Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage

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.

Role of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound in gastrointestinal malignancy- current evidence and future directions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to an advanced therapeutic modality. With the advent of better technologies and accessories, EUS has found ground in the management of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, not only for diagnosis but also for therapeutic purposes. EUS can tackle a host of conditions, including hepato-pancreatico-biliary malignancies. Advances and experience in various EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques have enabled the endosonologist to tackle biliary obstruction when conventional techniques of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) fails. More and more emerging data not only establishes the safety of EUS-BD but also demonstrates superior efficacy over PTBD and sometimes even ERCP. Malignant gastric outlet obstruction can now be safely managed with EUS-guided gastroenterostomy. Starting from pain management in malignant tumors through celiac plexus neurolysis to various tumor ablative therapies, EUS has forged ahead over percutaneous treatment or surgical options in the management of GI malignancies. Additional data is now coming up on the prospects of EUS-guided immunotherapy and biological therapy for tumor management. The future of EUS therapeutics in the field of GI malignancies is bright. With increasing evidence, this modality becoming a key player in management of a host of complex clinical conditions arising out of GI malignancies is in the offing. This review focuses on elucidating the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of GI malignancies, a synopsis of various techniques, data on its safety and efficacy as well as future advancements in this domain.

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.

Severe Persistent Hyponatremia: A Rare Presentation of Biliary Fluid Loss

Hypotonic hyponatremia is caused by a serum sodium level of <135 mEq/L in the setting of excess solute loss accompanied by free water retention because of antidiuretic hormone release, subsequent to decreased effective arterial blood volume. Acute hyponatremia can have various neurological manifestations, including drowsiness, lethargy, coma, seizures, respiratory depression, and even death. In this article, we present a case of a 41-year-old man who presented with hyponatremia as a result of sodium containing biliary fluid loss and resultant renal free water retention in response to increased antidiuretic hormone secretion. He underwent placement of a cholecystostomy tube for acalculous cholecystitis and was found to be persistently hyponatremic despite repletion with sodium-containing fluids. Once the cholecystostomy tube was removed, the patient’s sodium levels improved, and his symptoms resolved. Our case highlights choleuresis as an unusual but significant cause of hyponatremia in patients who have external biliary drainage.