3-Fr microcatheter-assisted endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous technique with a 22-gauge needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire for difficult biliary cannulation

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous with a 22-gauge needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire, assisted by a 3-Fr microcatheter, effectively addresses challenges in biliary cannulation, improving guidewire manipulation and reducing risks of injury and leakage. Natsume and colleagues describe the successful extraction of common bile duct stones to demonstrate the efficacy of this technique.

[Surgical treatment and prognostic factors in perihilar tumors]

OBJECTIVE

To study the results of surgical treatment in patients with perihilar tumors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed 98 patients with perihilar tumors who underwent surgery.

RESULTS

We prefer percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (n=58) for jaundice. Retrograde interventions were performed in 18 cases (20.5%), complications grade III-IV were more common (p=0.037) in the last group. Postoperative mortality was 12%. Complications developed in 81 patients (82.7%), grade ≥3 - in 39 (39.8%) cases. Portal vein resection (n=26) increased the incidence of complications grade ≥III (p=0.035) and portal vein thrombosis (p=0.0001). Chemotherapy after surgery was performed in 47 patients (48.0%), photodynamic therapy - in 7 (7.1%) patients. A 5-year overall survival was 28.1%, the median survival - 29 months. R2 resection and/or M1 stage (n=12) significantly worsened the prognosis and overall survival (16.5 vs. 31 months, p=0.0055). Lymph node (LN) lesion, microscopic status (R0 vs. R1) of resection margin, technique of decompression and isolated resection of extrahepatic bile ducts did not affect the prognosis, and we combined appropriate patients (n=72) for analysis. SI resection and excision of ≥6 lymph nodes were independent positive factors for disease-free survival (p=0.042 and p=0.007, respectively). Blood transfusion and high preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte index (NLI ≥2.15) worsened overall (p=0.009 and p=0.002, respectively) and disease-free survival (p=0.002 and 0.007, respectively). The absence of adjuvant therapy worsened disease-free survival alone (p=0.024).

CONCLUSION

SI liver resection, adequate lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy should be used for perihilar tumors. Isolated resection of extrahepatic bile ducts is permissible in some cases. Blood transfusion and NLI ≥2.15 are independent negative prognostic factors.

Endoscopic Treatment of Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstruction

Stent implantation is an effective approach for palliative treatment of Bismuth-Corlette type III-IV malignant hilar biliary obstructions (MHBOs). In this article, we reviewed the currently used access methods for biliary stent placement (percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, endoscopic biliary drainage, endosonography guided biliary drainage), the available stent types (plastic stent, self-expanding metallic stent, full cover self-expanding metallic stent, radioactive self-expanding metallic stent), major approaches (unilateral, bilateral) and deployment methods (stent-in-stent, stent-by-stent). Finally, this review gives an outlook on perspectives of development in stenting and other palliative methods in MHBO.

Optimal liver drainage rate for survival in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction using 3D-image volume analyzer

Background

Drainage exceeding 50% of total liver volume is a beneficial prognostic factor in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (UMHBO). However, it is unclear what threshold percentage of total liver volume drained ('liver drainage rate') significantly improves survival in patients with UMHBO who received systemic chemotherapy.

Objectives

We aimed to assess the optimal liver drainage rate that improves survival in patients with UMHBO receiving chemotherapy using a three-dimensional (3D)-image volume analyzer.

Design

This study was a single-center retrospective cohort study.

Methods

Data from 90 patients with UMHBO who received chemotherapy after endoscopic biliary drainage using metal stents at Okayama University Hospital from January 2003 to December 2020 were reviewed. The liver drainage rate was calculated by dividing the drained liver volume by the total liver volume using a 3D-image volume analyzer. The primary endpoint was overall survival by liver drainage rate. The secondary endpoints were time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) and prognostic factors.

Results

The median total liver volume was 1172 (range: 673-2032) mL, and the median liver drainage rate was 83% (range: 50-100). Overall survival was 376 (95% CI: 271-450) days, and patients with >80% drainage (n = 67) had significantly longer survival than those with <80% drainage (n = 23) (450 days versus 224 days, p = 0.0033, log-rank test). TRBO was 201 (95% CI: 155-327) days and did not differ significantly by liver drainage rate. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed >80% liver drainage [hazard ratio (HR): 0.35, 95% CI: 0.20-0.62, p = 0.0003] and hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.50, p < 0.0001) as significant prognostic factors.

Conclusion

In patients with UMHBO scheduled for chemotherapy, >80% drainage is associated with improved survival. Further prospective multicenter studies are needed to verify the results of this study.

Trail registration

Okayama University Hospital, IRB number: 2108-011.

The Feasibility of Whole-Liver Drainage with a Novel 8 mm Fully Covered Self-Expandable Metal Stent Possessing an Ultra-Slim Introducer for Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstructions

BACKGROUND

In the case of an unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO), the optimal drainage method has not yet been established. Recently, an 8 mm, fully covered, self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) with an ultra-slim introducer has become available. In this article, the results of whole-liver drainage tests using this novel FCSEMS for MHBO are reported.

METHODS

Unresectable MHBOs up to Bismuth IIIa with strictures limited to the secondary branches were eligible. The proximal end of the stent was placed in such a way as to avoid blocking the side branches, and the distal end was placed above the papilla when possible. Consecutive patients treated between April 2017 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The technical and functional success rates, rates and causes of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), revision for RBO, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (Bismuth I/II/IIIa: 1/7/3) were enrolled. Two stents were placed in nine patients and three were placed in two patients. Both the technical and functional success rates were 100%. RBO occurred in four (36%) patients due to sludge formation. Revision was performed for three patients, with the successful removal of all stents. The median TRBO was 187 days, and no late AEs other than the RBO occurred. Regarding the distal position of the stent, the RBO rate was significantly lower (14.3% vs. 75%, p = 0.041) and the cumulative TRBO was significantly longer (median TRBO: not reached vs. 80 days, p = 0.031) in the case of the placement above the papilla than the placement across the papilla.

CONCLUSION

For unresectable MHBOs of Bismuth I, II, and IIIa, whole-liver drainage with a novel 8 mm FCSEMS possessing an ultra-slim introducer was feasible and potentially safe, with favorable stent patency. Placement above the papilla might be preferrable to placement across the papilla.

Bilateral verses bilateral with tri-segmental endoscopic drainage using metal stents for high-grade malignant hilar biliary obstructions: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial: BRAVE study (BRAVE study)

INTRODUCTION

Bilateral endoscopic drainage with self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) can be used to manage hilar malignant biliary obstruction (HMBO) more effectively in comparison to unilateral drainage. An increased drainage area is predicted to prolong stent patency and patient survival. However, few reports have described the utility of trisegmental drainage and the benefits of using trisegmental drainage remain unknown. Thus, we launched a randomized clinical trial (RCT) to compare the clinical outcomes between bilateral and trisegmental drainage using SEMSs in patients with high-grade HMBO.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study was conducted as a multicenter randomized control trial (RCT) in 8 high-volume medical centers in Japan, and will prove the non-inferiority of bilateral drainage to trisegmental drainage. Patients with unresectable HMBO with Bismuth type IIIa or IV who pass the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized to receive bilateral or trisegmental drainage at a 1:1 ratio. At each center, the on-site study investigators will obtain informed consent from the candidates, and will use an electronic data capture system (REDCap) to input necessary information, and register candidates with the registration secretariat. The primary endpoint is the rate of non-recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) at 180 days after SEMSs placement. A -10% non-inferiority margin is assumed in the statistical analysis of the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include the rate of technical and clinical success, time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), causes of RBO, procedure-related adverse events (AEs), procedure time, TRBO with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy, overall survival, and the technical and clinical success rates at reintervention.

DISCUSSION

If the non-inferiority of bilateral drainage is demonstrated, it is predicted that the procedure time will be shortened and the medical cost will be reduced, which will be beneficial to the patient and the medical economy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in Japan Registry of Clinical Trial-Registration (trial number. jRCTs062220038). This version number 1. Protocol dated Jun 23, 2022.

Critically-Ill Patients with Biliary Obstruction and Cholangitis: Bedside Fluoroscopic-Free Endoscopic Drainage versus Percutaneous Drainage

Severe acute cholangitis is a life-threatening medical emergency. Endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is usually used for biliary decompression. However, it can be risky to transport a critical patient to the radiology unit. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between bedside, radiation-free EBD and fluoroscopic-guided PTBD in patients under critical care.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit with biliary obstruction and cholangitis from January 2011 to April 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 16 patients receiving EBD and 31 patients receiving PTBD due to severe acute cholangitis were analyzed. In the EBD group, biliary drainage was successfully conducted in 15 (93.8%) patients. Only one patient (6.25%) encountered post-procedure pancreatitis. The 30-day mortality rate was no difference between the 2 groups (32.72% vs. 31.25%, p = 0.96). Based on multivariate analysis, independent prognostic factors for the 30-day mortality were a medical history of malignancy other than pancreatobiliary origin (HR: 5.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-27.57) and emergent dialysis (HR: 7.30, 95% CI: 2.20-24.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside EBD is safe and as effective as percutaneous drainage in critically ill patients. It provides lower risks in patient transportation but does require experienced endoscopists to perform the procedure.

Current Status of Endoscopic Biliary Drainage in Patients with Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction

Distal malignant biliary obstruction is caused by various malignant diseases that require biliary drainage. In patients with operable situations, preoperative biliary drainage is required to control jaundice and cholangitis until surgery. In view of tract seeding, endoscopic biliary drainage is the first choice. Since neoadjuvant therapies are being developed, the time to surgery is increasing, especially in pancreatic cancer cases. Therefore, it requires long stent patency. Recently, preoperative biliary drainage using self-expandable metal stents has been reported as a useful modality to secure long stent patency. In patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction, self-expandable metal stent is the first choice for maintaining long stent patency. Although there are many comparison studies between a covered and an uncovered self-expandable metal stent, their use is still controversial. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage has been performed as an alternative treatment. The clinical success and stent patency are favorable. We should take into consideration that both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage have advantages and disadvantages and chose the drainage method depending on the patient’s situation or the expertise of the endoscopist. Here, we discuss the current status of endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.

Clinical Outcomes of Early Endoscopic Transpapillary Biliary Drainage for Acute Cholangitis Associated with Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation

Acute cholangitis (AC) is often associated with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), and endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage (EBD) under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a treatment of choice. However, no evidence exists on the outcomes of EBD for AC associated with DIC. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the treatment outcomes of early EBD and compared endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) and endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD). We included 62 patients who received early EBD (EBS: 30, ENBD: 32) for AC, associated with DIC. The rates of clinical success for AC and DIC resolution at 7 days after EBD were 90.3% and 88.7%, respectively. Mean hospitalization period was 31.7 days, and in-hospital mortality rate was 4.8%. ERCP-related adverse events developed in 3.2% of patients (bleeding in two patients). Comparison between EBS and ENBD groups showed that the ENBD group included patients with more severe cholangitis, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score, systemic inflammatory response syndrome score, and serum bilirubin level were significantly higher in this group. However, no significant difference was observed in clinical outcomes between the two groups; both EBS and ENBD were effective. In conclusion, early EBD is effective and safe for patients with AC associated with DIC.

How to Choose Between Percutaneous Transhepatic and Endoscopic Biliary Drainage in Malignant Obstructive Jaundice: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

Malignant obstructive jaundice (MOJ) is a common condition caused by several primary and secondary cancers. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate technical success rate and safety of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) versus endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) in MOJ.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relevant trials were identified by searching electronic databases and conference meetings. We included thirteen retrospective studies and four randomized controlled trials, with PTBD performed in 2353 patients and EBD in 8178 patients. Outcomes of interest included: technical success rate, overall complications, 30-day mortality rate and risk of bleeding, pancreatitis, cholangitis and tube dislocation.

RESULTS

The differences in technical success rate, total complications, 30-day mortality rate and tube dislocation were not statistically significant between the two groups. Patients receiving PTBD showed a lower risk of pancreatitis (OR=0.14, 95%CI=0.06-0.31) and cholangitis (OR=0.52, 95%CI=0.30-0.90) when compared to EBD while PTBD was associated with higher risk of bleeding (OR=1.78; 95%CI=1.32-2.39).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis indicates the presence of some advantages and limits for both PTBD and EBD. We highlight the paucity of quality-of-life data, a vital element which should be carefully pondered in future studies and in choosing the optimal technique in patients with MOJ.

Urgent and early EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with acute cholangitis

Background and Objectives:

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been reported as an effective alternative drainage technique. However, clinical data on EUS-BD for patients with acute cholangitis (AC) are limited. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical outcomes of EUS-BD in patients with AC.

Patients and Methods:

Nineteen patients with AC who underwent urgent or early drainage (within 96 h) by EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy (EUS-HES) between January 2014 and November 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Furthermore, the clinical outcomes of EUS-HES using a plastic stent in the AC group (n = 15) were compared to those in the non-AC group (n = 88).

Results:

In the 19 AC cases, the technical and clinical success rate was 100% with 5.3% of moderate adverse events (biliary peritonitis [n = 1]). Regarding the comparison between the AC group and the non-AC group, the clinical success rate was 100% in both groups and the adverse event rate was not statistically significantly different (P = 0.88). Although the recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rate was not statistically significantly different (P = 0.43), the early RBO rate was statistically significantly higher in the AC group (26.7% vs. 3.4%, P < 0.001). Kaplan–Meier curves showed that AC was associated with a shorter time to RBO (P = 0.046). The presence of AC was found to be an independent risk factor of early RBO (odds ratio = 10.3; P = 0.005).

Conclusions:

Urgent or early biliary drainage (within 96 h) by EUS-BD can be a feasible and safe alternative procedure for patients with AC, although there is a tendency of early RBO.

Effects of different preoperative biliary drainage methods for resected malignant obstruction jaundice on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis: A meta-analysis

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) for resected malignant obstruction jaundice (MOJ) on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were utilized. With reference to literature reported until January 2019, controlled clinical trials were designed to compare the effects of PTBD and EBD for MOJ on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Subsequently, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated with Review Manager 5.3.0 software. A total of 10 studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis, including 1,085 cases in the PTBD group and 1,379 cases in the EBD group. The results revealed that there was a significant difference in the incidence rate of implantation metastasis between the PTBD group and EBD group (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.23–0.53, P<0.00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the incidence rates of both catheter-related implantation metastasis and peritoneal metastasis were lower in the EBD group (OR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.12–0.44, P<0.00001; OR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.31–0.74, P=0.0008, respectively), and the advantage of EBD was demonstrated in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic carcinoma (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.17–0.74, P=0.006; OR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.17–0.60, P=0.0005; OR=0.27, 95% CI: 0.19–0.40, P<0.00001, respectively). In conclusion, this meta-analysis revealed the appropriate choice of preoperative biliary drainage for resected MOJ. The application of EBD reduced the incidence rate of implantation metastasis, however more evidence is required from future studies, to confirm the results.

Biliary Drainage Before and After Liver Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is a rare tumor that requires surgical resection for a potential cure. The role of preoperative biliary drainage has long been debated, given its treatment of biliary sepsis and decompression of the future liver remnant (FLR), but high procedure-specific morbidity. The indications, methods, and outcomes for preoperative biliary drainage are discussed to serve as a guide for perioperative management of patients with resectable PHC. Multiple studies from the literature related to perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, biliary drainage, and management of the FLR were reviewed. Commonly employed preoperative biliary drainage includes endoscopic biliary stenting and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Drainage of the FLR remains controversial, with most experts recommending drainage of the only in patients with an FLR <50%. Biliary drainage for resectable PHC requires a patient-specific approach with careful determination of the FLR and balancing of potential morbidity with the benefits of drainage.

Risk factors for dysfunction of preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant hilar biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND

Few studies have focused on the risk factors for dysfunction of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) in preoperative patients with malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO).

METHODS

We searched the database between February 2011 and December 2018 and identified patients with MHBO who underwent radical operation. The rate of dysfunction of the initial EBD, risk factors for dysfunction of the initial EBD and survival after surgery were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 131 patients [95 males (72.5%); mean age, 69.5 (±7.3) years; Bismuth-Corlette classification (BC) I/II/IIIa/IIIb/IV, 50/26/22/17/16; hilar cholangiocarcinoma/gall bladder cancer, 115/16]. Dysfunction of the initial EBD occurred in 28 patients (21.4%). The cumulative incidences of dysfunction of the initial EBD in all patients were 18.4%, 38.2% and 47.0% at 30, 60 and 90 days, respectively (Kaplan-Meier method). The rate of dysfunction of the initial EBD increased in patients with BC-IV (P = .03). Multivariate analysis showed that BC-IV and pre-EBD cholangitis were significantly associated with the occurrence of dysfunction of the initial EBD. Survival rates were not significantly different according to the initial biliary drainage methods and presence/absence of the initial EBD dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Dysfunction of the initial EBD frequently occurs in patients with the BC-IV and those with pre-EBD cholangitis.

The methods of preoperative biliary drainage for resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) and evaluate the effect of EBD and PTBD on tumor prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles about the comparison between PTBD and EBD. Data were analyzed by Revman 5.3.

RESULTS

PTBD showed a lower risk of drainage-related complications than EBD (OR, 2.73; 95%CI, 1.52-4.91; P < .05). PTBD was also associated with lower risk of pancreatitis (OR, 8.47; 95%CI, 2.28-31.45; P < .05). The differences in preoperative cholangitis, R0 resection, blood loss and recurrence showed no statistically significance between EBD and PTBD (all P > .05). Several literatures have reported the tumor implantation metastasis after PTBD. Since no well-designed prospective randomized controlled studies have explored in this depth, this article is unable to draw conclusions on this aspect.

CONCLUSION

PTBD is a reasonable choice for PBD, and EBD should only be used as preoperative drainage for HCCA by more experienced physicians. There is a greater need to design prospective randomized controlled studies to obtain high-level evidence-based medicinal proof. It is worth noting that, whether EBD or PTBD, accurate selective biliary drainage should be the trend.

Best option for preoperative biliary drainage in Klatskin tumor: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The operative treatment combined with preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been established as a safe Klatskin tumor (KT) treatment strategy. However, there has always been a dispute for the preferred technique for PBD technique. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the biliary drainage-related cholangitis, pancreatitis, hemorrhage, and the success rates of palliative relief of cholestasis between percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD), to identify the best technique in the management of KT.PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched systematically for prospective or retrospective studies reporting the biliary drainage-related cholangitis, pancreatitis, hemorrhage, and the success rates of palliative relief of cholestasis in patients with KT. A meta-analysis was performed, using the fixed or random-effect model, with Review Manager 5.3.PTBD was associated with lower risk of cholangitis (risk ratio [RR] = 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.67; P < .00001), particularly in patients with Bismuth-Corlette type II, III, IV KT (RR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77; P = .05). Compared with EBD, PTBD was also associated with a lower risk of pancreatitis (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.69; P = 0.003) and with higher successful rates of palliative relief of cholestasis (RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10-1.31; P < .0001). The incidence of hemorrhage was similar in these 2 groups (RR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.51-3.27; P = .59). The risk of biliary drainage-related cholangitis (RR = 1.96, 95% CI: 0.96-4.01; P = .06) and pancreatitis (RR = 1.62, 95% CI: 0.76-3.47; P = .21) was similar between endoscopic nasobiliary drainage groups and biliary stenting.In patients with type II or type III or IV KT who need to have PBD, PTBD should be performed as an initial method of biliary drainage in terms of reducing the incidence of procedure related cholangitis, pancreatitis, and improving the rates of palliative relief of cholestasis. Well-conducted randomized controlled trials with a universial criterion for PBD are required to confirm these findings.

Endoscopic management of acute cholangitis according to the TG13

The Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13) recommend that endoscopic drainage should be the first-choice treatment for biliary decompression in patients with acute cholangitis. Timing of biliary drainage for acute cholangitis should be based on the severity of the disease. For patients with severe acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support and urgent biliary drainage are needed. For patients with moderate acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage is needed. For patients with mild acute cholangitis, biliary drainage is needed when initial treatment such as antimicrobial therapy is ineffective. There are three methods of biliary drainage: endoscopic drainage, percutaneous transhepatic drainage, and surgical drainage. Endoscopic drainage is less invasive than the other two drainage methods. The drainage method (endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and stenting) depends on the endoscopist's preference but endoscopic sphincterotomy should be selected rather than endoscopic papillary balloon dilation from the aspect of procedure-related complications. In the TG13, balloon enteroscopy-assisted and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainages have been newly added as specific drainage methods. Recent studies have demonstrated their usefulness and safety. These drainage methods will become more widespread in the future.

Current strategies for endoscopic management of acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

At the pancreatobiliary session of Endoscopic Forum Japan (EFJ) 2016, current strategies for the endoscopic management of acute cholangitis were discussed. The topics consisted of two major parts, namely endoscopic management of acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones (CBDS) and biliary stent occlusion.

METHODS

Endoscopists from nine Japanese high-volume centers along with two overseas centers participated in the questionnaires and discussion.

RESULTS

Strategies for management of cholangitis due to CBDS were agreed upon, and the clinical guideline of acute cholangitis (Tokyo guidelines 2013) was accepted. The best timing for drainage in Grade 2 (moderate) cholangitis urgent or early (<24 h) was inconclusive, and more data is required on this issue. Another controversy was the feasibility of one step stone extraction in the patient with cholangitis vs stone removal after the cholangitis had resolved. There were various opinions with regards to the management of acute cholangitis due to stent occlusion, and the strategies differed according to the stricture location (distal or hilar) and stent type initially placed (Covered or uncovered metal stent).

CONCLUSION

Strategies for management of cholangitis caused by CBD stones are well established according to the TG13. More evidence is required before further recommendations can be made with regards to cholangitis due to stent occlusion. We aim to clarify this in the near future with questionnaires and consensus from experts.

Management of acute cholangitis as a result of occlusion from a self-expandable metallic stent in patients with malignant distal and hilar biliary obstructions

Acute cholangitis as a result of common bile duct stones can be managed; however, cholangitis caused by occlusion with a biliary self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) in patients with an unresectable malignant biliary obstruction has not been fully discussed. The acute cholangitis clinical guidelines (Tokyo Guidelines 2013) recommend following the same procedure as that used for cholangitis; however, the patient's condition, including performance status, tumor extension or staging, and prognosis must be considered. Most physicians manage cholangitis from a SEMS occlusion using a two-step procedure. They insert endoscopic drainage with a plastic stent or insert a nasobiliary drainage tube, which does not exacerbate sepsis. Addition or replacement of a biliary SEMS is required in many cases depending on the cause of the occlusion. Tumor ingrowth through the stent mesh is common in uncovered SEMS and requires placement of another stent in an in-stent method. However, covered SEMS tends to be occluded by sludge, so it must be replaced because of the bacterial biofilm that forms on the covering membrane. The location of the biliary stricture (hilar or distal) should also be considered. Strategies for managing cholangitis as a result of occlusion by a biliary SEMS remain controversial, so prospective clinical trials are needed.

Negative Impact of Preoperative Endoscopic Biliary Drainage on Prognosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND/AIM

Patients with obstructive jaundice due to cancer of the pancreatic head often undergo preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term impact of preoperative EBD following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied 106 patients who underwent PD for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between May 2000 and November 2013 at the Jikei University Hospital. We retrospectively examined perioperative findings as predictors of prognosis and the relationship between preoperative EBD and recurrence rate as well as overall survival.

RESULTS

In univariate analysis, significant factors associated with poor disease-free survival consisted of the presence of EBD (p=0.0213), poor tumor differentiation (p=0.0023) and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification IV (p=0.0027), while significant factors associated with poor overall survival consisted of the presence of EBD (p=0.0047), poor tumor differentiation (p<0.0001), TNM classification IV (p=0.0031) and microscopic or macroscopic residual tumor (p=0.0184). In multivariate analysis, poor tumor differentiation (p=0.0033) and TNM classification IV (p=0.0020) were independent factors for poor disease-free survival, while the presence of EBD (p=0.0435), poor tumor differentiation (p=0.0009), TNM classification IV (p=0.0447) and microscopic or macroscopic residual tumor (p=0.0184) were independent factors for poor overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative EBD may have a negative impact on prognosis after PD for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Comparison of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and endoscopic biliary drainage in the management of malignant biliary tract obstruction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To compare percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) for management of malignant biliary tract obstruction (MBTO).

METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane database were searched to 31 December 2013. Main outcome measurements were therapeutic success rate, 30-day mortality rate, overall complications, cholangitis, and pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Eight studies (five retrospective and three randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 692 participants. Combined odds ratio (OR) = 2.18 revealed no significant difference in therapeutic success between PTBD and EBD (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73-6.47, P = 0.162). However, after excluding two studies that appeared to be outliers, PTBD exhibited a better therapeutic success rate than EBD (pooled OR = 4.45, 95% CI = 2.68-7.40, P < 0.001). Patients who underwent PTBD were 0.55 times as likely to have cholangitis as those who underwent EBD, whereas the overall complication rate, pancreatitis rate, and 30-day mortality were similar between the two procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

PTBD may be associated with a better therapeutic success rate and lower incidence of cholangitis than EBD, but the overall complication rate, pancreatitis rate, and 30-day mortality of the two procedures are similar.