Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage Comparable with Endoscopic Biliary Stenting as a Preoperative Drainage Method for Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage (PEBD) for malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) is widely accepted. Recent PEBD consists of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD), conventional endoscopic biliary stenting (CEBS) with plastic stents across the papilla, and endoscopic biliary inside stenting (EBIS) with plastic stents above the papilla, while ENBD is the primary procedure in Asian countries. Thus, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ENBD with those of CEBS and EBIS as a means of PEBD for MHBO.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with MHBO who underwent upfront surgery between January 2011 and December 2018 in a multicenter setting. The outcome measures were cumulative dysfunction of PEBD, risk factors for PEBD dysfunction, and adverse events.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 219 patients, comprising 163 males (74.4%); mean age, 69.7 (±7.6) years; Bismuth-Corlette (BC) classification I, II, IIIa, IIIb, and IV in 68, 49, 43, 30, and 29 patients, respectively; and diagnosis of hilar cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer in 188 and 31 patients, respectively. PEBD procedures were performed in 160 patients with ENBD, 31 patients with CEBS, and 28 patients with EBIS. PEBD dysfunction occurred in 58 patients (26.5%), and the cumulative dysfunction rates were not significantly different among PEBD methods (p = 0.60). Multivariate analysis showed that BC-IV was significantly associated with the occurrence of PEBD dysfunction (hazard ratio = 2.10, p = 0.02). The adverse event rates were not significantly different among PEBD groups (p = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

ENBD as a means of PEBD for MHBO is comparable with CEBS and EBIS in rates of dysfunction and adverse events.

Outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM

To compare the outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD) in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

Data from 153 consecutive patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage prior to PD between January 2009 and July 2016 were analyzed. We compared the clinical data, procedure-related complications of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and postoperative complications of PD between the ENBD and ERBD groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were used to identify the risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.

RESULTS

One hundred and two (66.7%) patients underwent ENBD, and 51 (33.3%) patients underwent ERBD. Endoscopic sphincterotomy was less frequently performed in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group (P = 0.039); the EBD duration in the ENBD group was shorter than that in the ERBD group (P = 0.036). After EBD, the levels of total bilirubin (TB) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were obviously decreased in both groups, and the decreases of TB and ALT in the ERBD group were greater than those in the ENBD group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.000, respectively). However, the rate of EBD procedure-related cholangitis was significantly higher in the ERBD group than in the ENBD group (P = 0.007). The postoperative complications of PD as graded by the Clavien-Dindo classification system were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.864). However, the incidence of deep abdominal infection after PD was significantly lower in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group (P = 0.019). Male gender (OR = 3.92; 95%CI: 1.63-9.47; P = 0.002), soft pancreas texture (OR = 3.60; 95%CI: 1.37-9.49; P = 0.009), length of biliary stricture (≥ 1.5 cm) (OR = 5.20; 95%CI: 2.23-12.16; P = 0.000) and ERBD method (OR = 4.08; 95%CI: 1.69-9.87; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.

CONCLUSION

ENBD is an optimal method for patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to PD. ERBD is superior to ENBD in terms of patient tolerance and the effect of biliary drainage but is associated with an increased risk of EBD procedure-related cholangitis and deep abdominal infection after PD.