Endoscopic Reintervention for Recurrence of Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Developing the Best Strategy

Diagnosis and Treatment of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A National Survey from the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association

Background/Aims

Based on their anatomy, cholangiocarcinomas (CCAs) are classified into intrahepatic, hilar, and distal CCAs. Although the diagnosis and treatment of each type of CCA are thought to be different, real-world data studies on the current practice are limited. Therefore, this study was designed to capture the current practice of diagnosing and treating perihilar CCA in Korea.

Methods

We conducted a survey using an online platform. The questionnaire consisted of 18 questions designed to evaluate the current practice of diagnosing and treating perihilar CCA in Korea. The targets of this survey were biliary endoscopists who are members of the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association.

Results

In total, 119 biliary endoscopists completed the survey. Of the respondents, 89.9% thought that the use of the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) system is necessary to classify CCA. Approximately half of the respondents would recommend surgery or chemotherapy until patients were 80 years of age. For the pathological diagnosis of CCA, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with biopsy was the most preferred modality. Routine preoperative biliary drainage was performed by 44.5% of the respondents. For operable CCAs, 64.7% of the respondents preferred endoscopic biliary drainage using plastic stents. For palliative biliary drainage, 69.7% of the respondents used plastic stents. For palliative endoscopic biliary drainage using metal stents, 63% of the respondents preferred the stent-in-stent method.

Conclusions

A new coding system using the ICD-11 is needed for classifying CCAs. Guidelines for diagnosing and treating CCA based on the clinical situation in Korea are needed.

Efficacy Analysis of Suprapapillary versus Transpapillary Self-Expandable Metal Stents According to the Level of Obstruction in Malignant Extrahepatic Biliary Obstruction

Background/Aims

The use of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is recommended for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Stent-related adverse events might differ according to the position of the stent through the ampulla of Vater (AOV). We retrospectively evaluated SEMS patency and adverse events according to the position of the SEMS.

Methods

In total, 280 patients who underwent endoscopic SEMS placement due to malignant distal biliary obstruction were analyzed retrospectively. Suprapapillary and transpapillary SEMS insertions were performed on 51 patients and 229 patients, respectively.

Results

Between the suprapapillary group (SPG) and transpapillary group (TPG), the stent patency period was not significantly different (median [95% confidence interval]: 107 days [82.3 to 131.7] vs 120 days [99.3 to 140.7], p=0.559). There was also no significant difference in the rate of adverse events. In subgroup analysis, the stent patency for an MBO located within 2 cm from the AOV was found to be significantly shorter than that for an MBO located more than 2 cm from the AOV in the SPG (64 days [0 to 160.4] vs 127 days [82.0 to 171.9], p<0.001) and TPG (87 days [52.5 to 121.5] vs 130 [97.0 to 162.9], p<0.001). Patients with an MBO located within 2 cm from the AOV in both groups had a higher percentage of duodenal invasion (SPG: 40.0% vs 4.9%, p=0.002; TPG: 28.6% vs 2.9%, p<0.001) than patients with an MBO located more than 2 cm from the AOV.

Conclusions

The SPG and TPG showed similar results in terms of stent patency and rate of adverse events. However, patients with an MBO located within 2 cm from the AOV had a higher percentage of duodenal invasion with shorter stent patency than those with an MBO located more than 2 cm from the AOV, regardless of stent position.

The role of endoscopy in malignant hilar obstruction

Malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHO) is a medical challenge as regards both forming a correct diagnosis and its adequate management, in terms of treatment alternatives and palliative options. Surgical resection is the only curative treatment for the underlying disease, but the majority of patients are not suitable candidates because of an unresectable tumor or poor performance status. Biliary drainage (BD) can be achieved through the percutaneous transhepatic route or endoscopically, and the choice depends on a host of factors, including biliary anatomy and comorbidity of the patient. Though there is no consensus, the endoscopic approach is usually preferred over the former. Endoscopy can aid in both diagnosis (collection of histological as well as cytological samples, direct visualization of suspected malignant pathology, or use of endoscopic ultrasound [EUS] for evaluation and locoregional staging), and in achieving internal BD. Advances in the development of various stents, accessories and, more recently, the use of EUS have in fact further expanded its application in MHO management. The choice of stents to be used (type, make, and number), palliation methods, deployment techniques and the use of local ablative strategy are still evolving and require more data. The complexity of management of MHO mandates that each patient should receive a "personalized approach", all the way from establishing a diagnosis until final treatment, with the help of a multidisciplinary team effort. Herein, we provide a comprehensive literature review of the current role of endoscopy for MHO, according to its applications in various clinical settings.