Dataset Information

Is EUS-guided drainage a suitable alternative technique in case of proximal biliary obstruction?

ABSTRACT: Results of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUBD) are unknown in case of proximal stricture. The aim is to assess clinical outcomes of EUBD in patients with malignant hilar obstruction.Patients undergoing EUBD with hilar strictures were prospectively included. Primary outcome was clinical success at 7 and 30 days (defined by 50% bilirubin decrease). Secondary outcomes were technical success, procedure-related complications, length of hospital stay, reintervention rate, survival and chemotherapy administration.Eighteen patients with a mean age of 68.8 years were included. On 15 classable stenosis, 7 (47%) were noted Bismuth I-II, 7 (47%) Bismuth III, and 1 (6.7%) Bismuth IV. Reasons for EUBD were surgically modified anatomy in 10 patients (55.6%), impassable stricture at ERCP in 7 (38.9%) and duodenal obstruction in 1 (5.6%). Only hepaticogastrostomy was performed. Clinical success was at day 7 and 30 respectively 72.2% and 68.8%. Technical success was 94%. Complications occurred in 3 (16.7%) patients. Median (range) length of hospital stay was 10 (6-35) days. Reintervention rate was 16.7%. Median (range) survival was 79 (5-390) days. Chemotherapy was possible in 10 (55.6%) patients.EUBD is feasible for hilar obstruction for surgically altered anatomy or after ERCP failure. Clinical outcome is satisfactory when considering underlying advanced disease, allowing chemotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Moryoussef F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5484435 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) can be performed entirely transgastrically (hepatogastrostomy/EUS-HG) or transduodenally (choledochoduodenostomy/EUS-CDS). It is unknown how both techniques compare. The aims of this study were to compare efficacy and safety of both techniques and identify predictors of adverse events.Consecutive jaundiced patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-BD at multiple international centers were included. Technical/clinical success, adverse events, stent complications, and survival were assessed.A total of 121 patients underwent EUS-BD (CDS 60, HG 61). Technical success was achieved in 112 (92.56 %) patients (EUS-CDS 93.3 %, EUS-HG 91.8 %, P = 0.75). Clinical success was attained in 85.5 % of patients who underwent EUS-CDS group as compared to 82.1 % of patients who underwent EUS-HG (P = 0.64). Adverse events occurred more commonly in the EUS-HG group (19.67 % vs. 13.3 %, P = 0.37). Both plastic stenting (OR 4.95, 95 %CI 1.41 - 17.38, P = 0.01) and use of non-coaxial electrocautery (OR 3.95, 95 %CI 1.16 - 13.40, P = 0.03) were independently associated with adverse events. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the CDS group (5.6 days vs. 12.7 days, P < 0.001). Mean follow-up duration was 151 ± 159 days. The 1-year stent patency probability was greater in the EUS-CDS group [0.98 (95 %CI 0.76 - 0.96) vs 0.60 (95 %CI 0.35 - 0.78)] but overall patency was not significantly different. There was no difference in median survival times between the groups (P = 0.36) CONCLUSIONS: Both EUS-CDS and EUS-HG are effective and safe techniques for the treatment of distal biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. However, CDS is associated with shorter hospital stay, improved stent patency, and fewer procedure- and stent-related complications. Metallic stents should be placed whenever feasible and non-coaxial electrocautery should be avoided when possible as plastic stenting and non-coaxial electrocautery were independently associated with occurrence of adverse events.

Dataset Information

Is EUS-guided drainage a suitable alternative technique in case of proximal biliary obstruction?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets