EUS-guided antegrade procedures

Endoscopic palliation of malignant biliary obstruction

Malignant biliary obstruction often presents with challenges requiring the endoscopist to assess the location of the lesion, the staging of the disease, the eventual resectability and patient preferences in term of biliary decompression. This review will focus on the different modalities available in order to offer the most appropriate palliation, such as conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage as well as ablative therapies including photodynamic therapy or radiofrequency ablation.

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.

Transluminal intrahepatic bile duct stone removal using a novel spiral basket catheter via the endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy route (with video)

Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage has been developed as an alternative biliary drainage technique for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or inaccessible papilla. Among the various EUS-guided biliary drainage procedures, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) can be performed in patients with surgically altered anatomy. More recently, various transluminal treatments have been described after EUS-HGS, such as antegrade stone removal. In patients with hepaticojejunostomy strictures, stone extraction into the intestine might be challenging even after performing hepaticojejunostomy stricture dilation using a balloon catheter. In such cases, transluminal stone removal is considered an alternative method. With transluminal stone removal, a small stone that escapes from the conventional basket or from a balloon catheter could migrate into the branch bile ducts. The novel spiral basket catheter available in Japan. The wires form a helix shape, wherein each wire is wound counterclockwise, and the winding pitch becomes gradually tighter from the proximal portion to the tip. As the winding pitch is smaller and the wires are in closer contact with the bile duct wall as compared with conventional basket catheter, small bile duct stones can be easily captured by simply pulling back the catheter while the basket is open. In addition, even during withdrawal inside the bile duct, a high retrieval performance is assured by the special design that maintains the opening width on the top end. Therefore, transluminal stone removal using this novel basket catheter might be clinically useful, although further prospective evaluation of a larger number of cases is needed.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage-current status and future perspectives

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stenting is the treatment modality of choice for patients with benign and malignant bile duct obstruction. ERCP could fail in cases of duodenal obstruction, duodenal diverticulum, ampullary neoplastic infiltration or surgically altered anatomy. In these cases percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD) is traditionally used as a rescue procedure but is related to high morbidity and mortality and lower quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a relatively new interventional procedure that arose due to the development of curvilinear echoendoscope and the various endoscopic devices. A large amount of data is already collected that proves its efficacy, safety and ability to replace PTBD in cases of ERCP failure. It is also possible that EUS-BD could be chosen as a first-line treatment option in some clinical scenarios in the near future. Several EUS-BD techniques are developed EUS-guided transmural stenting, antegrade stenting and rendezvous technique and can be personalized depending on the individual anatomy. EUS-BD is normally performed in the same session from the same endoscopist in case of ERCP failure. The lack of training, absence of enough dedicated devices and lack of standardization still makes EUS-BD a difficult and not very popular procedure, which is related to life-threatening adverse events. Developing training models, dedicated devices and guidelines hopefully will make EUS-BD easier, safer and well accepted in the future. This paper focuses on the technical aspects of the different EUS-BD procedures, available literature data, advantages, negative aspects and the future perspectives of these modalities.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Antegrade Radiofrequency Ablation and Metal Stenting With Hepaticoenterostomy for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Prospective Preliminary Study

Endobiliary radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for malignant biliary obstruction is a promising option for improving biliary stent patency, but its efficacy and safety with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage are uncertain. We examined the feasibility of EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy with antegrade stenting (EUS-HEAS) and RFA in patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction.

Urgent and early EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with acute cholangitis

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been reported as an effective alternative drainage technique. However, clinical data on EUS-BD for patients with acute cholangitis (AC) are limited. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical outcomes of EUS-BD in patients with AC.

Patients and Methods:

Nineteen patients with AC who underwent urgent or early drainage (within 96 h) by EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HES) between January 2014 and November 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Furthermore, the clinical outcomes of EUS-HES using a plastic stent in the AC group (n = 15) were compared to those in the non-AC group (n = 88).

Results:

In the 19 AC cases, the technical and clinical success rate was 100% with 5.3% of moderate adverse events (biliary peritonitis [n = 1]). Regarding the comparison between the AC group and the non-AC group, the clinical success rate was 100% in both groups and the adverse event rate was not statistically significantly different (P = 0.88). Although the recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rate was not statistically significantly different (P = 0.43), the early RBO rate was statistically significantly higher in the AC group (26.7% vs. 3.4%, P < 0.001). Kaplan–Meier curves showed that AC was associated with a shorter time to RBO (P = 0.046). The presence of AC was found to be an independent risk factor of early RBO (odds ratio = 10.3; P = 0.005).

Conclusions:

Urgent or early biliary drainage (within 96 h) by EUS-BD can be a feasible and safe alternative procedure for patients with AC, although there is a tendency of early RBO.

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and the antegrade technique in the management of unresectable malignant biliary obstruction: study protocol for a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is used after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Based on existing studies, intrahepatic (IH) approaches are preferred in patients with dilated IH bile ducts. Both ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and ultrasound-guided antegrade treatment (EUS-AG) are appropriate for patients with unreachable papillae. Nevertheless, there have been no direct comparisons between these two approaches. Therefore, we aim to evaluate and compare the safety and efficiency of EUS-HGS and EUS-AG in patients with an unreachable papilla.

Methods

This is a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre study with two parallel groups without masking. One hundred forty-eight patients from three hospitals who met the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either EUS-HGS or EUS-AG for relief of malignant biliary obstruction. The final study follow-up is scheduled at 1 year postoperatively. The primary endpoint is efficiency, described by technical and clinical success rates of EUS-HGS and EUS-AG in patients with unreachable papillae. The secondary endpoints include stent patency, overall survival rates, complication rates, length of hospital stays, and hospitalisation expenses. The chi-square test, Kaplan–Meier methods, log-rank test, and Cox regression analysis will be used to analyse the data.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare these two EUS-BD approaches directly using a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial design. The clinical economic indexes will also be compared, as they may also affect the patient’s choice. The result may contribute to establishing a strategic guideline for choosing IH EUS-BD approaches.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) ChiCTR1900020737. Registered on 15 January 2019