Efficacy of the 6-mm fully covered self-expandable metal stent during endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy as a primary biliary drainage for the cases estimated difficult endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A prospective clinical study

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage for distal malignant biliary obstruction due to pancreatic cancer with asymptomatic duodenal invasion: a retrospective, single-center study in Japan

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Duodenal invasion (DI) is a risk factor for early recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) may reduce early RBO in cases of asymptomatic DI, even when ERCP is possible.

METHODS

We enrolled 56 patients with pancreatic cancer and asymptomatic DI who underwent EUS-HGS (n=25) or ERCP-BD (n=31). Technical and clinical success, early (<3 months) and overall RBO rates, time to RBO (TRBO), and adverse events were compared between the EUS-HGS and ERCP-BD groups. Risk factors for early RBO were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Both procedures demonstrated 100% technical and clinical success rates, with a similar incidence of adverse events (48% vs. 39%, p=0.59). While the median TRBO was comparable (5.7 vs. 8.8 months, p=0.60), EUS-HGS was associated with a lower incidence of early RBO compared to ERCP-BD (8% vs. 29%, p=0.09). The major causes of early RBO in ERCP-BD were sludge and food impaction, rarely occurring in EUS-HGS. EUS-HGS was potentially reduced early RBO (odds ratio, 0.32; p=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS can be a viable option for treating pancreatic cancer with asymptomatic DI.

Impact of self-expandable metal stent deployment site on stent dysfunction during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Background and Objectives

Hyperplasia at the distal side of an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) stent is one of the most frequent causes of stent dysfunction. However, risk factors for hyperplasia during EUS-HGS remain unclear. The aim of the present study was to determine the most appropriate stent site during EUS-HGS to obtain prolonged stent patency.

Method

This study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent successful EUS-HGS using a partially covered, self-expandable, metal stent (PCSEMS) between January 2017 and September 2022. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the distal site of the PCSEMS at the intrahepatic bile duct, the peripheral side group and the central side group.

Results

There were 30 patients in the peripheral side group and 70 in the central side group. The diameter of the intrahepatic bile duct at the PCSEMS deployment site was significantly greater in the central side group (mean 7.90 mm) than in the peripheral side group (mean 4.25 mm; P < 0.05). Stent patency was significantly longer in the central side group than in the peripheral side group (median, 60 days vs. 144 days, P = 0.011), although overall survival was not significantly different. Hyperplasia was significantly more frequent in the peripheral side group. On multivariate analysis, the site of the PCSEMS (peripheral) was the only risk factor for stent dysfunction.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the distal site of the PCSEMS deployed at the hepatic hilar site from the confluence between B2 and B3 might play a role in obtaining longer stent patency.

ERCP catheter or dilator? Which is best for fistula dilation following guidewire placement in EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage?

OBJECTIVES

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is performed after endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage fails. Although fistula dilation is one of the most difficult steps of EUS-BD, whether an ultratapered ERCP catheter or a dilator is the best choice for fistula dilation is unclear. In this study, we aimed to identify the optimal device for fistula dilation after guidewire placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage between March 2019 and July 2024 were enrolled in this study. The successful fistula dilation rates, patient characteristics, and EUS-BD procedures were compared between patients who underwent fistula dilation with an ultratapered ERCP catheter (Catheter group) and patients who underwent fistula dilation with new dilators (ES dilator or Tornus ES) (Dilator group).

RESULTS

A total of 38 fistula dilation sessions were performed. Among these 38 sessions, 12 involved a catheter, and 26 involved a dilator. The ERCP catheter was specifically intended for use with 0.025 guidewires, and the dilators were specifically intended for use with 0.018 or 0.025 guidewires. Successful fistula dilation was more frequently achieved in the dilator group than in the catheter group (100% (26/26) vs. 50% (6/12), p < 0.01). When the cases were limited to those involving devices specifically intended for use with 0.025 guidewires, the results were similar (dilator group 100% (22/22) vs. catheter group 50% (6/12), p < 0.01). The other outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A dilator is more promising than a tapered ERCP catheter for fistula dilation in EUS-BD.

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.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: a meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valid option for EUS-guided biliary drainage that has been increasingly used in the last decade. The aims of this study were to provide a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of the features and outcomes of this procedure.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for literature pertinent to EUS-HGS. Meta-analysis of the proportions and meta-regression of potential modifiers of the main outcome measures were applied. The main outcome was technical success; secondary outcomes were clinical success and procedure-related adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

33 studies, including 1644 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) was the underlying cause in almost all cases (99.6%); the main indications for EUS-HGS were duodenal/papillary invasion (34.8%), surgically altered anatomy (18.4%), and hilar stenosis (16.0%). The pooled technical success of EUS-HGS was 97.7% (95%CI 96.1%-99.0%; I 2 = 0%), the intention-to-treat clinical success rate was 88.1% (95%CI 84.7%-91.2%; I 2 = 33.9%), and procedure-related AEs occurred in 12.0% (95%CI 9.8%-14.5%; I 2 = 20.4%), with cholangitis/sepsis (2.8%) and bleeding (2.3%) the most frequent. The rate of procedure-related AEs was lower with the use of dedicated stents on univariable meta-regression analysis. Meta-regression showed that technical success and clinical success rates were modified by the centers' experience (>4/year).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-HGS represents an effective and safe procedure for EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with MBO. Future studies should address the impact of center experience, patient selection, and the use of dedicated stents to improve performance of this technique.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy by puncturing both B2 and B3: a single center experience

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) through ducts B2 or B3 is effective in most patients with biliary obstruction, because B2 and B3 commonly join together. However, in some patients, B2 and B3 do not join each other due to invasive hilar tumors; therefore, single-route drainage is insufficient. Here, we investigated the feasibility and efficacy of EUS-HGS through both B2 and B3 simultaneously in seven patients. We decided to perform EUS-HGS through both B2 and B3 to achieve adequate biliary drainage because these two ducts were separate from each other. Here, we report a 100% technical and overall clinical success rate. Early adverse effects were closely monitored. Minimal bleeding was reported in one patient (1/7) and mild peritonitis in one patient (1/7). None of the patients experienced stent dysfunction, fever, or bile leakage after the procedure. EUS-HGS through both B2 and B3 simultaneously is safe, feasible, and effective for biliary drainage in patients with separated ducts.

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.

Safety and efficacy of novel oblique-viewing scope for B2-endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) performed at the intrahepatic bile duct segment 3 (B3) is widely used for biliary drainage. Although performing post-puncture procedures is easier in the intrahepatic bile duct segment 2 (B2) when using a conventional oblique-viewing (OV) EUS scope, this method may cause transesophageal puncture and severe adverse events. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of B2 puncture using a novel OV-EUS scope.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, we prospectively enrolled and collected data from 45 patients who consecutively underwent EUS-HGS procedures with a novel OV-EUS scope between September 2021 and December 2022 at our cancer center.

RESULTS

The technical success rates of B2-EUS-HGS and EUS-HGS were 93.3% (42/45) and 97.8% (44/45), respectively. The early adverse event rate was 8.9% (4/45) with no cases of scope changes or transesophageal punctures. The median procedure time was 13 minutes (range, 5-30).

CONCLUSIONS

B2-EUS-HGS can be performed safely with the novel EG-740UT (Fujifilm) OV-scope without transesophageal puncture and with a high success rate. B2-EUS-HGS using this novel OV scope may be the preferred strategy for EUS-HGS.

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.

Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transhepatic biliary drainage with a 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration needle and 0.018-inch guidewire in the procedure's induction phase

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transhepatic biliary drainage is usually performed with a 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle and a 0.025-inch guidewire. The combination of a 22-gauge FNA needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire is reported to be effective as a rescue option when the bile duct diameter is small or technically challenging. Experts in EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage have reported that bile duct puncture with a 19-gauge FNA needle is possible in most cases, but is not easy to reproduce by endoscopists with less experience in EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage. We investigated the usefulness of EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage using a 22-gauge FNA needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire during the procedure's induction phase. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage at our institution from March 2021 to May 2023 were evaluated, and 37 were included. Biliary drainage was performed for malignant bile duct stricture in 36 patients and choledocholithiasis in one patient. The median target bile duct diameter was 4.5 mm (2.5-9.4). Biliary access, fistula dilation, and stent placement were successful in the 37 patients (100%). The median procedure time was 35 min (16-125). Adverse events occurred in four (10.8%) patients. EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage using a 22-gauge FNA needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire is a useful and promising option for endoscopists with limited experience in EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage in the procedure's induction phase.

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.

Complete migration of a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent after endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: A case report

A male patient underwent gastrojejunal bypass surgery in 2017. In 2020, he was referred to our hospital for suspected obstructive jaundice. Subsequently, he was diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was attempted via balloon-assisted enteroscopy. However, the endoscope did not reach the duodenal papilla owing to the abdomen-small intestine adhesion. Therefore, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy was performed using a dedicated plastic stent. After stent placement, obstructive jaundice and cholangitis promptly improved. However, we replaced the plastic stent with a fully covered self-expandable metal stent because stent occlusions occurred frequently. Two months after fully covered self-expandable metal stent placement, the patient developed cholangitis again. Notably, during the endoscopic procedure, the stent was found to be completely migrated. Nevertheless, the fistula was still open, and the patient was successfully retreated with the maintained fistula of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy.

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.

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.

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.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic double stenting using an anti-reflux metal stent for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate long-term outcomes of endoscopic double stenting using anti-reflux metal stents (ARMS) for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who received endoscopic double stenting with self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction at our institution between July 2014 and March 2021 were evaluated. Patients were divided into the ARMS group, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) group, and covered metal stent-transpapillary (CMS-transpapillary) group. A Duckbill-type metal stent was used in all ARMS cases.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were enrolled: ARMS group (n = 16), EUS-HGS group (n = 13), and CMS-transpapillary group (n = 9). Overall survival among three groups were not significantly different. Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rates of the ARMS, EUS-HGS, and CMS-transpapillary groups were 12.5%, 61.5%, and 88.9% (P < .01) and median time to recurrent biliary obstructions (TRBOs) were not reached, 125 days, and 7 days (P < .01). Median TRBOs of ARMS-choledochoduodenostomy and ARMS-transpapillary were not statistically different. Major causes of RBO were stent occlusion and symptomatic stent migration in the ARMS group, hyperplasia in the EUS-HGS group, and non-occlusion cholangitis in the CMS-transpapillary group.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic double stenting with ARMS might be an option for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction.

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.

B2 puncture with forward-viewing EUS simplifies EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (with video)

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is in widespread use; however, there are few dedicated devices. The B2 route is technically easier than the B3 route for guidewire insertion, dilation, and stenting but if performed with conventional oblique-viewing (OV) EUS, B2 puncture can cause transesophageal puncture and severe adverse events. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of forward-viewing (FV) EUS, which we have developed to improve safety for B2 puncture in EUS-HGS (B2-EUS-HGS).

Patients and Methods:

This single-center retrospective study included 61 consecutive patients who underwent B2-EUS-HGS with FV between February 2020 and March 2021 at Aichi Cancer Center, Japan. The patients were prospectively enrolled, and clinical data were retrospectively collected for these 61 cases.

Results:

The overall technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 98.3% (60/61). The rate of EUS-HGS with FV was 95.0% (58/61) after three cases converted to OV, and that of B2-EUS-HGS with FV was 88.5% (54/61). The early adverse event rate was 6.5% (4/61). There were no instances of transesophageal puncture. Median procedure time was 24 min (range, 8–70), and no patient required cautery dilation.

Conclusions:

B2-EUS-HGS can be performed safely using FV, without transesophageal puncture, and supportability of the device is improved as FV is coaxial with the guidewire. FV was efficacious in B2-EUS-HGS, which shows promise for clinical application in the future.

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.

Usefulness of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has many associated adverse events. We evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of the laser-cut fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (FCSEMS) for this procedure.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study included cases where EUS-HGS with a laser-cut FCSEMS was performed for malignant biliary obstruction. Technical and clinical success, time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), procedure time, adverse events, and re-interventions were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 95 eligible cases. Technical and clinical success rates were 100.0% and 95.8%, respectively. Median TRBO was 398 days. RBO causes were hyperplasia (7.4%), debris (3.2%), and migration (4.2%). Adverse events occurred in nine cases (9.5%). Non-occlusion and focal cholangitis occurred in four cases (4.2%) each. Nineteen patients (20%) underwent combined EUS-HGS (CH) procedures: antegrade stenting, bridging methods, plastic stent anchoring in SEMS, and EUS-hepaticoduodenostomy. The solely EUS-HGS (SH) group had significantly longer median TRBO than the CH group (398 vs. 246 days; P=0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events between the two groups. Re-intervention was performed in 29 cases (technical success rate: 100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-cut FCSEMS can be safely placed in the bile duct and easily applied during re-intervention, making it useful in EUS-HGS.

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.

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

1:  ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6:  ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7:  ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

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.

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.

Technical feasibility and safety of one-step deployment of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy using an 8-mm diameter metal stent with a fine-gauge stent delivery system (with video)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Adverse events (AEs) such as bile peritonitis or pneumoperitoneum might occur during procedural steps for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), such as during device exchange and after fistula dilation until stent deployment. Reducing the steps to the EUS-HGS procedure might therefore be ideal to prevent the occurrence of AEs. Recently, a novel, fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) has become available. Because of the fine-gauge stent delivery system (5.9Fr), fistula dilation might not be needed before stent deployment during EUS-HGS. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of one-step EUS-HGS using a novel 8-mm diameter FCSEMS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The primary outcome in this study was technical success, and the secondary outcomes were procedure- and stent-related AEs and clinical success. The technical success of one-step EUS-HGS was defined as successful FCSEMS deployment without any fistula dilation. Procedure time was measured from scope insertion to successful FCSEMS deployment.

RESULTS

One-step EUS-HGS using the novel FCSEMS was attempted on 14 patients. Technical success with a short procedure time (median: 7 min) and clinical success were obtained in all patients. In addition, procedure-related AEs such as bleeding, bile peritonitis, and stent migration during the procedure were not observed in any patients.

CONCLUSIONS

One-step EUS-HGS using the novel FCSEMS with a fine-gauge stent delivery system is technically feasible and shortens the procedure time with no requirement for additional fistula dilation, resulting in a potential reduction in procedure-related AEs.

Relief of biliary obstruction: choosing between endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was originally devised as a novel diagnostic technique to enable endoscopists to stage malignancies and acquire tissue. However, it rapidly advanced toward therapeutic applications and has provided gastroenterologists with the ability to effectively treat and manage advanced diseases in a minimally invasive manner. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has gained considerable attention as an approach to provide relief in malignant and benign biliary obstruction for patients when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails or is not feasible. Such instances occur in those with surgically altered anatomy, gastroduodenal obstruction, periampullary diverticulum or prior transampullary duodenal stenting. While ERCP remains the gold standard, a multitude of studies are showing that EUS-BD can be used as an alternative modality even in patients who could successfully undergo ERCP. This review will shed light on recent EUS-guided advancements and techniques in malignant and benign biliary obstruction.

What You Need to Know Before Performing Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Hepaticogastrostomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary treatment modality for bile duct obstruction. When ERCP is unsuccessful, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage can be an alternative method. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a treatment option for biliary obstruction, especially after ERCP failure. EUS-BD offers transluminal intrahepatic and extrahepatic drainage through a transgastric and transduodenal approach. EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an excellent choice for patients with hilar strictures or those with a surgically altered anatomy. The optimal steps in EUS-HGS are case selection, bile duct visualization, puncture-site selection, wire insertion and manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Caution should be taken at each step to prevent complications. Dedicated devices for EUS-HGS have been developed to improve the technical success rate and reduce complications. This technical review focuses on the essential practical points at each step of EUS-HGS.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: Technical Review and Tips to Prevent Adverse Events

Most patients who require biliary drainage can be treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided procedures. However, ERCP can be challenging in patients with complications, such as malignant duodenal obstruction, or a surgically-altered anatomy, such as a Roux-en-Y anastomosis, which prevent advancement of the duodenoscope into the ampulla of Vater. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage via transhepatic or transduodenal approaches has emerged as an alternative means of biliary drainage. Typically, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage or choledochoduodenostomy can be performed via both approaches, as can EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). EUS-HGS, because of its transgastric approach, can be performed in patients with malignant duodenal obstruction. Technical tips for EUS-HGS have reached maturity due to device and technical developments. Although the technical success rates of EUS-HGS are high, the rate of adverse events is not low, with stent migration still being reported despite many preventive efforts. In this review, we described technical tips for EUS-HGS related to bile duct puncture, guidewire insertion, fistula dilation, and stent deployment, along with a literature review. Additionally, we provided technical tips to improve the technical success of EUS-HGS.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage in Patients Undergoing Antithrombotic Therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) has published guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy in patients undergoing antithrombotic treatment. These guidelines classify endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a high-risk procedure. Nevertheless, the bleeding risk of EUS-BD in patients undergoing antithrombotic therapy is uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the bleeding risk in patients undergoing antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included 220 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-BD between January 2013 and December 2018. We managed the withdrawal and continuation of antithrombotic agents according to the JGES guidelines. We compared the bleeding event rates among patients who received and those who did not receive antithrombotic agents.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients (8.1%) received antithrombotic agents and 202 patients (91.8%) did not. Three patients experienced bleeding events, with an overall bleeding event rate of 1.3% (3/220): one patient was in the antithrombotic group (5.5%) and two patients were in the non-antithrombotic group (0.9%) (p=0.10). All cases were moderate. The sole thromboembolic event (0.4%) was a cerebral infarction in a patient in the non-antithrombotic group.

CONCLUSION

The rate of EUS-BD-related bleeding events was low. Even in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy, the bleeding event rates were not significantly different from those in patients not receiving antithrombotic therapy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy using a partially covered metal stent in patients with malignant biliary obstruction after failed Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The advent of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has provided an inimitable alternative for gaining biliary access in patients who fail conventional endoscopic drainage. The antimigratory features of the partially covered metal stent (PCMS), namely, the flange head and uncovered portion of the stent, makes it a valuable option in patients undergoing EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS). The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of EUS-BD via the hepaticogastrostomy approach using PCMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective observational study of patients with malignant biliary obstruction undergoing EUS-HGS after failed ERCP between January 2018 and May 2019. The end-point of the study was to assess the technical and clinical success rate, as well as the stent- and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS

There were 20 subjects in this study. The average age was 71.8 ± 7.6 years. Most patients were male, 16 (80%). Inaccessible papillae was the most common indication for this procedure, 16 (80%). Technical success was achieved in all patients. The average procedural time was 39.9 ± 1.3 min. Mean preprocedural bilirubin levels were 348.6 ± 28.8 and subsequently decreased to 108.94 ± 37.1 μmol/L at 2 weeks postprocedure. The clinical success rate was 95% (19/20), with one patient requiring percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). There were no stent- or procedure-related complications reported in this study.

CONCLUSION

EUS-HGS with PCMS is a feasible, effective, and safe alternative for biliary decompression in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

Biliary stent removal through a transgastric fistula created with endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound has become widespread as an effective procedure for biliary drainage; however, it is rarely used to remove foreign bodies such as a biliary stent. A 57-year-old man was referred to our hospital for a benign biliary stricture in the left hepatic duct after hepatectomy. Initially, a 7-Fr plastic stent was placed in the left hepatic duct with the distal end set above the papilla, and it was replaced with an 8.5-Fr stent as the stricture remained after 3 months. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was performed to retrieve the plastic stent 3 months later; however, the stent could not be moved because the proximal flap was caught in the stricture. Attempts using various devices failed to retrieve the stent; thus, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy was performed to create a route for stent retrieval. Eventually, the plastic stent was successfully retrieved with biopsy forceps through a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent located in a transgastric fistula. We propose our new method involving endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy for endoscopic stent retrieval that fails via the transpapillary route.

Efficacy and safety of EUS biliary drainage in malignant distal and hilar biliary obstruction: A comprehensive review of literature and algorithm

Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) encompasses a variety of malignancies arising from the pancreaticobiliary system. This can be divided into malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) or malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) biliary obstruction to which clinical outcomes and technical considerations of various biliary drainage methods may differ. EUS biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been increasingly influential in the management of MBO together with other familiar biliary drainage methods such as ERCP and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). Conventionally, ERCP has always been the primary choice of endoscopic biliary drainage in both MHBO and MDBO and that PTBD or EUS-BD is used as a salvage method when ERCP fails for which current guidelines recommends PTBD, especially for MHBO. This review was able to show that with today's evidence, EUS-BD is equally efficacious and possesses a better safety profile in the management of MBO and should be on the forefront of endoscopic biliary drainage. Therefore, EUS-BD could be used either as a primary or preferred salvage biliary drainage method in these cases.

Outcomes and limitations: EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy

One of the major roles of interventional EUS is biliary decompression as an alternative to ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Among EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with transmural stenting (EUS-HGS) may be the most promising procedure since this procedure can overcome the limitation of ERCP. However, EUS-HGS has disadvantages, and the safety issue is still not resolved. In this review, the clinical outcomes and limitations of EUS-HGS will be discussed.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO.

AIM

To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I 2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of -0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I 2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I 2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I 2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I 2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.