EUS-guided biliary drainage after failed ERCP: a novel algorithm individualized based on patient anatomy

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (BD) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows for biliary access when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is unsuccessful. The technique can be divided based on biliary access route: intrahepatic or extrahepatic, as well as on stenting approach: rendezvous approach (EUS-RV), antegrade placement, or transluminal (intra or extra hepatic) placement. There is no clear consensus on which approach is superior. Compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EUS-BD offers lower rates of adverse events without the need for an external drain. Compared to conventional ERCP, EUS-BD shows comparable, and in some cases superior, outcomes related to technical success, clinical success, and adverse events.

Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

In this 14th document in a series of papers entitled "Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound" we discuss various aspects of EUS-guided biliary drainage that are debated in the literature and in practice. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography is still the reference technique for therapeutic biliary access, but EUS-guided techniques for biliary access and drainage have developed into safe and highly effective alternative options. However, EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques are technically demanding procedures for which few training models are currently available. Different access routes require modifications to the basic technique and specific instruments. In experienced hands, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage is also a good alternative. Therefore, in this paper, we compare arguments for different options of biliary drainage and different technical modifications.

Endoscopic ultrasound-rendezvous versus percutaneous-endoscopic rendezvous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for bile duct access: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or percutaneous-assisted antegrade guidewire insertion can be used to achieve biliary access when standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of EUS-assisted rendezvous (EUS-RV) and percutaneous rendezvous (PERC-RV) ERCP.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases from inception to September 2022 to identify studies reporting on EUS-RV and PERC-RV in failed ERCP. A random-effects model was used to summarize the pooled rates of technical success and adverse events with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

In total, 524 patients (19 studies) and 591 patients (12 studies) were managed by EUS-RV and PERC-RV, respectively. The pooled technical successes were 88.7% (95% CI 84.6-92.8%, I2  = 70.5%) for EUS-RV and 94.1% (95% CI 91.1-97.1%, I2  = 59.2%) for PERC-RV (P = 0.088). The technical success rates of EUS-RV and PERC-RV were comparable in subgroups of benign diseases (89.2% vs. 95.8%, P = 0.068), malignant diseases (90.3% vs. 95.5%, P = 0.193), and normal anatomy (90.7% vs. 95.9%, P = 0.240). However, patients with surgically altered anatomy had poorer technical success after EUS-RV than after PERC-RV (58.7% vs. 93.1%, P = 0.036). The pooled rates of overall adverse events were 9.8% for EUS-RV and 13.4% for PERC-RV (P = 0.686).

CONCLUSIONS

Both EUS-RV and PERC-RV have exhibited high technical success rates. When standard ERCP fails, EUS-RV and PERC-RV are comparably effective rescue techniques if adequate expertise and facilities are feasible. However, in patients with surgically altered anatomy, PERC-RV might be the preferred choice over EUS-RV because of its higher technical success rate.

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.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are currently first- and second-line therapeutic options, respectively, for the relief of biliary obstruction. In recent years, however, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become an established alternative therapy for biliary obstruction. There are multiple different techniques for EUS-BD, which can be distinguished based on the access point within the biliary tree (intrahepatic versus extrahepatic) and the location of stent placement (transenteric versus transpapillary). The clinical and technical success rates of biliary drainage for EUS-BD are similar to both ERCP and PTBD, and complication rates are favorable for EUS-BD relative to PTBD. As EUS-BD becomes more widely practiced and endoscopic tools continue to advance, the outcomes will likely improve, and the breadth of indications for EUS-BD will continue to expand.

A pilot study of Spring Stopper Stents: Novel partially covered self-expandable metallic stents with anti-migration properties for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an effective salvage procedure when conventional endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage is difficult or fails. However, the risk of stent migration into the abdominal cavity has not been resolved completely. In this study, we evaluated a newly developed partially covered self-expandable metallic stent (PC-SEMS) that has a spring-like anchoring function on the gastric side.

METHODS

This retrospective pilot study took place at four referral centers in Japan between October 2019 and November 2020. We enrolled 37 cases consecutively who underwent EUS-HGS for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction.

RESULTS

The rates of technical and clinical success were 97.3% and 89.2%, respectively. Technical failures included one case in which the stent was dislocated during the removal of the delivery system, requiring additional EUS-HGS on another branch. Early adverse events (AEs) were observed in four patients (10.8%): two with mild peritonitis (5.4%) and one each (2.7%) with fever and bleeding. No late AEs were observed during the mean follow-up period of 5.1 months. All recurrent biliary obstructions (RBOs) were stent occlusions (29.7%). The median cumulative time to RBO was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval, 4.3 to not available). Although stent migration in which the stopper was in contact with the gastric wall on follow-up computed tomography was observed in six patients (16.2%), no migration was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed PC-SEMS is feasible and safe for the EUS-HGS procedure. The spring-like anchoring function on the gastric side is an effective anchor preventing migration.

Endoscopic ultrasound‑guided biliary drainage in patients with surgically altered anatomy: a systematic review and Meta‑analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is technically challenging to perform in patients with surgically altered anatomy (SAA). For these patients, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is one of the good indications. The aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify and evaluate evidence of the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in patients with SAA.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed was conducted through to December 2021 to identify studies performing EUS-BD in patients with SAA. The primary outcome was the pooled technical success proportion in patients with SAA. The pooled clinical success and adverse event proportions in patients with SAA were also analyzed.

RESULTS

The search identified 1195 possible records, with 18 studies meeting our criteria for analysis, reporting data for 409 patients with SAA who underwent EUS-BD. The pooled technical success, clinical success and adverse event proportions in patients with SAA were 97.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.8-99.7%), 94.9% (95% CI, 91.8-98.1%), and 12.8% (95% CI, 7.4-18.1%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD is effective for patients with SAA. However, adverse events should be considered when performing EUS-BD in these patients.

Biliary drainage guided by endoscopic ultrasonography is a doable objective

The therapeutic usage of EUS is being developed. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUSBD) is a recognized viable replacement for percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in severe cases with the obstructive biliary disease having ERCP failure due to a failure in cannulation or those with surgically altered anatomies, such as hepatico-jejunal anastomosis following Billroth II reconstruction, Roux-en-Y limb, Whipple procedure, or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, or cases with inaccessible papilla because of severe duodenal inflammatory structure.

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 Biliary Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary interventions have evolved to become an integral part of advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy units. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an accepted alternative for patients with failed ERCP or altered surgical anatomy. The potential advantages of EUS-guided interventions include choice of biliary access from stomach or duodenum, choice of stent exit in stomach and duodenum, and possibility of avoiding traversing through the obstruction. A variety of procedures have been described depending on the level of obstruction. Maximum evidence is available for distal malignant obstruction, and more studies are needed for hilar obstruction and benign indications.

When ERCP Fails: EUS-Guided Access to Biliary and Pancreatic Ducts

Pancreaticobiliary (PB) endotherapy continues to progress in the era of therapeutic endosonography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary method for PB access in native and altered anatomy. In altered anatomy, PB access can be obtained via enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (e-ERCP) or laparoscopy-assisted ERCP; however, both approaches have significant limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary and pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-BPD) are increasingly becoming the preferred alternative when ERCP fails, with advantages over percutaneous drainage. EUS-BPD continues to evolve with better feasibility, safety and efficacy as dedicated procedural equipment continues to improve. In this article, we discuss the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) when ERCP fails and their indications, technique, and outcomes.

Endoscopic stenting for malignant biliary obstruction is technically successful in patients with preexisting duodenal stents

Background and study aims  There are limited data on the success of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction with a preexisting duodenal stent. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient and procedural outcomes of a cohort of patients with preexisting duodenal stents who underwent an attempt at ERCP for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Patients and methods  This was a single-center retrospective study on consecutive patients with a preexisting duodenal stent who underwent attempted ERCP for MBO. Technical success was defined as successful cannulation of the common bile duct, with successful dilation and/or deployment of a biliary stent under fluoroscopy. Clinical success was defined as number of patients in the entire group who underwent ERCP successfully with resolution of symptoms. Results  We identified 64 patients (73 % men, 74 % white, median age 62 years) with a preexisting duodenal stent who underwent 85 attempts at ERCP. ERCP was technically successful in 50 of 85 procedures (59 %). Overall ERCP was successful in 41 of 85 patients (48 %). ERCP was more likely to be successful in patients with Type 1 and 3 duodenal strictures than with Type 2 strictures (83 % and 92 % vs. 42 %, P  < 0.01), in patients with a preexisting sphincterotomy (79% vs. 20 %, P  = 0.01) or preexisting biliary stent (66 % vs. 34 %, P  = 0.04). Adverse events included bleeding (n = 3), post-procedure fever (n = 3) and abdominal pain (n = 1). Conclusions  Although biliary stenting via ERCP is often technically challenging in patients with a prior duodenal stent, it is a safe and effective method of biliary drainage. ERCP should be attempted in patients with Type 1 and 3 duodenal strictures, a prior sphincterotomy or an indwelling biliary stent.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Interventions in Liver Disease

If endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails in cases of biliary obstruction and jaundice, percutaneous drains have been traditionally the current second-line option. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with choledocoduodenostomy or hepaticogastrostomy is alternative modality that have shown equivalent or better technical and clinical success compared with percutaneous drainage. Similarly, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage has emerged as a therapeutic option in acute cholecystitis as well. Furthermore, EUS-BD avoids some of the pitfalls of percutaneous drainage. Current research in EUS-BD involves optimizing devices to improve technical and clinical success. In centers with advanced endoscopists trained in these procedures, EUS-BD is an excellent second-line modality.

Hepaticogastrostomy versus choledochoduodenostomy: An international multicenter study on their long-term patency

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) offers minimally invasive decompression when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Stents can be placed from the intrahepatic ducts into the stomach (hepaticogastrostomy [HG]) or from the extrahepatic bile duct into the small intestine (choledochoduodenostomy [CCD]). Long-term patency of these stents is unknown. In this study, we aim to compare long-term patency of CCD versus HG.

METHODS

Consecutive patients from 12 centers were included in a registry over 14 years. Demographics, procedure info, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Student's t-test, Chi-square, and logistic regression analyses were conducted. Only patients with at least 6-month follow-up or who died within 6-month postprocedure were included.

RESULTS

One-hundred and eighty-two patients were included (93% male; mean age: 70; HG n = 95, CCD n = 87). No significant difference in indication, diagnosis, dissection instrument, or stent type was seen between the two groups. Technical success was 92% in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 75/87 (86%) in the HG group and 80/80 (100%) in the CCD group. A trend toward higher adverse events was seen in the CCD group. A total of 25 patients out of 87 needed stent revision in the HG group (success rate 71%), while eight out of 80 were revised in the CCD group (success rate 90%). Chi square shows CCD success higher than HG (90% vs. 71%, P = 0.010). After adjusting for diagnosis, jaundice or cholangitis presentation, instrument used for dissection, and gender, CCD was 4.5 times more likely than HG to achieve longer stent patency or manage obstruction (odds ratio 4.5; 95% 1.1548-17.6500, P = 0.0302).

CONCLUSION

CCD is associated with superior long-term patency than HG but with a trend toward higher adverse events. This is particularly important in patients with increased survival. Additional studies are required before recommending a change in practice.

Therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound in pancreato-biliary disorders: Does it really replace the surgical/percutaneous approach?

Pancreato-biliary disorders are still incredibly challenging in the field of gastroenterology, as they would sometimes require multi-approach interventional procedures. Recently, therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a potential alternative to surgical or percutaneous approaches. Unfortunately, considering the high cost of EUS, lack of facility and expertise, most gastroenterologists still often refer cases to undergo surgical interventions without contemplating the possibility of utilizing EUS first. EUS-guided biliary drainage has become one of the best choices for establishing access to biliary system, given the clear visualization of pancreas, gallbladder, and common bile duct. Although there are still only a few studies which directly compare EUS-guided and surgical approaches for biliary drainage, current evidence demonstrated the superiority of EUS-guided approach in terms of adverse events and re-intervention rates, with similarly high technical and clinical success rates compared to percutaneous and surgical approaches, especially in patients with history of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt. Comparable success rates with shorter length of hospital stay between endoscopic and surgical approaches have also been exhibited for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis. Recent findings about the progress of EUS approach in gastroenterostomy/jejunostomy also indicated a promising potential of EUS, as a less invasive approach, for managing gastric outlet obstruction.

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.

Sequential endoscopist-driven phone calls improve the capture rate of adverse events after ERCP: a prospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ERCP is a high-risk endoscopic procedure, yet reports of ERCP-related adverse events are largely limited to early adverse events based on immediate postprocedure assessment. We hypothesize that immediate/1-day follow-up underestimates the true adverse event rate, and later follow-up calls may enable a more accurate assessment of adverse events, leading to enhanced postprocedural patient care.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing ERCP at our tertiary care academic medical center from 2018 to 2019 were analyzed. Patients were encouraged to contact us with postprocedure symptoms, and they received phone calls at 1, 7, 14, and 30 days after the procedure using a standardized script to assess for delayed adverse events and unplanned health care encounters.

RESULTS

This study is notable for a high rate of successful patient follow-up at day 1 (94%) and day 7 (93%). The overall adverse event rate was 1.9% immediately postprocedure, 3.3% on day 1, and 9.8% on day 7. Increased detection of adverse events was accomplished by the day 7 call relative to the day 1 call (pancreatitis 2% vs 0.5%; bleeding 0.5% vs 0.2%; infection 0.9% vs 0.5%). Follow-up calls at 14 and 30 days were lower yield for detection of post-ERCP adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial postprocedure assessment and day 1 follow-up calls underestimate adverse event rates/unplanned health care encounters related to ERCP, due to delayed evolution of some adverse events. The day 7 call is optimal in that it resulted in a >3-fold higher rate of detection of adverse events and successful direction of over 10% of symptomatic patients to appropriate assessment and follow-up health care.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in benign biliary pathology with normal foregut anatomy: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biliary drainage using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-BD) has been developed as a novel technique to obtain biliary access and drainage when ERCP fails. Numerous studies have demonstrated its safety and efficacy specifically pertaining to those with malignant distal biliary obstruction or altered foregut anatomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-BD in benign indications in patients with normal foregut anatomy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective comparative study from 5 academic medical centers (2008-2018) involving patients with benign biliary obstruction and native foregut anatomy who had an initial failed ERCP with subsequent attempt at biliary decompression via EUS-BD or by repeating ERCP.

RESULTS

36 patients (mean age 61.6 ± 2.2, 38.9% female) who underwent attempted EUS-BD following initial failed ERCP were compared to 50 patients (mean age 62.7 ± 2.3, 73.5% female) who underwent repeat ERCP following an initial failed cannulation. EUS-BD was technically successful in 28 (77.8%) patients with rendezvous being the most common approach (86.1%). A higher level of pre-procedural bilirubin was found to be associated with technical success of EUS-BD (3.65 ± 0.63 versus 1.1 ± 0.4, p value 0.04). Success of repeat ERCP following failed cannulation was 86%. Adverse events were significantly more frequent in the EUS-BD cohort when compared to the repeat ERCP (10 (27.8%) versus 4 (8.0%), p = 0.02, OR 4.32.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD remains a viable therapeutic option in the setting of benign biliary disease, with success rates of 77.8%. Adverse events were significantly more common with EUS-BD vs. repeat ERCP, emphasizing the need to perform in expert centers with appropriate multidisciplinary support and to strongly consider the urgency of biliary decompression before considering same session EUS-BD after failed initial biliary access.

Goff Septotomy Is a Safe and Effective Salvage Biliary Access Technique Following Failed Cannulation at ERCP

BACKGROUND

Biliary cannulation is readily achieved in > 85% of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). When standard cannulation techniques fail, salvage techniques utilized include the needle knife precut, double wire technique, and Goff septotomy.

METHODS

Records of patients undergoing ERCP from 2005 to 2016 were retrospectively examined using a prospectively maintained endoscopy database. Patients requiring salvage techniques for biliary access were analyzed together with a control sample of 20 randomly selected index ERCPs per study year. Demographic and clinical variables including indications for ERCP, cannulation rates, and adverse events were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 7984 patients underwent ERCP from 2005 to 2016. Biliary cannulation was successful in 94.9% of control index ERCPs, 87.2% of patients who underwent Goff septotomy (significantly higher than for all other salvage techniques, p ≤ 0.001), 74.5% of patients in the double wire group and 69.6% of patients in the needle knife precut group. Adverse event rates were similar in the Goff septotomy (4.1%) and index ERCP control sample (2.7%) groups. Adverse events were significantly higher in the needle knife group (27.2%) compared with all other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the largest study to date of Goff septotomy as a salvage biliary access technique. It confirms the efficacy of Goff septotomy and indicates a safety profile similar to standard cannulation techniques and superior to the widely employed needle knife precut sphincterotomy. Our safety and efficacy data suggest that Goff septotomy should be considered as the primary salvage approach for failed cannulation, with needle knife sphincterotomy restricted to Goff septotomy failures.

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.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction with surgically altered anatomy: a multicenter prospective registration study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in patients bearing surgically altered anatomy (SAA) is not well-established. Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a new treatment option for MBO, limited data are available regarding the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in patients with SAA. We conducted a multicenter prospective registration study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in this population.

METHODS

This study involved 10 referral centers in Japan. Patients with SAA who were scheduled to receive EUS-BD for unresectable MBO between May 2016 and September 2018 were prospectively registered. The primary endpoint was technical success and the secondary outcomes were clinical success, procedure time, procedure-related adverse events (AEs), stent patency, and overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were prospectively enrolled. The surgical reconstruction methods were gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (47.5%), gastrectomy with Billroth-II reconstruction (15%), pancreaticoduodenectomy (27.5%), and hepaticojejunostomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (10%). EUS-BD was performed for primary biliary drainage in 31 patients and for rescue biliary drainage in nine patients. Transmural stenting alone (60%), antegrade stenting alone (5%), and a combination of the two techniques (35%) were selected for patients treated with EUS-BD. Technical and clinical success rates were 100% (95% confidence interval, 91.2-100.0%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 83.1-99.4%), respectively. Mean procedure time was 36.5 min. Early AEs were noted in six patients (15%): three self-limited bile leak, one bile peritonitis, and two pneumoperitonea. Late AEs occurred in six patients (15%): one jejunal ulcer and five stent occlusions. Stent patency rate after 3 months of survival was 95.7% (22/23). Median overall survival was 96 days.

CONCLUSION

EUS-BD for MBO in patients with SAA appears to be effective and safe not only as a rescue drainage technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography but also as a primary drainage technique.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000022101.

Clinical utility of treatment method conversion during single-session endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage

BACKGROUND

Although several techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) are available at present, an optimal treatment algorithm of EUS-BD has not yet been established.

AIM

To evaluate the clinical utility of treatment method conversion during single endoscopic sessions for difficult cases in initially planned EUS-BD.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis using a prospectively accumulated database. Patients with biliary obstruction undergoing EUS-BD between May 2008 and April 2016 were included. The primary outcome was to evaluate the improvement in EUS-BD success rates by converting the treatment methods during a single endoscopic session. Secondary outcomes were clarification of the factors leading to the conversion from the initial EUS-BD and the assessment of efficacy and safety of the conversion as judged by technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

A total of 208 patients underwent EUS-BD during the study period. For 18.8% (39/208) of the patients, the treatment methods were converted to another EUS-BD technique from the initial plan. Biliary obstruction was caused by pancreatobiliary malignancies, other malignant lesions, biliary stones, and other benign lesions in 22, 11, 4, and 2 patients, respectively. The reasons for the difficulty with the initial EUS-BD were classified into the following 3 procedures: Target puncture (n = 13), guidewire manipulation (n = 18), and puncture tract dilation (n = 8). Technical success was achieved in 97.4% (38/39) of the cases and clinical success was achieved in 89.5% of patients (34/38). AEs occurred in 10.3% of patients, including bile leakage (n = 2), bleeding (n = 1), and cholecystitis (n = 1). The puncture target and drainage technique were altered in subsequent EUS-BD procedures in 25 and 14 patients, respectively. The final technical success rate with 95%CI for all 208 cases was 97.1% (95%CI: 93.8%-98.9%), while that of the initially planned EUS-BD was 78.8% (95%CI: 72.6%-84.2%).

CONCLUSION

Among multi-step procedures in EUS-BD, guidewire manipulation appeared to be the most technically challenging. When initially planned EUS-BD is technically difficult, treatment method conversion in a single endoscopic session may result in successful EUS-BD without leading to severe AEs.

EUS-guided biliary drainage for difficult cannulation

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been recognized as a new alternative to failed ERCP. The alternatives for failed/impossible ERCP in cases of difficult and selective bile duct cannulation include percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) with precut papillotomy. EUS-BD is reportedly more convenient than PTBD and more successful than precut papillotomy, suggesting that EUS-BD is the next step following failed/impossible ERCP.

EUS-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ERCP is the current procedure of choice for patients with jaundice caused by biliary obstruction. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative to ERCP in patients requiring biliary drainage. The aim of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to report the overall efficacy and safety of EUS-BD. We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and LILACS databases (earliest inception to June 2018) to identify studies that reported EUS-BD in patients. The primary outcome was to look at the technical and clinical success of the procedure. The secondary analysis focused on calculating the pooled rate of re-interventions and all adverse-events, along with the commonly reported adverse-event subtypes. Twenty-three studies reporting on 1437 patients were identified undergoing 1444 procedures. Majority of the patient population were male (53.86%), with an average age of 67.22 years. The pooled technical success rates and clinical success rates were 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.7-94.2, I^[2] = 76.5) and 87% (95% CI: 82.3-90.6, I^[2] = 72.4), respectively. The total adverse event rates were 17.9% (95% CI: 14.3-22.2, I^[2] = 69.1). Subgroup analysis of three major individual adverse events was bile leak: 4.1% (2.7-6.2, I^[2] = 46.7), stent migration: 3.9% (2.5-6.2, I^[2] = 43.5), and infection: 3.8% (2.8-5.1, I^[2] = 0) Substantial heterogeneity was noted in the analysis. EUS-BD has high technical and clinical success rate and hence a very effective procedure. Concerns about publication bias exist. Careful consideration should be given to the adverse events and weighing the risks and benefits of the alternative nonsurgical/surgical approaches.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP in low performance status patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of a biliary stent is the treatment of choice for palliation of malignant obstructive jaundice. In 5-10% of cases ERCP fails. In these cases an effective alternative is endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD).

AIM

Evaluation of the principal clinical outcomes of direct transluminal EUS-BD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis. All consecutive patients with malignant obstructive jaundice, in whom ERCP had failed, were enrolled. The primary outcome was the technical success of EUS-BD defined as the correct placement of the metal or plastic stent across the stomach or duodenum to the biliary tree. The most important secondary outcomes were early and late clinical success, both linked to the decrease of bilirubin haematic level.

RESULTS

Between January 2011 and November 2017 thirty-six patients were included. Technical success was obtained in 91.6%. A clinical success, early or late was obtained in 75.8%. The ECOG performance status of less than 3 was correlated with clinical success. Adverse events occurred in 30.3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD is an effective and safe procedure.

Learning curve for EUS-guided biliary drainage: What have we learned?

Background and Objective:

EUS-guided-biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an efficacious and safe option for patients who fail ERCP. EUS-BD is a technically challenging procedure. The aim of this study was to define the learning curve for EUS-BD.

Methods:

Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-BD by a single operator were included for a prospective registry over 6 years. Demographics, procedural information, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Nonlinear regression and CUSUM analyses were conducted for the learning curve. Technical success was defined as successful stent placement. Clinical success was defined as resolution of jaundice and/or at least a 30% reduction in the pretreatment bilirubin level within a week after placement or normalization of bilirubin within 30 days.

Results:

Seventy-two patients were included in the study (53% male, mean age 67 years). Technical success was achieved in 69 patients (96%). Clinical success was achieved in 59/69 patients (86%). Seven patients (10%) had adverse events including bleeding (n = 6) and liver abscess (n = 1). The median procedural time was 59 min (range 36–138 min). This was achieved at the 32^nd procedure. Procedural durations were further reduced to 50 min and below after the 50^th procedure in a nonlinear pattern. This suggests that procedural durations approach a potential plateau after 100 cases.

Conclusion:

Endoscopists experienced in EUS-BD are expected to achieve a reduction in procedural time over successive cases, with efficiency reached at 59 min and a learning rate of 32 cases. Continued improvement is demonstrated with additional experience, with mastery suggested after approximately 100 cases.

EUS-guided biliary drainage for postsurgical anatomy

ERCP is the mainstay of therapy for pancreatobiliary diseases in patients with native upper gastrointestinal (UGI) anatomy. However, when UGI anatomy is surgically altered, standard ERCP becomes technically challenging or not possible. In such instances, EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been increasingly employed by advanced endoscopists as a safe and effective method of access to the biliary tree. In this study, we review the technical aspects and outcomes of EUS-BD in patients with surgical UGI anatomy.

Review of Simultaneous Double Stenting Using Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Techniques in Combined Gastric Outlet and Biliary Obstructions

Concomitant malignant gastric outlet obstruction and biliary obstruction may occur in patients with advanced cancers affecting these anatomical regions. This scenario presents a unique challenge to the endoscopist in selecting an optimal management approach. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of endoscopic techniques for treating simultaneous gastric outlet and biliary obstruction (GOBO) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance for biliary drainage. An extensive literature search for peer-reviewed published cases yielded 6 unique case series that either focused on or included the use of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with simultaneous gastroduodenal stenting. In our composite analysis, a total of 51 patients underwent simultaneous biliary drainage through EUS, with an overall reported technical success rate of 100% for both duodenal stenting and biliary drainage. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy or EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was employed as the initial technique. In 34 cases in which clinical success was ascribed, 100% derived clinical benefit. The common adverse effects of double stenting included cholangitis, stent migration, bleeding, food impaction, and pancreatitis. We conclude that simultaneous double stenting with EUS-BD and gastroduodenal stenting for GOBO is associated with high success rates. It is a feasible and practical alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage or surgery for palliation in patients with associated advanced malignancies.

Comprehensive review on EUS-guided biliary drainage

Feasibility of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for biliary drainage is not always applicable due to anatomical alterations or to inability to access the papilla. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage has always been considered the only alternative for this indication. However, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage represents a valid option to replace percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage when ERCP fails. According to the access site to the biliary tree, two kinds of approaches may be described: the intrahepatic and the extrahepatic. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided rendez-vous transpapillary drainage is performed where the second portion of the duodenum is easily reached but conventional ERCP fails. The recent introduction of self-expandable metal stents and lumen-apposing metal stents has improved this field. However, the role of the latter is still controversial. Echoendoscopic transmural biliary drainage can be challenging with potential severe adverse events. Therefore, trained endoscopists, in both ERCP and endoscopic ultrasonography are needed with surgical and radiological backup.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the preferred procedure for biliary drainage in benign and malignant obstructions. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is an emerging technique for when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. It is a highly versatile procedure with several options of access point, stent direction, and drainage route. Based on the current literature, the cumulative success rate is 88% to 93%, with an overall complication rate of 13% to 20%. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage seems to be an effective and valuable alternative technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography when performed by highly skilled endoscopists.

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 drainage: Summary of therapeutic EUS consortium meeting

EUS-guided drainage is a safe and efficacious endoscopic technique for biliary, pancreatic, and gallbladder decompression. Recent literature has described many successful procedural techniques and devices to achieve EUS-guided drainage. This consortium gathering advanced endoscopists with expertise in both ultrasonography and therapeutic endoscopy, discuss the introduction to learning several EUS-guided drainage approaches, devices, and technology involved, possible obstacles to certain procedural and all potential complications.

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.

Updates in Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasonography

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in the possibilities of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). From EUS fine needle aspiration of cancerous lesion to pseudocyst drainage, it has now not only replaced some of the percutaneous techniques but has permitted to bypass all together laparoscopic approach for patient with altered anatomy or malignant gastric outlet obstruction. This review will emphasize the novel therapeutic EUS procedures added to our arsenal.

Different options of endosonography-guided biliary drainage after endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography failure

AIM

To investigate the success rates of endosonography (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) techniques after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure for management of biliary obstruction.

METHODS

From Feb/2010 to Dec/2016, ERCP was performed in 3538 patients, 24 of whom (0.68%) suffered failure to cannulate the biliary tree. All of these patients were initially submitted to EUS-guided rendez-vous (EUS-RV) by means of a transhepatic approach. In case of failure, the next approach was an EUS-guided anterograde stent insertion (EUS-ASI) or an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG). If a transhepatic approach was not possible or a guidewire could not be passed through the papilla, EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) was performed.

RESULTS

Patients were submitted to EUS-RV (7), EUS-ASI (5), EUS-HG (6), and EUS-CD (6). Success rates did not differ among the various EUS-BD techniques. Overall, technical and clinical success rates were 83.3% and 75%, respectively. Technical success for each technique was, 71.4%, 100%, 83.3%, and 83.3%, respectively (P = 0.81). Complications occurred in 3 (12.5%) patients. All of these cases were managed conservatively, but one patient died after rescue percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD).

CONCLUSION

The choice of a particular EUS-BD technique should be based on patient's anatomy and on whether the guidewire could be passed through the duodenal papilla.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is an emerging technique that combines the advantages of the endoscopic and percutaneous approaches, without the inconveniences and discomfort of an indwelling external catheter. There has been growing interest and experience in EUS-biliary drainage. Several different EUS-guided techniques have been developed to access the obstructed biliary tree from either the stomach or duodenum, according to the location of the stricture, the anatomy of the patient, and the experience of the endoscopist.

EUS-guided Choledochoduodenostomy Versus Hepaticogastrostomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative in cases of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Two types of EUS-BD methods for achieving biliary drainage when ERCP fails are choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) or hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). However, there is no consensus if one approach is better than the other. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate these 2 main EUS-BD methods.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane database, LILACS from inception through April 8, 2017, using the following search terms in various combinations: biliary drainage, biliary stent, transluminal biliary drainage, choledochoduodenostomy, hepaticogastrostomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage. We selected studies comparing CDS and HGS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction with ERCP failure. Pooled odds ratio (OR) were calculated for technical success, clinical success, and adverse events and difference of means calculated for duration of procedure and survival after procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies with 434 patients were included in the meta-analysis: 208 underwent biliary drainage via HGS and the remaining 226 via CDS. The technical success for CDS and HGS was 94.1% and 93.7%, respectively, pooled OR=0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.39-2.33, I=0%]. Clinical success was 88.5% in CDS and 84.5% in HGS, pooled OR=0.76 (95% CI=0.42-1.35, I=17%). There was no difference for adverse events OR=0.97 (95% CI=0.60-1.56), I=37%. CDS was about 2 minutes faster with a pooled difference in means of was -2.69 (95% CI=-4.44 to -0.95).

CONCLUSION

EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal efficacy and safety, and are both associated with a very high technical and clinical success. The choice of approach may be selected based on patient anatomy.

EUS-guided biliary drainage: A comprehensive review of the literature

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a technique for gaining biliary access when ERCP fails. This article gives a comprehensive review on the role and technique of EUS-BD. Moreover, we propose an algorithm guiding the clinician when to consider EUS-BD after failed ERCP or in anticipated difficult cannulations.

International study of endoscopic management of distal malignant biliary obstruction combined with duodenal obstruction

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic transpapillary or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided stent placement is used for nonresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with duodenal obstruction.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic biliary drainage combined with a duodenal stent at 16 referral centers in four Asian countries. The primary outcome was time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO). We assessed TRBO according to the sequence of biliary and duodenal obstruction (group 1/2/3, biliary obstruction first/concurrent/duodenal obstruction first, respectively) or the location of duodenal obstruction (type I/II/III, proximal to/affecting/distal to the ampulla, respectively). We also evaluated functional success and adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 110 patients (group1/2/3, 67/29/14 patients; type I/II/III, 45/46/19 patients; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]/EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy/EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy, 90/10/10 patients, respectively). The median TRBO of all cases was 450 days (interquartile range, 212-666 days) and functional success was achieved in 105 cases (95%). The TRBO did not differ significantly by the timing or location of duodenal obstruction (p = .30 and .79, respectively). The TRBO of metal stents (n = 96) tended to be longer compared with plastic stents (n = 14, p = .083). Compared with ERCP, EUS-guided biliary drainage was associated with a higher rate of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Transpapillary or transmural endoscopic biliary drainage with a duodenal stent was effective, irrespective of the timing or location of duodenal obstruction. A prospective study is required considering the tradeoff of technical success rate, stent patency, and adverse events (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02376907).

Recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly used as an alternative in patients with biliary obstruction who fail standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The two major endoscopic approach routes for EUS-BD are the transgastric intrahepatic and the transduodenal extrahepatic approaches. Biliary drainage can be achieved by three different methods, transluminal biliary stenting, transpapillary rendezvous technique, and antegrade biliary stenting. Choice of approach route and drainage method depends on individual anatomy, underlying disease, and location of the biliary stricture. Recent meta-analyses have revealed that cumulative technical success and adverse event rates were 90-94% and 16-23%, respectively. Development of new dedicated devices for EUS-BD would help refine the technical aspects and minimize the possibility of complications, making it a more promising procedure.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Techniques for Accessing and Draining the Biliary System and the Pancreatic Duct

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails to decompress the biliary system or the pancreatic duct, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary or pancreatic access and drainage can be used. Data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. The outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage seem equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP, whereas only retrospective studies are available for pancreatic duct drainage. In this article, revision of the technical and clinical status and the current evidence of interventional EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage are presented.

[Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Biliary Drainage]

The therapeutic role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has continued to evolve in recent years. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) can be performed as an effective alternative to percutaneous drainage or surgical options when conventional Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails or is not possible. Depending on the access and exit routes of the stent, multiple approaches to EUS-BD have been proposed. Each patient should receive an individualized approach based on the patient's condition, anatomy, and endoscopist's experience, with an appropriate backup prepared. In high-volume centers, the cumulative success rate has been reported to be over 90%. However, the reported overall complication rate remains relatively high at 10-30%. Further studies are necessary to better understand the long-term results and standardize EUS-BD, including appropriate indications and optimal approach.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in comparison with percutaneous biliary drainage when ERCP fails: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly used as an alternate therapeutic modality to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for biliary obstruction in patients who fail ERCP. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of these 2 procedures.

METHODS

We searched several databases from inception to September 4, 2016 to identify comparative studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and PTBD. Primary outcomes of interest were the differences in technical success and postprocedure adverse events. Secondary outcomes of interest included clinical success, rate of reintervention, length of hospital stay, and cost comparison for these 2 procedures. Odds ratios (ORs) and standard mean difference were calculated for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. These were analyzed using random effects model of meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 483 patients were included in the final analysis. There was no difference in technical success between 2 procedures (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, .69-4.59; I² = 22%) but EUS-BD was associated with better clinical success (OR, .45; 95% CI, .23-.89; I² = 0%), fewer postprocedure adverse events (OR, .23; 95% CI, .12-.47; I² = 57%), and lower rate of reintervention (OR, .13; 95% CI, .07-.24; I² = 0%). There was no difference in length of hospital stay after the procedures, with a pooled standard mean difference of -.48 (95% CI, -1.13 to .16), but EUS-BD was more cost-effective, with a pooled standard mean difference of -.63 (95% CI, -1.06 to -.20). However, the latter 2 analyses were limited by considerable heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

When ERCP fails to achieve biliary drainage, EUS-guided interventions may be preferred over PTBD if adequate advanced endoscopy expertise and logistics are available. EUS-BD is associated with significantly better clinical success, lower rate of postprocedure adverse events, and fewer reinterventions.