Prospective evaluation of a treatment algorithm with enhanced guidewire manipulation protocol for EUS-guided biliary drainage after failed ERCP (with video).

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was introduced as an effective alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failed ERCP. However, EUS-BD is technically challenging. The intraductal manipulation of the guidewire seems to be the most difficult stage of the procedure. Therefore, technical advances in guidewire manipulation may be required for EUS-BD. To evaluate our treatment algorithm for guidewire manipulation protocol for EUS-BD after failed ERCP. Prospective, observational cohort study. A tertiary-care academic center. Forty-five consecutive patients undergoing EUS-BD failed ERCP. Enhanced guidewire manipulation protocol (with a plane parallel to the long axis of the bile duct with an EUS needle tip or a new 0.025-inch guidewire in an extrahepatic approach and intrahepatic bile duct puncture of segment 2 and 4F cannula with guidewire probing in the intrahepatic approach) for rendezvous and antegrade therapy, EUS-BD with transluminal stenting for duodenal invasion, and crossover to another technique if each technique failed. Technical and functional success rates and adverse event rate of the current treatment algorithm for EUS-BD. The overall technical and functional success rates of EUS-BD in this study were 91% (intention to treat, n = 41/45) and 95% (per protocol, n = 39/41), respectively. Specifically, rendezvous (n = 20) and antegrade therapy (n = 14) were initially feasible in 34 of 45 patients (76%). With our protocol, 25 of 45 patients (56%) were eventually treated with rendezvous and antegrade therapy as a first-line or crossover treatment. EUS-guided biliary drainage with transluminal stenting in patients with duodenal invasion or failed antegrade therapy was feasible in the remaining 20 patients (44%). The overall adverse event rate of EUS-BD was 11%. Single-operator, nonrandomized study. In this prospective study, our treatment algorithm with an enhanced guidewire manipulation protocol appeared to be technically feasible and effective. Given the favorable success rate and acceptable adverse event rate, this may be considered the standard treatment algorithm for future randomized trials of EUS-BD and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage.

Park DH ，Jeong SU ，Lee BU ，Lee SS ，Seo DW ，Lee SK ，Kim MH ... -  《-》

Comparison of EUS-guided rendezvous and precut papillotomy techniques for biliary access (with videos).

Precut papillotomy after failed bile duct cannulation is associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis. EUS-guided rendezvous drainage is a novel alternative technique, but there are no data comparing this approach with precut papillotomy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided rendezvous drainage of the bile duct and compare its outcome with that of precut papillotomy. Retrospective study. Tertiary care referral center. Consecutive patients with distal bile duct obstruction, in whom selective cannulation of the bile duct at ERCP failed after 5 attempts with a guidewire and sphincterotome, underwent an EUS-guided rendezvous procedure. The outcomes were compared with those in a historical cohort of patients who underwent precut papillotomy. Patients in whom selective cannulation failed underwent EUS-guided rendezvous drainage by use of the short wire technique or precut papillotomy by use of the Erlangen papillotome. At EUS, after the extrahepatic bile duct was punctured with a 19-gauge needle, a hydrophilic angled-tip guidewire 260 cm long was passed in an antegrade manner across the papilla into the duodenum. The echoendoscope was then exchanged for a duodenoscope, which was introduced alongside the EUS-placed guidewire. The transpapillary guidewire was retrieved through its biopsy channel, and accessories were passed over the wire to perform the requisite endotherapy. Comparison of the rates of technical success and complications between patients treated by the EUS-guided rendezvous and those treated by precut papillotomy techniques. Treatment success was defined as completion of the requisite endotherapy in one treatment session. Treatment success was significantly higher for the EUS-guided rendezvous (57/58 patients) than for those undergoing precut papillotomy technique (130/144 patients) (98.3% vs 90.3%; P = .03). There was no significant difference in the rate of procedural complications between the EUS and precut papillotomy techniques (3.4% vs 6.9%, P = .27). Retrospective nonrandomized study design; highly selective patient cohort. In this study, the EUS-guided rendezvous technique was found to be superior to precut papillotomy for single-session biliary access. Prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm these preliminary but promising findings.

Dhir V ，Bhandari S ，Bapat M ，Maydeo A ... -  《-》

EUS-guided biliary drainage with transluminal stenting after failed ERCP: predictors of adverse events and long-term results.

EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been proposed as an effective alternative for percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed ERCP. To date, the risk factors for adverse events and long-term outcomes of EUS-BD with transluminal stenting (EUS-BDS) have not been fully explored. To evaluate risk factors for adverse events and long-term outcomes of EUS-BDS. Prospective follow-up study. Tertiary-care academic center. This study involved 57 consecutive patients with malignant or benign biliary obstruction undergoing EUS-BDS after failed ERCP. EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy with transluminal stenting (EUS-CDS). Risk factors for postprocedure and late adverse events and clinical outcomes of EUS-BDS. The overall technical and functional success rates, respectively, in the EUS-BDS group were 96.5% (intention-to-treat, n = 55/57) and 89% (per-protocol, n = 49/55). Postprocedure adverse events developed after EUS-BDS in 11 patients (20%, n = 11/55). This included bile peritonitis (n = 2), mild bleeding (n = 2), and self-limited pneumoperitoneum (n = 7). In multivariate analysis, needle-knife use was the single risk factor for postprocedure adverse events after EUS-BDS (odds ratio 12.4; P = .01). A late adverse event in EUS-BDS was distal stent migration (7%, n = 4/55). The mean stent patencies with EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS were 132 days and 152 days, respectively. Single-operator performed, nonrandomized study. EUS-HGS and EUS-CDS may be relatively safe and can be used as an alternative to PTBD after failed ERCP. Both techniques offer durable and comparable stent patency. The use of a needle-knife for fistula dilation in EUS-BDS should be avoided if possible.

Park DH ，Jang JW ，Lee SS ，Seo DW ，Lee SK ，Kim MH ... -  《-》

EUS-guided biliary interventions for benign diseases and unsuccessful ERCP - a prospective unicenter feasibility study on a large consecutive patient cohort.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard for the treatment of biliary obstruction of any etiology. However, cannulation failure of the common bile duct (CBD) by ERCP occurs in 5-10%. Alternatives after a failed ERCP are re-ERCP by an expert endoscopist, percutaneous transhepatic cholangio drainage (PTCD), (balloon) enteroscopy-assisted ERCP, or surgery. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of the bile ducts (EUS-BD) is becoming the standard of care in tertiary referral centers for cases of failed ERCP in patients with malignant obstruction of the CBD. In expert hands, EUS-guided biliary drainage has excellent technical/clinical success rates and lower complication rates compared to PTCD. Despite the successful performance of EUS-BD in malignant cases, its use in benign cases is limited. The aim of this study (design, systematic prospective clinical observational study on quality assurance in daily clinical practice) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in benign indications. Patients with cholestasis and failed ERCP were recruited from a prospective EUS-BD registry (2004-2020). One hundred and three patients with EUS-BD and benign cholestasis were extracted from the registry (nTotal = 474). Indications of EUS-BDs included surgically altered anatomy (n = 65), atypical bile duct percutaneous transhepatic cholangio orifice at the duodenal junction from the longitudinal to the horizontal segment (n = 1), papilla of Vater not reached due to the gastric outlet/duodenal stenoses (n = 6), papilla that cannot be catheterized (n = 24), and proximal bile duct stenosis (n = 7). The primary endpoint was technical and clinical success. Secondary endpoints were procedure-related complications during the hospital stay. 103 patients with EUS-BD and benign cholestasis were extracted from the registry (nTotal=474). Different transluminal access routes were used to reach the bile ducts: transgastric (n = 72/103); -duodenal (n = 16/103); -jejunal (n = 14/103); combined -duodenal and -gastric (n = 1/103). The technical success rate was 96 % (n = 99) for cholangiography. Drainage was not required in 2 patients; balloon dilatation including stone extraction was sufficient in 17 cases (16.5 %; no additional or prophylactic insertion of a drain). Transluminal drainage was achieved in n = 68/103 (66 %; even higher in patients with drain indication only) by placement of a plastic stent (n = 29), conventional biliary metal stents (n = 24), HotAXIOS stents (n = 5; Boston Scientific, Ratingen, Germany), Hanaro stents (n = 6; Olympus, Hamburg, Germany), HotAXIOS stents and plastic stents (n = 1), HotAXIOS stents and metal stents (n = 1) and metal stents and plastic stents (n = 2). Techniques for stone extraction alone (nSuccessful=17) or stent insertion (nTotal = 85; nSuccessful=85 - rate, 100 %) and final EUS-BD access pathway included: Rendezvous technique (n = 14/85; 16.5 %), antegrade internal drainage (n = 20/85; 23.5 %), choledochointestinostomy (n = 7/85; 8.2 %), antegrade internal and hepaticointestinostomy (n = 22/85; 25.9 %), hepaticointestinostomy (n = 21/85; 24.7 %), choledochointestinostomy and hepaticointestinostomy (n = 1/85; 1.2 %).The complication rate was 25 % (n = 26) - the spectrum comprised stent dislocation (n = 11), perforation (n = 1), pain (n = 2), hemorrhage (n = 6), biliary ascites/leakage (n = 3) and bilioma/liver abscess (n = 3; major complication rate, n = 12/68 - 17.6 %). Re-interventions were required in 19 patients (24 interventions in total). EUS-BD can be considered an elegant and safe alternative to PTCD or reoperation for failed ERCP to achieve the necessary drainage of the biliary system even in underlying benign diseases. An interventional EUS-based internal procedure can resolve cholestasis, avoid PTCD or reoperation, and thus improve quality of life. Due to the often complex (pathological and/or postoperative) anatomy, EUS-BD should only be performed in centers with interventional endoscopy/EUS experience including adequate abdominal surgery and interventional radiology expertise in the background. This enables adequately adapted therapeutic management in the event of challenging complications. It seems appropriate to conduct further studies with larger numbers of cases to systematize the approach and peri-interventional management and to successively develop specific equipment.

Füldner F ，Meyer F ，Will U 《-》

Multicenter study on endoscopic ultrasound-guided expandable biliary metal stent placement: choice of access route, direction of stent insertion, and drainage route.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) using expandable biliary metal stents has emerged as an acceptable alternative in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for malignant biliary obstruction. However, there is no consensus over the preferred access route (transhepatic or extrahepatic), direction of stent insertion (antegrade or retrograde) or drainage route (transluminal or transpapillary) in patients potentially suitable for multiple methods. The present study compares success and complication rates in patients undergoing EUS-BD via different methods. This was a multicenter retrospective analysis. Records of patients who underwent EUS-BD for malignant obstructive jaundice at four centers were entered in a standard database. Success and complications were compared for different techniques. Sixty-eight patients were analyzed. EUS-BD was successful in 65 patients (95.6%). There was no significant difference in the success rates of different techniques. Complications were seen in 14 patients (20.6%) and mortality in three patients (4.4%). Complications were significantly higher for the transhepatic route compared to the transduodenal route (30.5% vs 9.3%, P=0.03). There was no significant difference in complication rates among transluminal and transpapillary stent placements, or direct and rendezvous stenting. Logistic regression analysis showed transhepatic access to be the only independent risk factor for complications (P=0.031, t=2.2). EUS-BD can be carried out with high success rates regardless of the choice of access route, stent direction or drainage route. However, complications are significantly higher with transhepatic access. The transduodenal route should be chosen for EUS-guided and rendezvous stent placements, when both routes are available.

Dhir V ，Artifon EL ，Gupta K ，Vila JJ ，Maselli R ，Frazao M ，Maydeo A ... -  《-》