Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in first-line biliary drainage for malignant distal bile duct obstruction: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.
In patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction and normal gastrointestinal anatomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is indicated when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. The ERCP drainage route passes through the tumor, whereas the EUS-CDS route does not. Therefore, EUS-CDS is expected to have a longer stent patency than ERCP. However, for first-line biliary drainage, it remains unclear whether EUS-CDS or ERCP is superior in terms of stent patency. To reduce the frequency of highly adverse events (AEs) such as bile peritonitis or stent migration following EUS-CDS, we developed an antimigration metal stent with a thin delivery system for tract dilatation. This study is designed to assess whether EUS-CDS with this novel stent is superior to ERCP with a traditional metal stent in terms of stent patency when the two techniques are used for first-line drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction.
This study is a multicenter single-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving 95 patients in four tertiary centers. Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction that is unresectable or presents a very high surgical risk and who pass the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized to EUS-CDS or ERCP in a 1:1 proportion. The primary endpoint is the stent patency rate 180 days after stent insertion. Secondary outcomes include the rates of technical success, clinical success, technical success in cases not requiring fistulous-tract dilation (only EUS-CDS group), procedure-related AEs, re-intervention success, patients receiving post-drainage chemotherapy, procedure time, and overall survival time.
If EUS-CDS is superior to ERCP in terms of stent patency and safety for the first-line drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction, it is expected that the first-line drainage method will be changed from ERCP to EUS-CDS, and that interruption of chemotherapy due to stent dysfunction can be avoided.
University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), ID: UMIN000041343. Registered on August 6, 2020. https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000047201Version number: 1.2, December 7, 2020.
Itonaga M
，Kitano M
，Yoshikawa T
，Ashida R
，Yamashita Y
，Hatamaru K
，Takenaka M
，Yamazaki T
，Ogura T
，Nishioka N
，Sakai A
，Masuda A
，Shiomi H
，Shimokawa T
... -
《-》
EUS-guided biliary drainage with electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent placement should replace PTBD after ERCP failure in patients with distal tumoral biliary obstruction: a large real-life study.
In cases of malignant distal biliary obstruction, ERCP is the preferred technique for bile duct drainage. In case of failure, the alternative techniques are percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and more recently endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage. A new type of stent called the electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent (EC-LAMS) has been developed to enable the performance of biliary-enteric anastomosis under EUS-guidance in a single step, without prior bile duct puncture or the need for a guidewire. The aim of our study was to compare the real-life efficacies of PTBD and EUS-BD with the EC-LAMS for cases of ERCP failure in patients with malignant biliary obstruction.
We performed a monocentric retrospective study comparing PTBD and EUS-BD with the use of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent in the context of a malignant distal biliary obstruction after ERCP failure.
95 patients were included (50 in EUS-BD group and 45 in PTBD group). The main etiology of malignant obstruction was adenocarcinoma of the head of pancreas (85%). There was a significant difference in favor of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage using electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent for the following criteria: clinical success: 89.3% vs. 45.5%; p < 0.0001; procedure-related adverse event rate: 2.12% vs. 22.7%; p = 0.003; duration of post-drainage hospitalization: 3.5 vs. 8.2 days; p < 0.0001, overall survival (median survival): 118.2 vs. 42 days; p = 0.012, overall cost of the strategy per patient: 5098 vs. 9363 euros; p < 0.001.
Our results are in favor of EUS-BD using electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent in case of ERCP failure for a distal tumor biliary obstruction. Operators performing ERCP for distal tumor biliary obstruction must learn this backup procedure because of its superiority over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in terms of clinical success, safety, cost, and overall survival.
Ginestet C
，Sanglier F
，Hummel V
，Rouchaud A
，Legros R
，Lepetit H
，Dahan M
，Carrier P
，Loustaud-Ratti V
，Sautereau D
，Albouys J
，Jacques J
，Geyl S
... -
《-》
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
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
