Long-term outcomes of a newly developed hybrid metal stent for EUS-guided biliary drainage (with videos)

Prevention of Adverse Events in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is used when biliary drainage using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Recently, it has been adopted as a primary biliary drainage method, and its indications have expanded. Since EUS-BD can cause adverse events (AEs), such as bile leakage and stent migration, which do not occur in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopists need to be well-versed in its management and preventive techniques. EUS-BD includes several procedures, such as EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AS), and EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV). A recent meta-analysis reported that the overall AE rate of EUS-BD was 13.7% (EUS-CDS, 11.9%; EUS-HGS, 15.5%; EUS-AS, 9.9%; and EUS-RV, 8.8%). Among various EUS-BD techniques, EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS are the most frequently reported. Tubular self-expandable metal stents have been traditionally used in EUS-CDS; however, lumen-apposing metal stents have recently gained popularity. A systematic review showed that the rates of early AEs were similar between self-expandable metal stents and lumen-apposing metal stents; however, stent maldeployment was more problematic with lumen-apposing metal stents. Although tubular self-expandable metal stents are used in EUS-HGS, stent maldeployment remains a serious issue, and available devices and technical tips for preventing this AE should be well understood. Furthermore, AEs, such as sepsis, cholangitis, and bleeding, can occur, and strategies to mitigate these risks are essential. In this narrative review, we discussed AEs related to EUS-BD with a focus on management options and strategies for prevention.

Balloon Catheter Versus Drill Dilator for EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Stent Placement: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

A novel partially self-expandable metal stent (PCSEMS) with an anti-migration system has recently become available during Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) but requires tract dilation. No previous study has compared the performance of dilation devices during EUS-HGS. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the technical success rate of tract dilation between a balloon catheter and drill dilator technique during EUS-HGS prior to insertion of SEMS with an anti-migration system.

METHODS

A single-center, randomized controlled trial comparing the balloon dilation and drill dilator techniques for first-line tract dilation during EUS-HGS. The primary outcome was the initial technical success rate of tract dilation for each technique during EUS-HGS. The secondary outcome was adverse events associated with the procedures.

RESULTS

Of 54 randomized patients who underwent EUS-HGS at our center, there were 27 in the balloon dilation group and 27 in the drill dilation group. The initial technical success rate was 92.6% (25/27) in the balloon dilation group and 100% (27/27) in the drill dilation group (p = 0.1495). The technical success rate of stent delivery system insertion was significantly higher in the balloon dilation group (88%, 22/25) than in the drill dilation group (45%, 13/27; p = 0.0013). Procedure time was significantly shorter in the balloon dilation group (mean, 9.7 min) than in the drill dilation group (mean, 14.0 min; p = 0.047). Adverse events were more frequent in the drill dilation group (7.4% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Balloon dilation appears more suitable than drill dilation for PCSEMS with 8.5 Fr stent delivery system deployment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

University Hospital Medical Information Network 000049550.

Comparison of fully versus partially covered metal stents in endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy for malignant biliary obstruction (with video)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) using a fully covered metal stent (FCMS) or partially covered metal stent (PCMS) is performed to manage unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) following unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. This study aimed to compare FCMS and PCMS for EUS-HGS in patients with MBO.

METHODS

We reviewed the EUS database to analyze consecutive patients with MBO who underwent EUS-HGS between November 2017 and March 2023. We performed a 1:1 matching using propensity score matching based on potential confounding factors. Stent patency, technical success, clinical success, adverse events, reintervention, and overall survival were assessed.

RESULTS

The technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 92% (123/134). A total of 80 patients with technical success (40 FCMS, 40 PCMS) were selected after propensity score matching. The two groups showed similar rates of clinical success (90% vs. 88%; P = 0.999), early adverse events (15% vs. 20%; P = 0.556), late adverse events (18% vs. 33%; P = 0.121), reintervention (20% vs. 38%; P = 0.084), and median overall survival (4.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-5.5] vs. 3.8 months [95% CI 1.9-5.7]; P = 0.609). During follow-up, the FCMS group showed higher patency rates (85% vs. 60% at 6 months; 76% vs. 43% at 12 months; P = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

FCMS and PCMS for EUS-HGS in patients with unresectable MBO showed similar rates of clinical success, as well as early and late adverse events. However, the FCMS group showed a higher cumulative stent patency rate compared to the PCMS group.

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.

ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Pawa S, Marya NB, Thiruvengadam NR, Ngamruengphong S, Baron TH, Bun Teoh AY, Bent CK, Abidi W, Alipour O, Amateau SK, Desai M, Chalhoub JM, Coelho-Prabhu N, Cosgrove N, Elhanafi SE, Forbes N, Fujii-Lau LL, Kohli DR, Machicado JD, Navaneethan U, Ruan W, Sheth SG, Thosani NC, Qumseya BJ, (ASGE Standards of Practice Committee Chair). American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders: summary and recommendations

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the following: 1: The role of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients after failed ERCP. 2: The role of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy in resolving distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. 3: The role of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy. 4: The role of EUS-BD versus E-ERCP and PTBD in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy other than RYGB. 5: The role of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary transcystic gallbladder drainage in resolving acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy.

Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference

BACKGROUND

Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.

METHODS

The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) versus choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) in ERCP-failed malignant biliary obstruction: A systematic review and META-analysis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard in managing malignant biliary obstruction. The success of ERCP has limitations, whereas surgical biliary bypass and percutaneous transhepatic approaches, as alternative modalities, come with significant costs, longer durations, and higher levels of mortality and morbidity. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary drainage with two approaches, hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), is a favored and evolving alternative modality. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Scholar databases up to August 2023, based on the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. We identified randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS. Outcome measures included technical and clinical success, side effects, and mean procedure time. Nine nonrandomized studies and two randomized controlled trials involving 537 patients (225 EUS-HGS, 312 EUS-CDS) were analyzed. No difference was found in technical success (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.41-1.68; I 2 = 0%) and clinical success between the two procedures (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.51-1.81; I 2 = 9.94%). Side effects were significantly higher in EUS-HGS (OR, 2.01, 95% CI, 1.14-3.59; I 2 = 0%). No significant difference in mean procedure time was observed between the two procedures (0.13; 95% CI, -0.15-0.41; I 2 = 34.89%). There are differences in efficacy and safety between EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS. EUS-CDS has a faster procedure time, lower risk of side effects, and ease of puncture during the procedure.

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.

Is Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Safe and Effective after Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography?-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as an alternative option for biliary drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS. In this comprehensive meta-analysis, we aim to study the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS in cases of failed conventional ERCP. Methods: Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS. Using the random effect model, the pooled weight-adjusted event rate estimate for clinical outcomes in each group were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success rates. Secondary outcomes included overall adverse events (AEs), rates of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and rates or re-intervention. Results: Our analysis included 70 studies, with a total of 3527 patients. The pooled technical and clinical success rates for EUS-HGS were 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I2 = 40%) and 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I2 = 40%), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of AEs with EUS-HGS was 14.9% (95% CI, 12.7-17.1), with bile leakage being the most common (2.4% [95% CI, 1.7-3.2]). The pooled incidence of RBO was 15.8% [95% CI, 12.2-19.4], with a high success rate for re-intervention (97.5% [95% CI, 94.7-100]). Conclusions: Our analysis showed high technical and clinical success rates of EUS-HGS, making it a feasible and effective alternative to ERCP. The ongoing development of dedicated devices and techniques is expected to make EUS-HGS more accessible and safer for patients in need of biliary drainage.

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.

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.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by I 2 statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; I 2 = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; I 2 = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; I 2 = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; I 2 = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; I 2 = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; I 2 = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; I 2 = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.

Factors Associated With Difficult Endoscopic Ultrasonography-guided Biliary Drainage

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage is challenging, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) can be used as an alternate treatment; however, this method requires operator expertise. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the factors that are associated with a difficult EUS-BD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who successfully underwent EUS-BD were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into the easy group and difficult group depending on whether the procedural time was more than 60 minutes, which was the cutoff value elicited from past reports. Patient characteristics and procedural factors were compared between the two groups. The factors associated with difficult procedures were also investigated.

RESULTS

The patient characteristics were not significantly different between the easy group (n=22) and the difficult group (n=19). The diameter of the punctured bile duct was significantly different between the two groups. In the multivariate analysis, the diameter of the punctured bile duct was the only factor associated with a difficult EUS-BD (odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.91, P value=0.012). The cutoff value for the diameter of the punctured bile duct in predicting a difficult EUS-BD was 7.0 mm (area under the curve: 0.83, sensitivity 84.2%, specificity 86.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

A nondilated bile duct might be a predictive factor for a difficult EUS-BD. For beginners of EUS-BD, the cutoff value for the punctured bile duct diameter found in this study, 7.0 mm, might become a barometer for puncture point selection.

Propensity score matching analysis for clinical impact of braided-type versus laser-cut-type covered self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND

To prevent stent migration during endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), intra-scope channel release technique is important, but is unfamiliar to non-expert hands. The self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is an additional factor to prevent stent migration. However, no comparative studies of laser-cut-type and braided-type during EUS-HGS have been reported. The aim of this study was to compare the distance between the intrahepatic bile duct and stomach wall after EUS-HGS among laser-cut-type and braided-type SEMS.

METHODS

To evaluate stent anchoring function, we measured the distance between the hepatic parenchyma and stomach wall before EUS-HGS, one day after EUS-HGS, and 7 days after EUS-HGS. Also, propensity score matching was performed to create a propensity score for using laser-cut-type group and braided-type group.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 24 patients underwent EUS-HGS using a laser-cut-type SEMS, and 118 patients underwent EUS-HGS using a braided-type SEMS. EUS-HGS using the laser-cut-type SEMS was mainly performed by non-expert endoscopists (n = 21); EUS-HGS using braided-type SEMS was mainly performed by expert endoscopists (n = 98). The distance after 1 day was significantly shorter in the laser-cut-type group than that in the braided-type group [2.00 (1.70-3.75) vs. 6.90 (3.72-11.70) mm, P < 0.001]. In addition, this distance remained significantly shorter in the laser-cut-type group after 7 days. Although these results were similar after propensity score matching analysis, the distance between hepatic parenchyma and stomach after 7 days was increased by 4 mm compared with the distance after 1 day in the braided-type group. On the other hand, in the laser-cut-type group, the distance after 1 day and 7 days was almost the same.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS using a laser-cut-type SEMS may be safe to prevent stent migration, even in non-expert hands.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus choledochoduodenostomy for malignant biliary obstruction: A meta-analysis

Objectives

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage encompasses techniques such as EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of EUS-CDS with that of EUS-HGS for the treatment of biliary obstruction.

Methods

A systematic meta-analysis of all relevant articles listed was performed by searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. We used random effects or fixed effects models to compare success rates, adverse events, procedure times, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction after EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS.

Results

This meta-analysis included 18 eligible studies. There was no significant difference between EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS with respect to technical success rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.73) and clinical success rate (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.43-1.04), or with respect to total procedure-related adverse events (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.00-1.93). Subgroup analysis of adverse events revealed that the rate of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) was significantly higher for EUS-HGS (OR 2.95; 95% CI 1.54-5.64). There was no significant difference between the two methods with respect to time to recurrent biliary obstruction (mean difference -11.93 days; 95% CI -47.77-23.91). However, the procedure time was longer for EUS-HGS (mean difference, 3.21 min; 95% CI 1.24-5.19).

Conclusion

EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS are comparable in terms of technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events; however, EUS-CDS is superior with respect to procedure time and preventing RBO.

Endoscopic Management of Malignant Biliary Obstruction

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is commonly used for managing malignant biliary obstruction; however, it is impossible if the endoscope cannot reach the ampulla of Vater, and it carries a risk of procedure-related pancreatitis. Percutaneous approach is a traditional rescue method when ERCP fails and can be useful in advanced malignant hilar biliary obstruction; however, it is invasive and carries risks of tube dislodgement, recurrent infection, and tract seeding. Endoscopic ultrasound approach may be attempted if ERCP fails and is free from the risk of pancreatitis; however, it is only possible in limited centers, and training is still difficult. Malignant biliary obstruction should be managed by leveraging the complementary strengths of these methods.

Preliminary feasibility study of a new partially covered self-expandable metal stent with an anchoring flange for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HPG) has a risk of serious procedural adverse events (AEs), but few dedicated devices for EUS-HPG are available. We evaluated the feasibility of a new partially covered self-expandable metal stent (PCSEMS) with an anchoring flange for EUS-HPG.

METHODS

The feasibility of a stent featuring a proximal radiopaque uncovered portion 1.5 cm in length and a distal anchoring flange 20 mm in diameter was evaluated in consecutive patients undergoing EUS-HPG for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. Primary outcomes were the technical and clinical success of EUS-HPG, and secondary outcomes were AEs, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), reintervention for RBO, and the technical feasibility of peroral cholangioscopy (POC) through the stent in situ.

RESULTS

EUS-HPG was performed in 24 patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. The technical and clinical success rates of EUS-HPG were 100% (24/24) and 91.7% (22/24), respectively. AEs developed after EUS-HPG in 8.3% of patients (2/24, cholangitis). RBO developed in 29.2% of patients (7/24), with a median cumulative time to RBO of 6.7 months. The causes of RBO were sludge formation (n = 4), hyperplasia at an uncovered portion (n = 2), and nonocclusive cholangitis (n = 1). Reintervention for RBO had a 100% success rate (7/7), and POC through the stent in situ was technically feasible in 7 of 8 patients with a stent diameter of 10 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HPG with a new PCSEMS can alleviate malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. The novel stent evaluated in this study may prevent stent-related AEs, including stent migration, and allow advanced endoscopic interventions through the HPG route.

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.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

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.

Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy of India Consensus Guidelines on Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: Part I (Indications, Outcomes, Comparative Evaluations, Training)

Endoscopic management of bile duct obstruction is a key aspect in gastroenterology practice and has evolved since the first description of biliary cannulation by McCune et al in 1968. Over many decades, the techniques and accessories have been refined and currently, the first-line management for extrahepatic biliary obstruction is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). However, even in expert hands the success rate of ERCP reaches up to 95%. In almost 4 to 16% cases, failure to cannulate the bile duct may necessitate other alternatives such as surgical bypass or more commonly percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). While surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality, PTBD has a very high reintervention and complication rate (∼80%) and poor quality of life. Almost parallelly, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to a substantial therapeutic option in various pancreatico-biliary diseases. Biliary drainage using EUS-guidance (EUS-BD) has gained momentum since the first report published by Giovannini et al in 2001. The concept of accessing the bile duct through a different route than the papilla, circumventing the shortcomings of PTBD and sometimes bypassing the actual obstruction have enthused a lot of interest in this novel strategy. The three key methods of EUS-BD entail transluminal, antegrade, and rendezvous approach. Over the past decade, with growing experience, EUS-BD has been found to be equivalent to ERCP or PTBD for malignant obstruction with better success rates.

EUS-BD, albeit, is not devoid of adverse events and can carry fatal adverse events. However, neither the technique of EUS-BD, nor the accessories and stents for EUS-BD have been standardized.

Additionally, different countries and regions have different availability of the accessories making generalizability a difficult task. Thus, technical aspects of this evolving therapy need to be outlined. For these reasons, the Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy India deemed it appropriate to develop technical consensus statements for performing safe and successful EUS-BD.

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.

Clinical Outcomes of EUS-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy for Biliary Drainage in Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Case Series

Introduction. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is associated with poor prognosis and 98% loss-of-life expectancy. 80% of patients with PDA are unfit for radical surgery. In those cases, emphasis is set on management of cancer-related symptoms, among which obstructive jaundice is most common. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) emerges as a valid alternative to the well-accepted methods for treatment of biliary obstruction. Patient Selection. Five consecutive patients with unresectable pancreatic malignancy, were subjected to EUS-BD, particularly EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). Ethics. Oral and written informed consent was obtained in all cases prior procedure. Technique. EUS-guided puncture of the common bile duct was performed, followed by advancement of a guidewire to the intrahepatic bile ducts. After dilation of the fistulous tract with a cystotome, a fully covered self-expandable metal stent was inserted below the hepatic confluence and extending at least 3 cm in the duodenum. Technical and clinical success was achieved in four patients without adverse events. In one patient procedure failed due to dislocation of the guidewire, with consequent biliary leakage requiring urgent surgery. Recovery was uneventful with no further clinical sequelae and there was no mortality associated with procedure. Discussion. Introduced in 2001, EUS-guided biliary drainage has become an accepted option for treatment of obstructive jaundice. According to recent guidelines published by European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) in 2022, EUS-CDS is a preferred modality to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and surgery in patients with failed ERCP, with comparable efficiency and better safety profile, which is supported by our experience with the procedure. Conclusions. Our case series suggests that EUS-CDS is an excellent option for palliative management of malignant distal biliary obstruction, emphasizes on the importance of adequate technique and experience for the technical success, and urges the need for future research on establishing the best choice for guidewire and dilation device.

Comparison of recurrent biliary obstruction with the use of metal and plastic stents in EUS-guided biliary drainage: A propensity score-matched analysis

Background and Objectives

In transpapillary biliary drainage, metal stents (MSs) exhibit a lower incidence of a biliary obstruction than plastic stents (PSs). However, few studies have compared recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) when MSs and PSs are used in EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). We retrospectively evaluated the RBO for both stents in each procedure.

Patients and Methods

: Between November 2012 and December 2020, 85 and 53 patients who underwent EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction, respectively, were enrolled. Factors associated with RBO were assessed. Clinical outcomes were compared between the MS and PS groups using propensity score matching.

Results

: The clinical success rate and procedure-related adverse events were similar in the MS and PS groups. Multivariate analysis identified the use of PS as a factor associated with RBO (EUS-HGS, P = 0.03; EUS-CDS, P = 0.02). After matching, the median time to RBO in EUS-HGS (MS: 313; PS: 125 days; P = 0.01) in the MS group was longer than that in the PS group. The cumulative incidence of RBO at 1, 3, and 6 months in the MS group was significantly lower than that in the PS group for EUS-HGS (MS: 4.0%, 8.2%, and 8.2%; PS: 12.4%, 24.9%, and 39.5%, respectively, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

: MS exhibited a lower rate of RBO than PS for EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS.

Feasibility and efficacy of endoscopic reintervention after covered metal stent placement for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy: A multicenter experience

Background and Objectives

Although the use of a long metal stent is favored for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) for the relief of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), endoscopic reintervention (E-RI) at the time of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) is challenging due to a long intragastric portion. This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of E-RI after a long partially covered metal stent (L-PCMS) placement during EUS-HGS.

Materials and Methods

We performed a multicenter retrospective study between January 2015 and December 2019 examining patients with MBO who underwent E-RI for RBO through the EUS-HGS route after the L-PCMS placement. Technical and clinical success rates, details of E-RI, adverse events (AEs), stent patency, and survival time were evaluated.

Results

Thirty-three patients at eight referral centers in Japan who underwent E-RI through the EUS-HGS route were enrolled. The location of MBO was distal in 54.5%. The median intragastric length of the L-PCMS was 5 cm. As the first E-RI attempt, E-RI via the distal end of the existing L-PCMS was successful in 60.6%. The overall technical and clinical success rates of E-RI were 100% and 81.8%, respectively. Liver abscess was noted in one patient. A proximal biliary stricture was associated with the clinical ineffectiveness of E-RI in multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 12.5, P = 0.04). The median survival and stent patency duration after E-RI were 140 and 394 days, respectively.

Conclusions

Our study findings suggest that E-RI for RBO after EUS-HGS with a L-PCMS is technically feasible and clinically effective, without any severe AEs, especially for patients with distal MBO.

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.

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.

Current endoscopic approaches to biliary strictures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current status and future perspectives of the endoscopic management of biliary strictures.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to conventional diagnostic modalities, such as cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), per-oral cholangioscopy is helpful for indeterminate biliary strictures. It allows direct visualization of the biliary tract and targeted biopsy. For distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard of care. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an emerging alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in cases with failed ERCP. EUS-BD is also an effective salvage option for perihilar MBO, which can not be managed via ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Preoperative drainage is necessary for most jaundiced patients as neoadjuvant chemotherapy is widely administered for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and a SEMS is preferred in this setting, too. For benign biliary strictures, a covered SEMS can improve stricture resolution and reduce the number of endoscopic sessions as compared to plastic stents.

SUMMARY

ERCP and EUS play a central role in the diagnosis and drainage for both malignant and benign biliary strictures.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary interventions

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), even in expert hands, may fail in 5-10% of cases, especially in cases of papillary infiltration, malignant gastric outlet obstruction, or surgically altered anatomy. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) has represented the traditional rescue therapy, despite associated with high rate of adverse events, need for re-interventions and an inferior quality of life. The evolution of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic tool offers an effective and safe alternative for internal biliary drainage (BD) into the stomach or the duodenum. EUS-BD is reported to have similar or even improved efficacy and increased safety when compared to PTBD and can be performed in the same session of a failed ERCP. This review summarizes technical aspects of intra-hepatic and extra-hepatic EUS-BD (including hepatico-gastrostomy, choledocho-duodenostomy and rendezvous) together with current evidence and future perspectives that steadily cements EUS-BD's place in multidisciplinary management of bilio-pancreatic diseases.

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.

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.

[Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage in Pancreatobiliary Diseases]

EUS-guided drainage for gallbladder, bile duct, pancreatic duct, and peripancreatic fluid collection has been performed more frequently in the last decade. The development of dedicated stents and delivery systems for EUS-guided interventions have improved the efficacy and safety of these procedures. Furthermore, the introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents has reduced the complication significantly of endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic collections and gallbladder. Recent studies show that EUS-guided drainage of pancreaticobiliary ducts and peripancreatic fluid collection produces good results and low complication rates. This review describes the current position and role of interventional EUS for pancreatobiliary disease in clinical practice.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been continuously evolving for the past three decades and has become widely used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The efficacy of therapeutic EUS (TEUS) has proven to be superior and better tolerated than conventional percutaneous or surgical techniques. TEUS has allowed the performance of multiple procedures including gallbladder, pancreatic duct and biliary drainage as well as gastrointestinal anastomoses. TEUS procedures generally require the following critical steps: needle access, guidewire placement, fistula creation and stent deployment. The indications and contraindication for TEUS procedures vary with different procedures but common contraindications include hemodynamic instability, severe coagulopathy unable to be reversed, large volume ascites or the inability to obtain access to the target site. Proficiency and high volume in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and diagnostic EUS procedures are required for training in TEUS. The complexity of the cases performed can be seen as a pyramid with drainage of pancreatic fluid collections at the base, pancreaticobiliary decompression in the middle, and creation of digestive anastomosis at the top. The mastery of each level is crucial prior to reaching the next level of complexity. TEUS has been incorporated in our arsenal and is impacting on a daily basis the way we offer minimally invasive therapy.

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.

Comparison of Choledochoduodenostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy for EUS-Guided Biliary Drainage: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as an option for patients of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), there has no agreement on which approach is preferred. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to examine the two methods.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search in databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library to find relevant studies reporting the efficacy and safety of the two EUS-guided biliary drainage methods.

Results

In total, 12 studies with 623 patients (EUS-CDS: 303 and EUS-HGS: 320) were included. The cumulative technical success and clinical success for EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was 95.0% (288/303), 93.1% (268/288), and 96.6% (309/320), 91.3% (282/309), respectively. Compared with EUS-HGS, the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.74 (95% CI 0.33–1.65; p = 0.46) for EUS-CDS technical success and 0.94 (95% CI 0.56–1.59; p = 0.83) for clinical success. The pooled difference in means of procedure time of EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was −2.68 (95% CI −5.12 to −0.24; p = 0.03). The cumulative early adverse events for EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was 12.2% (37/303) and 17.5% (56/320), respectively. Compared with EUS-HGS, the pooled OR of early adverse events for EUS-CDS was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.36–0.93; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis further suggests EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal high technical and clinical success, but EUS-CDS with a slightly short procedure time and with less early adverse events compared to EUS-HGS.

Partially covered self-expandable metal stent with antimigratory single flange plays important role during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Background and study aims  Stent migration into the abdominal cavity, which can occur due to stent shortening or stomach mobility, is a critical adverse event (AE) in EUS-HGS. To prevent this AE due to stent shortening, a novel, partially covered self-expandable metal stent with an antimigratory single flange has recently become available in Japan. The present study evaluated the clinical feasibility and safety of EUS-HGS using this novel stent. Patients and methods  We measured stent length in the abdominal cavity and the luminal portion after EUS-HGS using computed tomography (CT) performed 1 day after EUS-HGS (early phase). To evaluate stent shortening and the influence of stomach mobility, we also measured stent length at the same sites on CT performed at least 7 days after EUS-HGS (late phase). Results  Thirty-one patients successfully underwent EUS-HGS using this stent. According to CT in the early phase, stent length in the abdominal cavity was 7.13 ± 2.11 mm and the length of the luminal portion was 53.3 ± 6.27 mm. Conversely, according to CT in the late phase, stent length in the abdominal cavity was 8.55 ± 2.36 mm and the length of the luminal portion was 50.0 ± 8.36 mm. Stent shortening in the luminal portion was significantly greater in the late phase than in the early phase ( P  = 0.04). Conclusions  CT showed that stent migration can occur even with successful stent deployment, due to various factors such as stent shortening. The antimigratory single flange may be helpful to prevent stent migration, but further prospective comparative studies are needed to confirm our results.

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

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Specific Stents

The evolution of the endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) technique has necessitated the development of EUS-specific accessories and stents. In the earlier period, EUS-guided interventions mostly relied on borrowed accessories and stents from therapeutic endoscopy in particular ERCP. Traditional stents do not serve the purpose of EUS-guided transluminal stenting in all cases due to the length of the stent, no anchoring mechanism, and chance of migration. From 2011 onward, several EUS-specific stents became available, bringing a paradigm shift in interventional EUS. This article reviews current EUS-specific stents, indications, strengths, and weaknesses.

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.

Lumen apposing metal stents versus tubular self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy in malignant biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is an effective option for biliary drainage in malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) are increasingly been used for EUS-CDS. It is unknown how LAMS compare to tubular self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for EUS-CDS. Our aim is to compare the clinical outcomes of LAMS versus SEMS for EUS-CDS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS after failed ERCP for initial biliary drainage between 2011 and 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients who had conventional covered SEMS and LAMS placed for EUS-CDS. Outcome measures included unplanned procedural events, technical success, clinical success, adverse events and reinterventions. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

During the study period 57 patients met inclusion criteria (37 LAMS, 20 SEMS). All EUS-CDS were technically successful (LAMS group 95% CI 90.3-100%, SEMS group 95% CI 83.2-100%). There were no differences between groups in unplanned procedural events (4 LAMS deployment issues, 2 mild bleeding in SEMS group; 10 vs 10.8%), clinical success (37/37 [100%] vs 19/20 [95%]), and short-term adverse events (5/37 [13.5%] vs 4/20 [20%], p = 0.71). Complete follow-up data were available in 41 patients for a mean of 376 ± 145 days. Endoscopic reintervention was required for duodenal stent placement (n = 9) or biliary stent dysfunction (n = 4), with no difference between LAMS and SEMS group (6/37 [16.2%] vs 7/20 [35%]). There were no differences in overall survival between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy after failed ERCP has equally high technical and clinical success rates with either LAMS or SEMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. No differences in adverse events, reinterventions and survival were seen with either type of stent. The cost-effectiveness of LAMS vs SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy remains to be proven.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Portal Vein Coiling: Troubleshooting Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) is widely performed not only as an alternative to transpapillary biliary drainage, but also as primary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction. For anatomical reasons, this technique carries an unavoidable risk of mispuncturing intrahepatic vessels. We report a technique for troubleshooting EUS-guided portal vein coiling to prevent bleeding from the intrahepatic portal vein after mispuncture during interventional EUS. EUS-HGS was planned for a 59-year-old male patient with unresectable pancreatic cancer. The dilated bile duct (lumen diameter, 2.8 mm) was punctured with a 19-gauge needle, and a guidewire was inserted. After bougie dilation, the guidewire was found to be inside the intrahepatic portal vein. Embolizing coils were placed to prevent bleeding. Embolization coils were successfully inserted under stabilization of the catheter using a double-lumen cannula with a guidewire. Following these procedures, the patient was asymptomatic. Computed tomography performed the next day revealed no complications.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy using a novel laser-cut type partially covered self-expandable metal stent (with video)

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) is of clinical benefit in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, some endoscopists are concerned about the potential risk of adverse events. Bile peritonitis due to bile leakage through the fistula is one of the possible adverse events following EUS-HGS. Recently, a novel laser-cut type partially covered self-expandable metal stent (PCSEMS), which is a dedicated stent for EUS-HGS, has become available. This stent has an uncovered part, despite it being a laser-cut type stent, along with a flared end. In addition, it uses a 7-Fr stent delivery. Therefore, tract dilation might not be needed to deploy the stent, which might reduce the incidence of stent migration. In this study, the safety of EUS-HGS using this novel laser-cut type PCSEMS was evaluated by assessing technical success, which was defined as successful stent deployment, and clinical success, which was defined as reduction in serum total bilirubin levels by 50% and resolution of symptoms related to biliary tract obstruction within 2 weeks. Five patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction underwent EUS-HGS using the novel stent. Stent deployment was successfully performed without tract dilation in four patients, although tract dilation using a balloon catheter was needed in one patient. Clinical success was obtained in all patients, and adverse events including abdominal pain and bile peritonitis were not observed in any of the patients. EUS-HGS without tract dilation can be safely performed using a novel laser-cut type PCSEMS. A prospective comparative study evaluating this stent versus conventional stents is needed to corroborate our results.

Efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents or self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is becoming an option for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are replacing self-expandable metal stents (SEMS). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAMS and SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA protocols. Electronic databases were searched for studies on EUS-CDS. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success, reintervention, and adverse events. We used the random effects model with the DerSimonian-Laird estimation, and the results were depicted using forest plots. Subgroup analyses were also performed with data stratified by selected variable.

RESULTS

Overall, 31 studies (820 patients) were included. The pooled rates of clinical and technical success were 93.6 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 88.6 %-96.5 %) and 94.8 % (95 %CI 90.2 %-97.3 %) for LAMS, and 91.7 % (95 %CI 88.1 %-94.2 %) and 92.7 % (95 %CI 89.9 %-94.9 %) for SEMS, respectively. The pooled rates of adverse events were 17.1 % (95 %CI 12.5 %-22.8 %) for LAMS and 18.3 % (95 %CI 14.3 %-23.0 %) for SEMS. The pooled rates of reintervention were 10.9 % (95 %CI 7.7 %-15.3 %) for LAMS and 13.9 % (95 %CI 9.6 %-19.7 %) for SEMS. Subgroup analyses confirmed these results.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that LAMS and SEMS are comparable in terms of efficacy for EUS-CDS. Clinical and technical success, post-procedure adverse events, and reintervention rates were similar between LAMS and SEMS use; however, adverse events require further investigation.

Choledochoduodenostomy Versus Hepaticogastrostomy in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to estimate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) for malignant biliary obstruction.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies that compared EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS were included in this study.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were eligible for inclusion. The technical [odds ratio (OR): 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-1.74) and clinical (OR: 1.13; 95%CI: 0.66-1.94) success rates of EUS-CDS were comparable to those of EUS-HGS. However, EUS-CDS had less reintervention (OR: 0.31; 95%CI: 0.16-0.63) and stent obstruction (OR: 0.48; 95%CI: 0.21-0.94) than EUS-HGS. Both groups had similar adverse events (OR: 1.00; 95%CI: 0.70-1.43) and overall survival (hazard ratio: 1.07; 95%CI: 0.58-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have comparable technical and clinical success rates, adverse events, and overall survival. However, EUS-CDS has less reintervention and stent obstruction.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: Are we there yet?

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the mainstay procedure of choice for management of obstructive biliary disease. While ERCP is widely performed with high success rates, the procedure is not feasible in every patient such as cases of non-accessible papilla. In the setting of unsuccessful ERCP, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become a promising alternative to surgical bypass and percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD). A variety of different forms of EUS-BD have been described, allowing for both intrahepatic and extrahepatic approaches. Recent studies have reported high success rates utilizing EUS-BD for both transpapillary and transluminal drainage, with fewer adverse events when compared to PTBD. Advancements in novel technologies designed specifically for EUS-BD have led to increased success rates as well as improved safety profile for the procedure. The techniques of EUS-BD are yet to be fully standardized and are currently performed by highly trained advanced endoscopists. The aim of our review is to highlight the different EUS-guided interventions for achieving biliary drainage and to both assess the progress that has been made in the field as well as consider what the future may hold.