International multicenter comparative trial of transluminal EUS-guided biliary drainage via hepatogastrostomy vs. choledochoduodenostomy approaches

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.

Feasibility and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in inexperienced centers: a multicenter study in southwest Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has shown promising procedural outcomes in high-volume centers. Although inferior procedural outcomes were reported in inexperienced centers during the early days of EUS-BD, the current outcomes are unknown. This study aimed to clarify the feasibility and safety of EUS-BD in centers that recently introduced EUS-BD.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study was conducted at 22 centers that introduced EUS-BD between 2017 and 2022. A maximum of 20 initial EUS-BD cases at each center were evaluated. The clinical outcomes and experience of 84 endoscopists who performed these procedures were examined. Primary outcomes were the rate of technical success and adverse events (AEs), whereas secondary outcomes were risk factors associated with technical failure and procedure-related AEs.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-five patients were enrolled. The technical success rate was 91.4% (233/255). Among 22 technical failure cases, guidewire manipulation failure was the most common cause (n = 12) followed by tract dilation failure (n = 5). The AE rate was 10.2% (26/255). Multivariate analysis identified a puncture target diameter of <5 mm (odds ratio, 3.719; 95% CI, 1.415-9.776; P = .008) and moderate ascites extending to the liver surface (odds ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.195-8.653; P = .021) as independent risk factors for technical failure and procedure-related AEs, respectively. Endoscopists' procedural experience was not a risk factor for technical failure or procedure-related AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility and safety of EUS-BD were maintained during the induction phase at inexperienced centers. These data will be helpful to better understand the current status of EUS-BD. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000053615.).

The usefulness of percutaneous bile duct metal stent insertion for malignant biliary obstruction: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic bile duct stent insertion is a useful alternative to the endoscopic approach for malignant biliary strictures. This study retrospectively reviewed the cases of percutaneous metallic stent insertion at our institution to evaluate its safety and usefulness.

METHODS

The study included cases of percutaneous bile duct stent insertion performed between April 2016 and August 2024. All patients included those with malignant biliary obstruction and those in whom an endoscopic approach was first attempted but could not reach or cannulate the papilla of Vater. Two procedures were used: a two-stage procedure, in which a drain was inserted to create an external or internal fistula, followed by stent insertion, and a one-stage procedure, in which the stent was inserted at the same time as the approach to the bile duct. The causes of biliary strictures and complications were examined.

RESULTS

The study included 14 cases: seven patients had pancreatic head cancer, including biliary tract cancer (n = 4) and postoperative gastric cancer (n = 3); three patients who underwent a one-stage insertion. The number of inserted stents tended to increase in patients with postoperative cholangiocarcinoma recurrence. No complication occurred in any patient. One patient had severe cholangitis, eight had moderate cholangitis, and four had mild cholangitis; two patients who underwent one-stage procedures had moderate cholangitis and one had mild cholangitis. In cases of two-stage expandable metal stent (EMS) insertion, the average time from initial drainage to EMS insertion was 10.5 days (4-25).

CONCLUSIONS

The stent can be safely inserted in a one-stage procedure without compromising the patient's quality of life. Therefore, one-stage insertion of EMS for malignant biliary stricture may be performed aggressively unless the patient has severe cholangitis.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Comprehensive Review on Technical Tips and Clinical Outcomes

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has dramatically spread and improved in the last two decades and is changing the paradigm of drainage in case of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). EUS-BD can be achieved from different routes, including the common bile duct (choledochoduodenostomy), intrahepatic bile ducts (hepaticogastrostomy), and gallbladder as a rescue (cholecystogastrostomy/cholecystoduodenostomy). EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valuable option for biliary drainage in MBO when ERCP fails or is not feasible. EUS-HGS has demonstrated high efficacy with a good rate of technical and clinical success. The safety profile is also overall favorable, although severe adverse events may occur in a significant proportion of patients. From a technical perspective, EUS-HGS is considered one of the most demanding procedures in biliopancreatic endoscopy, requiring multiple steps and high technical skills and experience. In this comprehensive review, technical tips and clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are reviewed according to the latest evidence in the literature.

Dedicated cautery-enhanced tubular self-expandable metal stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an alternative for biliary drainage in patients with obstructive pancreaticobiliary pathology when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not feasible. Despite its effectiveness, EUS-HGS is associated with a significant risk of adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a newly designed dedicated cautery-enhanced tubular self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for EUS-HGS.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective study included patients with malignant biliary obstruction in whom ERCP had failed because of tumor infiltration, inability to drain the intrahepatic ducts, or surgically altered anatomy. A dedicated cautery-enhanced tubular SEMS was used for EUS-HGS. Technical and clinical success rates, procedure times, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

20 patients underwent EUS-HGS with the dedicated stent. Technical and clinical success rates of 100% were achieved, with no reported severe adverse events or mortality. The median procedure time was 16 minutes. Recurrent biliary obstruction was observed in 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The dedicated cautery-enhanced tubular SEMS for EUS-HGS can simplify the procedure and enhance its safety and efficacy. This innovation shows promise for improving patient outcomes, although further studies are needed to validate these findings in a broader patient population.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) includes EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AG) and EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV). While EUS-HGS, EUS-CDS and EUS-GBD are transluminal drainage procedures, EUS-AG is a traspapillary drainage procedure and EUS-RV is a procedure intended to facilitate endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) in instances of failed cannulation. These procedures were initially developed as options for endoscopic salvage of failed ERCP, but have evolved to become first-line interventions also for select indications over time as the technique and expertise improved. Several randomised controlled trials have demonstrated EUS-BD, especially EUS-CDS has similar or even better outcomes as compared to ERCP in malignant biliary obstruction. However, widespread adoption of these modalities is limited by the availability of expertise, steep learning curve, lack of standardization of techniques and cost. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of various EUS-BD procedures including the indications, accessories, technique, outcomes and follow-up of each of these procedures.

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.

EUS-guided Gastroenterostomy: A Multicenter International Study Comparing Benign and Malignant Diseases

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a minimally invasive therapy for patients with gastric outlet obstruction without the risks of surgical bypass and the limited long-term efficacy of enteral self-expanding metal stent placement. However, due to its novelty, there is a lack of significant data comparing long-term outcomes of patients with EUS-GE, based on the underlying disease. In this study, we compare outcomes of EUS-GE on benign versus malignant indications.

METHODS

Consecutive patients from 12 international, tertiary care centers who underwent EUS-GE over 3 years were extracted in a retrospective registry. Demographic characteristics, procedure-related information and follow-up data was collected. Primary outcome was the rate of adverse events associated with EUS-GE and the comparison of the rate of adverse events in benign versus malignant diseases. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success as well as hospitalization admission.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were included: 72 malignant and 31 benign. The characteristics of the patients undergoing EUS-GE is shown in Table 1. The mean age of the cohort was 68 years and 58 years for malignant and benign etiology. Gender distribution was 57% and 39% being females in malignant and benign etiology group, respectively. Clinical success, technical success, average procedure time, and hospital length of stay were similar in both groups. Patients with benign underlying etiology had significantly higher number of surgically altered midgut anatomy ( P =0.0379).

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE is equally efficient regardless of the underlying etiology (malignant vs. benign), and the adverse events both groups were comparable.

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.

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-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.

Current paradigm of endoscopic ultrasound in biliary and pancreatic duct drainage: an update

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the workhorse for biliary and pancreatic ductal interventions. Despite advances in both endoscopes and accessories for ERCP, it still has limitations in the presence of altered anatomy, luminal obstruction hindering access to the papilla, and proximal duct obstructions by tight stricture, calculi or intraductal growth. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) have expanded the rescue procedures after failed ERCP. This review discusses the techniques and results of various EUS-BD procedures, as well as EUS-PDD.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound for Complications of Pancreatic Cancer

Progression of pancreatic adenocarcinoma can result in disease complications such as biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction. The recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have transformed EUS from a purely diagnostic technology to a therapeutic modality, particularly with the development of lumen-apposing metal stents. In terms of biliary drainage, EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy offer safe and effective techniques when conventional transpapillary stent placement via ERCP fails or is not possible. If these modalities are not feasible, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage offers yet another salvage technique when the cystic duct is non-involved by the cancer. Lastly, EUS-guided gastroenterostomy allows for an effective bypass treatment for cases of gastric outlet obstruction that enables patients to resume eating within several days. Future randomized studies comparing these techniques to current standard-of-care options are warranted to firmly establish therapeutic EUS procedures within the treatment algorithm for this challenging disease.

Preoperative endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for primary drainage in obstructive jaundice

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic transpapillary approach by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the established technique for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been reported to be a useful alternative technique after ERCP fail. However, the optimal strategy remain controversial.

AREA COVERED

This review summarizes the literature on EUS-BD techniques for PBD with a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database between 2000 and 2023 using keywords for 'preoperative biliary drainage' and all types of EUS-BD techniques.

EXPERT OPINION

As there is no consensus on the optimal EUS-BD technique for PBD, selection of the EUS-BD approach depends on the patient's condition, the biliary obstruction site, the anastomosis after surgical intervention, and the preference of the endoscopist. However, we consider that EUS-HGS using a dedicated plastic stent may have some advantages in the adverse impact of surgical procedure because the location where the fistula is created by EUS-HGS is away from the site of the surgical procedure. Although there remain many issues that require further investigation, EUS-BD can be a feasible and safe alternative method of PBD for malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP fail.

The Role of Endoscopy in the Palliation of Pancreatico-Biliary Cancers: Biliary Drainage, Management of Gastrointestinal Obstruction, and Role in Relief of Oncologic Pain

Therapeutic endoscopy permits many and various treatments for cancer palliation in patients with bilio-pancreatic cancers, enabling different options, supporting patients during their route to oncologic treatments, and trying to improve their quality of life. Therefore, both endoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided techniques are performed in this scenario. We performed a literature review focusing on the role of endoscopy in the palliation of those advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers developing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and pain unresponsive to medical therapies. Therefore, we explored and focused on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic procedures in this scenario. In fact, the endoscopic treatment is based on achieving biliary drainage in the case of MBO through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), while GOO is endoscopically treated through the deployment of an enteral stent or the creation of EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis (EUS-GEA). Furthermore, untreatable chronic abdominal pain is a major issue in patients unresponsive to high doses of painkillers, so EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) or celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN) helps to reduce dosage and have better pain control. Therefore, therapeutic endoscopy in the palliative setting is an effective and safe approach for managing most of the clinical manifestations of advanced biliopancreatic tumors.

Covered self-expandable metallic stents versus plastic stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with malignant biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Covered self-expandable metallic stents (cSEMS) have become popular for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy with transmural stenting (EUS-HGS). We compared the time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), complications, and reintervention rates between EUS-HGS using plastic stent (PS) and cSEMS in patients with unresectable malignancies at multicenter institutions in Japan.

METHODS

Patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-HGS between April 2015 and July 2020 at any of the six participating facilities were enrolled. Primary endpoint: TRBO; secondary endpoints: rate of complications other than recurrent biliary obstruction and technical success rate of reintervention were evaluated.

RESULTS

PS and cSEMS were used for EUS-HGS in 109 and 43 patients, respectively. The TRBO was significantly longer in the cSEMS group than in the PS group (646 vs. 202 days). Multivariate analysis identified two independent factors associated with a favorable TRBO: combined EUS-guided antegrade stenting with EUS-HGS and the use of cSEMS. No significant difference was observed in the rate of complications other than recurrent biliary obstruction between the two groups. The technical success rate of reintervention was 85.7% for PS and 100% for cSEMS (p=0.309).

CONCLUSION

cSEMS might be a better option for EUS-HGS in patients with unresectable malignancies, given the longer TRBO.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: a literature review

Neoplasms of the biliopancreatic confluence may present with obstruction of the bile tract, leading to jaundice, pruritus and cholangitis. In these cases drainage of the bile tract is imperative. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with placement of a choledochal prosthesis is an effective treatment in about 90% of cases, even in experienced hands. In cases of ERCP failure, therapeutic options traditionally include surgical bypass by hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) or percutaneous transparietohepatic drainage (DPTH). In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage techniques have gained space because they are less invasive, effective and have an acceptable incidence of complications. Endoscopic echo-guided drainage of the bile duct can be performed through the stomach (hepatogastrostomy), duodenum (choledochoduodenostomy) or by the anterograde drainage technique. Some services consider ultrasound-guided drainage of the bile duct the procedure of choice in the event of ERCP failure. The objective of this review is to present the main types of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage and compare them with other techniques.

Development of devices for interventional endoscopic ultrasound for the management of pancreatobiliary diseases

A variety of devices have been developed for interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). EUS-guided drainage of the bile duct and pancreatic duct, as well as fluid collection adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract, is performed by a procedure involving puncture, guidewire manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Devices specialized for interventional EUS are being developed for each step of the procedure. Mechanical dilators such as bougie, balloon, and electrocautery dilators are used for tract dilation. Various types of plastic stents, self-expandable metal stents, and lumen-apposing metal stents specifically designed for interventional EUS are now available, including one-step devices developed to improve the efficacy and safety of interventional EUS. In addition, radiofrequency ablation and the placement of fiducial markers and radioactive seeds under EUS guidance are now becoming established for pancreatic neoplasms. Such development of specialized devices has expanded the indications for interventional EUS, increased the success rate, and lowered the adverse event rate.

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.

Novel drill dilator facilitates endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Tract dilation is one of the most difficult stages of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), especially for beginners. To overcome this problem, we applied a special dedicated dilator. Herein, we retrospectively evaluate the safety and usefulness of a novel drill dilator in EUS-HGS. This single-center retrospective study included 20 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS with a novel drill dilator. The tip is 0.77 mm, and it becomes 7F at 3 cm from tip. The track is dilated to 7F by simple clockwise rotation. The technical success rate of both initial tract dilation and stent placement was 20/20 (100%). No cases required additional dilation such as balloon or electric cautery. In 13/20 cases (65.0%), EUS-HGS was performed by beginner endoscopists. Median time required for dilation was 62.5 s (range, 30-144 s). Median procedure time was 13 min (range, 7-25 min). Early adverse events were two cases of mild fever. There was no bile leakage or bleeding. The novel drill dilator appears to be safe and useful for EUS-HGS. As it is not necessary to press the device strongly, there is no pushback during dilation and the scope position is stable. These characteristics facilitate EUS-HGS even for beginners. This device may enable the further development and increased dissemination of EUS intervention.

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.

Drenagem biliar endoscópica ecoguiada: revisão da literatura

RESUMO Neoplasias da confluência biliopancreática podem cursar com obstrução da via biliar, levando a icterícia, prurido e colangite. Nesses casos a drenagem da via biliar é imperativa. A colangiopancreatografia endoscópica retrógrada (CPER) com colocação de prótese coledociana constitui tratamento eficaz em cerca de 90% dos casos mesmo em mãos experientes. Nos casos de insucesso da CPER, tradicionalmente as opções terapêuticas incluem a derivação cirúrgica por hepaticojejunostomia (HJ) ou drenagem percutânea transparietohepática (DPTH). Nos últimos anos as técnicas endoscópicas ecoguiadas de drenagem biliar ganharam espaço por serem menos invasivas, eficazes e apresentarem incidência aceitável de complicações. A drenagem endoscópica ecoguiada da via biliar pode ser realizada pelo estômago (hepatogastrostomia), duodeno (coledocoduodenostomia) ou pela técnica de drenagem anterógrada. Alguns serviços consideram a drenagem ecoguiada da via biliar o procedimento de escolha no caso de insucesso da CPER. O objetivo desta revisão é apresentar os principais tipos de drenagem biliar endoscópica ecoguiada e confrontá-los com outras técnicas.

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.

Utility of Fine-Gauge Balloon Catheter for EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Background and Purpose: During endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), tract dilation is one of the most important steps, and the placement of conventional metal stents with 8.5 Fr delivery devices is difficult due to the large outer shape of the device. Fine-gauge balloon catheters have become popular because of their stricture penetration ability and ease of dilation. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of fine-gauge balloon catheters. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study involved 38 patients who underwent conventional metal stent placement. The patients were classified into two groups: those who underwent dilation with a fine-gauge balloon catheter before initial metal stenting (balloon dilation group) and those who underwent bougie dilation only (non-balloon dilation group). We evaluated the stenting success rate after initial dilation and adverse events. Results: Seventeen and twenty-one patients were included in the balloon dilation and non-balloon dilation groups, respectively. The stenting success rate after initial dilation was 100% (17/17) in the balloon dilation group and 71.4% (15/21) in the non-balloon dilation group (p = 0.024). As adverse events, peritonitis was observed in one case (4.8%) in the balloon dilation group, and in three cases (14.3%) in the non-balloon dilation group (p = 0.613). Conclusions: Dilation using a fine-gauge balloon catheter before conventional metal stent with 8.5 Fr delivery device placement is considered effective in EUS-HGS.

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.

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.

Safe Performance of Track Dilation and Bile Aspiration with ERCP Catheter in EUS-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy with Plastic Stents: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Objectives: Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) with plastic stent placement is associated with a high incidence of adverse events that may be reduced using an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) contrast catheter in the track dilation step. In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of track dilation and bile aspiration performed with an ERCP contrast catheter in EUS-HGS with plastic stent placement. Methods: In a multicenter setting, 22 EUS-HGS cases dilated with an ERCP contrast catheter were analyzed retrospectively and compared between a bile aspiration group and no bile aspiration group. Results: Overall, adverse events occurred in three (13.6%) cases of bile leakage, three (13.6%) cases of peritonitis, and one (4.5%) case of bleeding. Comparing patients with and without bile aspiration, 6 of the 11 patients (54.5%) with no bile aspiration had adverse events, whereas only 1 of the 11 patients (9.1%) who had bile aspiration, as much bile as possible, had an adverse event (bleeding). In univariate analysis, the only factor affecting the occurrence of adverse events was bile aspiration whenever possible (odds ratio, 12.0; 95%CI 1.12–128.84). Conclusions: In EUS-HGS with plastic stent placement, track dilation and bile aspiration with an ERCP contrast catheter may be useful in reducing adverse events.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Facilitates Decompression and Diagnosis in Patients With Suspected Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Case Series

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG) is increasingly being used as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP). This technique has also been utilized for diagnosis of malignant biliary obstruction by providing biliary access for antegrade cholangioscopy with biopsies and brushings for cytology and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). However, the potential impact of EUS-HG on surgical candidacy in cases with resectable disease remains unknown. We present three patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure) for suspected distal malignant biliary obstruction following EUS-HG. Biliary drainage was achieved in all three patients preoperatively and a diagnosis of malignancy could be established in two of the three cases using this technique. There were no procedure-related complications. The HG metal stent was removed eight weeks post-operatively with cholangiogram showing a patent hepaticojejunostomy in all three patients. Mean length of follow-up after EUS-HG was 298 +/- 96 days. Our case series demonstrates that EUS-HG is an effective method to achieve biliary decompression in patients with an inaccessible papilla. The mature HG tract can subsequently be used to obtain a tissue diagnosis. Lastly, EUS-HG does not preclude patients from undergoing a curative Whipple procedure.

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.

Informed Consent for Endoscopic Biliary Drainage: Time for a New Paradigm

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is considered as the first option in the management of malignant biliary obstruction. In case of ERCP failure, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) has been conventionally considered as the preferred rescue strategy. However, the use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has proved similarly high rates of technical success, when compared to PTBD. As a matter of fact, biliary drainage is maybe the most evident paradigm of the increasing interconnection between ERCP and EUS, and obtaining an adequate informed consent (IC) is an emerging issue. The aim of this commentary is to discuss the reciprocal roles of ERCP and EUS for malignant biliary obstruction, in order to provide a guide to help in developing an appropriate informed consent reflecting the new biliopancreatic paradigm.

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.

Managing adverse events after endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of the biliary tract and pancreatic fluid collections: Narrative review (with video)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided therapeutic procedures have become increasingly common in clinical practice. The development of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology led to the concept of interventional EUS. However, it carries a considerable risk of adverse events (AEs), which occur in approximately 23% of the procedures performed for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and 2.5-37.0% of those performed for drainage of the biliary tract. Although the vast majority of AEs occurring after EUS-guided drainage are mild, a deep understanding of such events is necessary for their appropriate management. Because EUS-guided drainage is a novel procedure, there have been few studies of the topic. To our knowledge, this is the first narrative review that focuses on the management and resolution of AEs occurring after EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections or the biliary tract. We also include an explanatory video.

Endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction: Which is better - endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound?

Presently, following endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy, an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with transpapillary stenting is performed for palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). However, technical failure and postprocedure pancreatitis are limitations to ERCP. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) after a failed ERCP has a 90% technical success rate and has been shown to be superior when compared to percutaneous methods, making EUS an increasingly recognized option for biliary drainage. Supporting this approach, findings from recently concluded randomized trials suggest that the safety profile and technical outcomes for EUS-BD are comparable or even superior to that of ERCP for primary biliary decompression in patients with MDBO. Also, EUS-BD is increasingly being utilized in patients with altered surgical anatomy in lieu of percutaneous techniques and balloon-assisted enteroscopy. A growing body of evidence supports the notion that, in the future, EUS may become the primary modality by which biliary decompression is undertaken in the majority of patients with MDBO. The roadmap to this eventuality may require further optimization of procedural techniques, technological innovations, and cost reduction.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage-current status and future perspectives

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stenting is the treatment modality of choice for patients with benign and malignant bile duct obstruction. ERCP could fail in cases of duodenal obstruction, duodenal diverticulum, ampullary neoplastic infiltration or surgically altered anatomy. In these cases percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD) is traditionally used as a rescue procedure but is related to high morbidity and mortality and lower quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a relatively new interventional procedure that arose due to the development of curvilinear echoendoscope and the various endoscopic devices. A large amount of data is already collected that proves its efficacy, safety and ability to replace PTBD in cases of ERCP failure. It is also possible that EUS-BD could be chosen as a first-line treatment option in some clinical scenarios in the near future. Several EUS-BD techniques are developed EUS-guided transmural stenting, antegrade stenting and rendezvous technique and can be personalized depending on the individual anatomy. EUS-BD is normally performed in the same session from the same endoscopist in case of ERCP failure. The lack of training, absence of enough dedicated devices and lack of standardization still makes EUS-BD a difficult and not very popular procedure, which is related to life-threatening adverse events. Developing training models, dedicated devices and guidelines hopefully will make EUS-BD easier, safer and well accepted in the future. This paper focuses on the technical aspects of the different EUS-BD procedures, available literature data, advantages, negative aspects and the future perspectives of these modalities.

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.

A novel partially covered metallic stent with a 20-mm long distal bare portion for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Video 1EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with a novel partially covered self-expandable metallic stent for a patient with biliary obstruction owing to gallbladder cancer.