwent EUS-HGS were retrospectively reviewed. A multivariate analysis through Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression model was used to identify the risk factors for stent dysfunction and AEs, respectively. Stent patency and patient survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier plots with a log-rank test for each stent.

RESULTS

The technical and clinical success rates were 96.2% (102/106) and 83.0% (88/106). The median duration of stent patency was longer in self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) compared to plastic stents (PS) (158 vs. 108 days). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that the type of stent was not associated with stent patency (Hazard ratios [HR] 0.997, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.525-1.896]) or overall survival. In addition, multivariate analysis indicated that hilar MBO significantly associated with stent dysfunction (HR, 2.340; 95% CI, 1.028-5.326, p = 0.043) and late AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the lower incidence of AEs and better long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS, it can be considered a safe alternative to ERCP or percutaneous approaches regardless of which stent is used. Furthermore, hilar MBO was established as a potential risk factor for stent dysfunction and late AEs.

How to perform EUS-guided biliary drainage

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has recently gained widespread acceptance as a minimally invasive alternative method for biliary drainage. Even in experienced endoscopy centers, ERCP may fail due to inaccessibility of the papillary region, altered anatomy (particularly postsurgical alterations), papillary obstruction, or neoplastic gastric outlet obstruction. Biliary cannulation fails at first attempt in 5%-10% of cases even in the absence of these factors. In such cases, alternative options for biliary drainage must be provided since biliary obstruction is responsible for poor quality of life and even reduced survival, particularly due to septic cholangitis. The standard of care in many centers remains percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). However, despite the high technical success rate with experienced operators, the percutaneous approach is more invasive and associated with poor quality of life. PTBD may result in long-term external catheters for biliary drainage and carry the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) in up to 10% of patients, including bile leaks, hemorrhage, and sepsis. PTBD following a failed ERCP also requires scheduling a second procedure, resulting in prolonged hospital stay and additional costs. EUS-BD may overcome many of these limitations and offer some distinct advantages in accessing the biliary tree. Current data suggest that EUS-BD is safe and effective when performed by experts, although SAEs have been also reported. Despite the high number of clinical reports and case series, high-quality comparative studies are still lacking. The purpose of this article is to report on the current status of this procedure and to discuss the tools and techniques for EUS-BD in different clinical scenarios.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in the management of malignant biliary obstruction: Experience and learning curve in a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a recognized second-line strategy for biliary drainage when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails or is impossible. Substantial technical and procedural progress in performing EUS-HGS has been achieved. The present study wanted to analyze whether growing experience in current practice has changed patient outcomes over time.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with malignant biliary obstruction treated by EUS-HGS between 2002 and 2018 at a tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients were included (104 male; mean age 68 years). Clinical success was achieved in 93% of patients with available 30-days follow-up (153), and the rate of procedure-related morbidity and mortality after one month was 18% and 5%, respectively. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) learning curve suggests a slight improvement in the rate of early complications during the second learning phase (23% vs 32%; P = 0.14; including death for any cause and intensive care). However, a significant threshold of early complications could not be determined. Recurrent biliary stent occlusion is the main cause for endoscopic reintervention (47/130; 37%).

CONCLUSION

The rate of procedure-related complications after EUS-HGS has improved over time. However, the overall morbidity rate remains high, emphasizing the importance of dedicated expertise, appropriate patient selection and multidisciplinary discussion.

Relief of jaundice in malignant biliary obstruction: When should we consider endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy as an option?

BACKGROUND

Since it was first described in 2001, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative procedure for achieving an endoscopic internal drainage in case of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Biliary drainage can be achieved by either a transduodenal extrahepatic approach through EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), or a transgastric intrahepatic approach, namely EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) which already holds a remarkable place in the treatment of patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

For this review we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE from inception to May 31, 2021 for papers with a significant sample size (at least 20 patients enrolled) dealing with EUS-HGS. Data on technical success, clinical success and rate of adverse events were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies with different design, comprising 874 patients, were included. Technical success was achieved in about 96% of cases (ranging from 65% to 100%). Clinical success was obtained in almost 91% of cases (ranging from 76% to 100%). Overall rate of adverse events was 19% (ranging from 0% to 35%). Abdominal pain, self-limiting pneumoperitoneum, bile leak, cholangitis, bleeding, perforation and intraperitoneal migration of the stent were the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite both safety and efficacy profile, at the moment HGS still remains a challenging procedure at every single step and must therefore be conducted by a very experienced endoscopist in interventional EUS and ERCP procedures, who is able to deal with the possible severe adverse events of this procedure. A rapid introduction in clinical practice of dedicated devices is desiderable.

Usefulness of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has many associated adverse events. We evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (FCSEMS) for this procedure.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study included cases where EUS-HGS with a laser-cut FCSEMS was performed for malignant biliary obstruction. Technical and clinical success, time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), procedure time, adverse events, and re-interventions were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 95 eligible cases. Technical and clinical success rates were 100.0% and 95.8%, respectively. Median TRBO was 398 days. RBO causes were hyperplasia (7.4%), debris (3.2%), and migration (4.2%). Adverse events occurred in nine cases (9.5%). Non-occlusion and focal cholangitis occurred in four cases (4.2%) each. Nineteen patients (20%) underwent combined EUS-HGS (CH) procedures: antegrade stenting, bridging methods, plastic stent anchoring in SEMS, and EUS-hepaticoduodenostomy. The solely EUS-HGS (SH) group had significantly longer median TRBO than the CH group (398 vs. 246 days; P=0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events between the two groups. Re-intervention was performed in 29 cases (technical success rate: 100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-cut FCSEMS can be safely placed in the bile duct and easily applied during re-intervention, making it useful in EUS-HGS.

Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Facilitates Decompression and Diagnosis in Patients With Suspected Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Case Series

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG) is increasingly being used as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP). This technique has also been utilized for diagnosis of malignant biliary obstruction by providing biliary access for antegrade cholangioscopy with biopsies and brushings for cytology and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). However, the potential impact of EUS-HG on surgical candidacy in cases with resectable disease remains unknown. We present three patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) for suspected distal malignant biliary obstruction following EUS-HG. Biliary drainage was achieved in all three patients preoperatively and a diagnosis of malignancy could be established in two of the three cases using this technique. There were no procedure-related complications. The HG metal stent was removed eight weeks post-operatively with cholangiogram showing a patent hepaticojejunostomy in all three patients. Mean length of follow-up after EUS-HG was 298 +/- 96 days. Our case series demonstrates that EUS-HG is an effective method to achieve biliary decompression in patients with an inaccessible papilla. The mature HG tract can subsequently be used to obtain a tissue diagnosis. Lastly, EUS-HG does not preclude patients from undergoing a curative Whipple procedure.

Practical Tips for Safe and Successful Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: A State-of-the-Art Technical Review

Currently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is widely performed worldwide for various benign and malignant biliary diseases in cases of difficult or unsuccessful endoscopic transpapillary cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Furthermore, its applicability as primary drainage has also been reported. Although recent advances in EUS systems and equipment have made EUS-HGS easier and safer, the risk of serious adverse events such as bile leak and stent migration still exists. Physicians and assistants need not only sufficient skills and experience in ERCP-related procedures and basic EUS-related procedures such as fine needle aspiration and pancreatic fluid collection drainage, but also knowledge and techniques specific to EUS-HGS. This technical review mainly focuses on EUS-HGS with self-expandable metal stents for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction and presents the latest and detailed tips for safe and successful performance of the technique.

Malignant biliary obstruction due to metastatic non-hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer

Malignant biliary obstruction generally results from primary malignancies of the pancreatic head, bile duct, gallbladder, liver, and ampulla of Vater. Metastatic lesions from other primaries to these organs or nearby lymph nodes are rarer causes of biliary obstruction. The most common primaries include renal cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, lymphoma, and melanoma. They may be difficult to differentiate from primary hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer based on imaging studies, or even on biopsy. There is also no consensus on the optimal method of treatment, including the feasibility and effectiveness of endoscopic intervention or surgery. A thorough review of the literature on pancreato-biliary metastases and malignant biliary obstruction due to metastatic non-hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer is presented. The diagnostic modality and clinical characteristics may differ significantly depending on the type of primary cancer. Different primaries also cause malignant biliary obstruction in different ways, including direct invasion, pancreatic or biliary metastasis, hilar lymph node metastasis, liver metastasis, and peritoneal carcinomatosis. Metastasectomy may hold promise for some types of pancreato-biliary metastases. This review aims to elucidate the current knowledge in this area, which has received sparse attention in the past. The aging population, advances in diagnostic imaging, and improved treatment options may lead to an increase in these rare occurrences going forward.

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

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

EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage: a large single-center U.S. experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy has been performed for many years with most published experience from outside the United States. The luminal access point can be from the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, or jejunum; biliary access can be either into the right or left intrahepatic system. Thus, we prefer the term EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (ETBD). We describe what is believed to be the largest single-center U.S. experience of ETBD for management of benign and malignant biliary disease.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all ETBD conducted by 1 endoscopist between September 2014 and May 2021.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifteen patients underwent attempted ETBD: 85 for benign disease and 130 for malignant disease. Ninety-two patients (43%) had surgically altered anatomy (SAA). In 94 patients previously endoscopic attempts failed. The approach was transesophageal in 9, transgastric in 188, transduodenal in 5, and transjejunal in 5 patients. In 1 patient a bilateral approach was used. Standard fully covered self-expandable stents of 4- to 10-cm lengths and 8- or 10-mm diameters were used. Technical success was 95.3% and clinical success was 87.25%. Forty patients (18.6%) experienced adverse events (13 mild, 21 moderate, and 6 severe according to the modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon). Mean follow-up was 257.31 ± 308.11 days for all patients (124.53 ± 229.86 days for benign disease and 457.27 ± 466.31 days for malignant disease). Seventy-four patients (34.4%) had died at the time of data collection (66 in the malignant cohort, 8 in the benign cohort). Of those with malignancy surviving >6 months, 17.4% required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

ETBD is effective in the management of benign and malignant biliary obstruction for patients with SAA as well as native anatomy, with a modest adverse event rate.

Endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction: Which is better - endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound?

Presently, following endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy, an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with transpapillary stenting is performed for palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). However, technical failure and postprocedure pancreatitis are limitations to ERCP. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) after a failed ERCP has a 90% technical success rate and has been shown to be superior when compared to percutaneous methods, making EUS an increasingly recognized option for biliary drainage. Supporting this approach, findings from recently concluded randomized trials suggest that the safety profile and technical outcomes for EUS-BD are comparable or even superior to that of ERCP for primary biliary decompression in patients with MDBO. Also, EUS-BD is increasingly being utilized in patients with altered surgical anatomy in lieu of percutaneous techniques and balloon-assisted enteroscopy. A growing body of evidence supports the notion that, in the future, EUS may become the primary modality by which biliary decompression is undertaken in the majority of patients with MDBO. The roadmap to this eventuality may require further optimization of procedural techniques, technological innovations, and cost reduction.

Newly Designed Laser-Cut Metal Stent with an Anchoring Hook and Thin Delivery System for Endoscopic Ultrasound–Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: Is It a Dream Stent?

Endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) involves creation of an anastomosis between two intra-abdominal mobile organs, namely, liver and the stomach, with no intervening stricture. Therefore, the risk of stent migration in EUS-HGS is very high and the stent migration can lead on to severe life-threatening complications like biliary peritonitis. During last few years, there have been increased efforts to design a safe and effective stent for EUS-HGS that obviates the risk of stent migration and can also be inserted quickly, preferably, in a single-step procedure. In this news and views, we discuss an experimental study from Japan that has evaluated a new partially covered self-expandable laser cut metal stent with a thin delivery system (7.2 F) and antimigration anchoring hooks for single-step EUS-HGS in phantom and animal models.

What You Need to Know Before Performing Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary treatment modality for bile duct obstruction. When ERCP is unsuccessful, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage can be an alternative method. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a treatment option for biliary obstruction, especially after ERCP failure. EUS-BD offers transluminal intrahepatic and extrahepatic drainage through a transgastric and transduodenal approach. EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an excellent choice for patients with hilar strictures or those with a surgically altered anatomy. The optimal steps in EUS-HGS are case selection, bile duct visualization, puncture-site selection, wire insertion and manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Caution should be taken at each step to prevent complications. Dedicated devices for EUS-HGS have been developed to improve the technical success rate and reduce complications. This technical review focuses on the essential practical points at each step of EUS-HGS.

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.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure has resulted in a paradigm shift toward endoscopic management of disease states that previously required percutaneous or surgical approaches. The past few years have seen additional techniques and devices that have enabled endoscopists to expand its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Some of these techniques initially were reported more than a decade ago; however, with further device development and refinement in techniques there is potential for expanding the application of these techniques and new technologies to a broader group of interventional gastroenterologists. Lack of formalized training, devices, and prospective data regarding their use in addition to a scarcity of guidelines on implementation of these technologies into clinical practice are contributing factors impeding the growth of the field of interventional EUS. In April 2019, the American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology conducted its annual Tech Summit and a key session focused on interventional EUS. This article is a White Paper generated from the conference, discusses the published literature pertaining to the topic of interventional EUS, and outlines a proposed framework for the implementation of interventional EUS techniques into clinical practice. Three primary areas of interventional EUS are addressed: (1) EUS-guided access; (2) EUS-guided tumor ablation; and (3) endohepatology. There was general agreement among participants on several key components. The introduction of these novel interventions requires better tools, more data on safety/outcomes, and improved training for endoscopists. Participants also agreed that widespread implementation and use of these techniques will require support from Gastrointestinal Societies and other key stakeholders including payers. Continued work by the Gastrointestinal Societies and manufacturers to provide training programs, appropriate equipment/work environments, and policies that motivate endoscopists to adopt new techniques is essential for growing the field of interventional EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy using a partially covered metal stent in patients with malignant biliary obstruction after failed Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The advent of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has provided an inimitable alternative for gaining biliary access in patients who fail conventional endoscopic drainage. The antimigratory features of the partially covered metal stent (PCMS), namely, the flange head and uncovered portion of the stent, makes it a valuable option in patients undergoing EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS). The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of EUS-BD via the hepaticogastrostomy approach using PCMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective observational study of patients with malignant biliary obstruction undergoing EUS-HGS after failed ERCP between January 2018 and May 2019. The end-point of the study was to assess the technical and clinical success rate, as well as the stent- and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS

There were 20 subjects in this study. The average age was 71.8 ± 7.6 years. Most patients were male, 16 (80%). Inaccessible papillae was the most common indication for this procedure, 16 (80%). Technical success was achieved in all patients. The average procedural time was 39.9 ± 1.3 min. Mean preprocedural bilirubin levels were 348.6 ± 28.8 and subsequently decreased to 108.94 ± 37.1 μmol/L at 2 weeks postprocedure. The clinical success rate was 95% (19/20), with one patient requiring percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). There were no stent- or procedure-related complications reported in this study.

CONCLUSION

EUS-HGS with PCMS is a feasible, effective, and safe alternative for biliary decompression in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

EUS-guided intrahepatic biliary drainage: a large retrospective series and subgroup comparison between percutaneous drainage in hilar stenoses or postsurgical anatomy

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided intrahepatic biliary drainage (EUS-IBD) struggles to find a place in management algorithms, especially compared to percutaneous drainage (PTBD). In the setting of hilar stenoses or postsurgical anatomy data are even more limited. Patients and methods  All consecutive EUS-IBDs performed in our tertiary referral center between 2012 - 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Rendez-vous (RVs), antegrade stenting (AS) and hepatico-gastrostomies (HGs) were compared. The predefined subgroup of EUS-IBD patients with proximal stenosis/surgically-altered anatomy was matched 1:1 with PTBD performed for the same indications. Efficacy, safety and events during follow-up were compared. Results  One hundred four EUS-IBDs were included (malignancies = 87.7 %). These consisted of 16 RVs, 43 ASs and 45 HGs. Technical and clinical success rates were 89.4 % and 96.2 %, respectively. Any-degree, severe and fatal adverse events (AEs) occurred in 23.3 %, 2.9 %, and 0.9 % respectively. Benign indications were more common among RVs while proximal stenoses, surgically-altered anatomy, and disconnected left ductal system among HGs. Procedures were shorter with HGs performed with specifically designed stents (25 vs . 48 minutes, P  = 0.004) and there was also a trend toward less dysfunction with those stents (6.7 % vs . 30 %, P  = 0.09) compared with previous approaches. Among patients with proximal stenosis/surgically-altered anatomy, EUS-IBD vs. PTBD showed higher rates of clinical success (97.4 % vs. 79.5 %, P  = 0.01), reduced post-procedural pain (17.8 % vs. 44.4 %, p = 0.004), shorter median hospital stay (7.5 vs 11.5 days, P  = 0.01), lower rates of stent dysfunction (15.8 % vs. 42.9 %, P  = 0.01), and the mean number of reinterventions was lower (0.4 vs. 2.8, P  < 0.0001). Conclusions  EUS-IBD has high technical and clinical success with an acceptable safety profile. HGs show comparable outcomes, which are likely to further improve with dedicated tools. For proximal strictures and surgically-altered anatomy, EUS-IBD seems superior to PTBD.

Long-term outcomes of a long, partially covered metal stent for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We previously reported safety and effectiveness of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) using a long, partially covered metal stent (LP-CMS) for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). In this study, we aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of EUS-HGS in an expanded cohort.

METHODS

One hundred ten patients undergoing EUS-HGS using an LP-CMS in 2 centers were retrospectively studied. Technical and functional success, adverse events, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and reinterventions were evaluated.

RESULTS

The cause of MBO was pancreatic cancer in 50%, and the location of MBO was distal in 68%. The stent length was 8 cm in 2%, 10 cm in 84%, and 12 cm in 15%, with a median intragastric stent length of 54 mm. Technical and functional success rates were 100% and 94%, respectively. The adverse event rate was 25% (mild 15%, moderate 7%, severe 3%), but about one-half of adverse events were mild transient fever and abdominal pain. RBO developed in 33%, with a median cumulative time to RBO of 6.3 months. The major cause of RBO was hyperplasia at an uncovered portion. The presence of prior biliary drainage and short intragastric stent length were significantly associated with RBO. Reintervention for RBO was successfully achieved through the EUS-HGS route in 92%. The remaining reintervention procedures were 1 EUS-HGS and 2 percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage all in cases with hilar MBO.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS using an LP-CMS for unresectable MBO was safe and effective. RBO was not uncommon, but reintervention through the EUS-HGS route was technically possible in most cases.

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.

Practical applications and learning curve for EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy: results of a large single-center US retrospective analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HE) is an effective method of endoscopic biliary drainage in cases where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has failed or is deemed impossible. Indications for EUS-HE have expanded, resulting in increased interest by endoscopists to learn the procedure; however, few data exist on breadth of application or experience needed to develop proficiency. We describe utilization of EUS-HE for biliary decompression at a large tertiary referral center along with procedural learning curve. Patients and methods  Retrospective evaluation of 60 consecutive patients who underwent attempted EUS-HE by one endoscopist from February 2016 through June 2018. Procedures were divided into chronological and summative experience quartiles. We compared procedural success rate, procedural utilization, and procedure duration over time. Results  Sixty patients underwent attempted EUS-HE during the study period: 35 with surgically altered anatomy, 23 with malignant biliary obstruction, 35 outpatients, 35 females; median age, 66 years. The procedure was technically successful in 53 patients. Success rates by summative experience quartile were 80 %, 80 %, 93.3 % and 100 % respectively. Beginning at patient number 40, the remaining cases had a success rate of 100 %. Utilization increased from eight cases in the first chronological quartile to 28 in the fourth. There was no significant reduction in procedure duration over time. Conclusion  For an experienced endoscopist, EUS-HE could be performed effectively and safely after the experience of 40 cases. Limitations of this study include a single endoscopist and heterogeneous patient population with variable anatomy that may affect procedural success. Future studies should include data from multiple centers and endoscopists.

Palliative therapy in pancreatic cancer-interventional treatment with stents

Interventional treatment with stents in pancreatic cancer is a topic that developed during recent years and new fields of palliative stent therapy have evolved. The increasing life expectancy of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer increases the need for clinical and cost effective therapeutic interventions. Current literature, guidelines, practice and evidence were reviewed. Besides the most obvious biliary stenting via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), pancreatic and gastroduodenal stenting as well as percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) and the rapidly growing field of endosonographic stent implantation in the palliative care of patients with pancreatic cancer are being discussed from several points of view in this review.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage in Two Patients with Difficult Biliary Access

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the method of choice for biliary drainage, although in some cases standard biliary access is difficult or even impossible. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided endoluminal procedures are an alternative in these cases, although experience with these techniques is still limited.

CLINICAL CASE

We present two cases of successful EUS-guided biliary drainage. In the first case, a hepaticogastrostomy was performed in a patient with stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma with obstructive jaundice due to compression of the hilum, where malignant gastric stenosis and previous palliative gastrojejunostomy precluded access to the second part of the duodenum. In the second case, a patient with a pancreatic head adenocarcinoma with duodenal invasion that precluded major papillae identification was submitted to a choledochoduodenostomy. Both procedures occurred without immediate or delayed adverse events, with technical and clinical success.

DISCUSSION

Although experience with EUS-guided biliary drainage is still limited, its efficacy and safety is favorable when compared with percutaneous and surgical drainage, and should be considered an alternative to these techniques where sufficient expertise exists.

EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy as a portal to allow definitive antegrade treatment of benign biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HE) usually is reserved for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or inaccessible biliary tree in surgically altered anatomy (SAA). We describe the outcome of EUS-HE and antegrade therapy for benign biliary disease in patients with SAA.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 20 consecutive patients with surgically altered anatomy and benign biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-HE performed by 1 endoscopist at a tertiary-care center over a 3-year period.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients underwent EUS-HE; 24 for benign disease. Of these, 20 patients had SAA and were analyzed (15 women, mean age, 62 years). SAA consisted of 9 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses, 6 Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, 2 Billroth II procedures, and 3 Whipple procedures. Indications for ERC were common bile duct stones (n = 8), benign postoperative strictures (n = 7), chronic pancreatitis (n = 3), inflammatory stricture (n = 1), and treatment of a bile leak (n = 1). Five patients had previously failed balloon enteroscopy-assisted ERCs. The approach was transgastric in 15 and transjejunal in 5. In all cases, a branch of the left hepatic duct with a mean diameter of 7.8 mm was accessed. Median stent length was 80 mm, with diameters of 8 or 10 mm. Antegrade, definitive endoscopic therapy via the HE was performed in 18 patients, with an average of 2.7 procedures performed for resolution of stones and/or downstream strictures. HE stents were removed in 17 patients after a mean of 91 days without adverse events. Three patients experienced mild adverse events (1 with postprocedural pancreatitis after placement of a 10F transpapillary stent, 1 with postprocedural abdominal pain, and 1 with postprocedural cholangitis) requiring hospitalization for fewer than 3 nights; no severe adverse events occurred. The average postprocedural hospital stay was 1.3 days. No deaths occurred during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HE is safe and effective in the management of benign biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy. It creates a portal to allow definitive, antegrade therapy and is a viable alternative to other endoscopic methods in this patient population.

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.