Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction Research Articles

Stent misdeployment and factors associated with failure in EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy: an analysis of the combined datasets from the ELEMENT and DRA-MBO trials.

Stent misdeployment (SMD) is a feared technical challenge of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a lumen apposing stent (EUS-CDS) that has been poorly characterized. We aim to ascertain the rate of SMD in EUS-CDS for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) and describe its outcomes while identifying variables associated with its occurrence. In addition, we aim to propose a de novo SMD classification. A post hoc analysis of two RCTs comparing EUS-CDS vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in MDBO. The main endpoint was the rate of SMD classified as misdeployment of the distal flange (type I), proximal flange (type II), contralateral bile duct wall injury (type III), or double mucosal puncture (type IV). A multivariable analysis was performed to identify variables associated with the odds of SMD and/or technical failure and clinical failure or stent dysfunction. 152 patients were included with a technical success of 93.4%. SMDs occurred in 11 (7.2%) patients (95% CI, 3.1%-11.4%): 8 type I, 1 type II, and 2 type III. Endoscopic salvage was successful in 81.8%. SMDs led to an adverse event (AE) in 4 cases (2 mild and 2 moderate) with an overall AE rate of 2.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-6.6%). On multivariable analysis, an extrahepatic bile duct diameter of ≤ 15 mm was associated with increase odds of SMD and/or technical failure. SMD is relatively common in EUS-CDS and is associated with an extra-hepatic bile duct diameter measuring ≤ 15 mm. The majority of SMDs can be rescued endoscopically with low risk for AE.

Secondary uncovered versus fully-covered metal stents for the management of occluded stent in unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction

IntroductionSelf-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been widely placed for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (UDMBO). However, the dysfunction rate is 19–40% and its treatment is controversial. We aimed asses the efficacy and safety of a secondary biliary stents (uncovered (UC) versus fully-covered (FC) stent) for the management of occluded SEMS. Patients and methodsBetween 2015 and June 2023, 41 patients with UDMBO underwent secondary biliary stent placement as “stent-in-stent” (20 FCSEMS and 21 UCSEMS). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success of SEMS placement. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), patency and survival. Patients were prospectively followed until death or loss of follow-up. ResultsTechnical (100% vs 85.5%) and clinical (100% vs 95.2%) success rates were similar in FCSEMS and UCSEMS groups. The median follow-up period was 510 days (range 290–630). The median duration of stent patency of FCSEMS (220 days, IQR 137.5–442.5) was longer than UCSEMS (150 days, IQR 110–362.5) (P=0.395), although stent dysfunction within 6 months was not different between groups. Multivariate analysis indicated that sex (HR=0.909, 0.852–0.970), antitumor treatment (HR=0.248, 0.032–0.441), stent patency (HR=0.992, 0.986–0.998) and clinical success (HR=0.133, 0.026–0.690) were significant factors for overall survival. There were no remarkable differences in AEs. ConclusionsThe placement of additional biliary stent using the stent-in-stent method is an effective and safe rescue treatment for patients with UDMBO and occluded stent. In addition, the use of FCSEMS compared UCSEMS has unclear benefits regarding stent patency and overall survival.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis after self-expandable metal stent placement for distal malignant biliary obstruction (SPHINX): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BackgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) placement is the preferred approach for biliary drainage in patients with suspected distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). However, FCSEMS...

Novel self-expandable metallic stent with dumbbell-shape and spiral outer cover for malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Novel self-expandable metallic stent with dumbbell-shape and spiral outer cover for malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Feasibility of Double-Deployment Small-Diameter Covered Metallic Stent for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (with Video)

Background/Objectives: Covered self-expandable metallic stents (CSEMS) are commonly used to treat malignant distal biliary obstructions. A 10-mm CSEMS carries the risk of obstructing the pancreatic and cystic duct orifices by adhering to the bile duct; therefore, postoperative pancreatitis and cholecystitis are reported to occur at a certain frequency. We have adopted a new drainage technique for malignant distal biliary obstruction called ‘‘double-slim SEMS stenting” (DSS), where two small-diameter CSEMS are placed side-by-side. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of biliary drainage using DSS with those of conventional CSEMS. Methods: In total, 50 patients who underwent endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstructions between April 2019 and March 2022 at Hyogo Medical University Hospital were enrolled. Patients were divided into DSS and Conventional groups, and the technical success rate, clinical success rate, adverse events, success rate for reintervention, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rate, and time to RBO (TRBO) were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the DSS (n = 20) and Conventional groups (n = 30). The technical and clinical success rates were 100% in the DSS group. The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the two groups (DSS/Conventional: 10.0% [2/20]/20.0% [6/30]) (p = 0.34). No acute cholecystitis was observed in the DSS group. The incidence rates of RBO were 30% (6/20) and 43% (13/30) in the DSS and Conventional groups, respectively (p = 0.92). The median TRBO in the DSS group was 378 days, while the TRBO in the Conventional group was 195 days (p = 0.03), resulting in significantly longer TRBO in the DSS group. Conclusions: DSS emerges as a viable and safe approach for biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction, demonstrating a lower incidence of adverse events and longer TRBO compared to conventional CSEMS.

Palliation of Gastric Outlet Obstruction in Case of Biliary Obstruction-A Retrospective, Multicenter Study: The B-GOOD Study.

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel and effective procedure for the management of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with more durable results when compared to enteral stenting (ES). However, data comparing EUS-GE to ES in patients already treated with EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) for distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) are lacking. We aimed to compare outcomes of EUS-GE and ES for the palliation of GOO in this specific population of patients. A multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients with DMBO treated by EUS-CDS and subsequent GOO treated by EUS-GE or ES from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were overall AEs rate and dysfunction of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment. Secondary outcomes included clinical success, technical success, procedure duration, length of hospital stay and relapse of GOO symptoms. A total of 77 consecutive patients were included in the study: 25 patients underwent EUS-GE and 52 underwent ES. AEs rate and patency outcomes of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment were comparable between the two groups (12.5% vs. 17.3%; p = 0.74). No recurrence of GOO symptoms was registered in the EUS-GE group while 11.5% of ES patients had symptoms recurrence, even if not statistically significant (p = 0.16), after a mean follow-up period of 63.5 days. EUS-GE and ES are both effective and safe for the palliation of GOO in patients already treated by EUS-CDS for DMBO with no difference in the biliary stent dysfunction rate and overall AEs. EUS-GE is associated with less recurrence of GOO symptoms.

Optimizing EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy with lumen-apposing metal stents for primary drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction (SCORPION-IIp): a prospective pilot study

Background and AimsBiliary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) in patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction (MBO) is frequently associated with complications, such as pancreatitis, hampering patient outcome. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a promising alternative in patients with MBO but is associated with a worrisome risk of stent dysfunction. Placement of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) through the LAMS, thereby changing the axis of biliary drainage towards the descending duodenum, may decrease the risk of stent dysfunction while maintaining high technical success and low adverse event rates. MethodsProspective single center pilot study in patients with a pathology confirmed MBO without gastric-outlet obstruction. Primary outcome was stent dysfunction, defined as recurrent jaundice after initial clinical success, ongoing jaundice in combination with persistent bile duct dilatation, or cholangitis. The study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov (registry number NCT05595122). ResultsOverall, 27 consecutive patients eligible for EUS-CDS were enrolled. The placement of a LAMS was successful in 24/27 patients (89%), and placement of FCSEMS through the LAMS was successful in 20/24 (83%), in the remaining 4 patients a coaxial double-pigtail plastic stent was placed. In 2 of these 20 patients there was persistent jaundice requiring stent revision (10%), leading to a clinical success rate of 90%. No patients developed stent dysfunction after initial clinical success. ConclusionsThis study showed a stent dysfunction rate of 10% following technically successful EUS-CDS with placement of a FCSEMS through the LAMS. Improving the design of LAMS may further reduce the rate of stent dysfunction.

S1658 Risk Factors for Cholecystitis After Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

S1658 Risk Factors for Cholecystitis After Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference

BackgroundMalignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.MethodsThe scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.Results and conclusionsThe manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

Outcomes of multi-hole self-expandable metal stents versus fully covered self-expandable metal stents for malignant distal biliary obstruction in unresectable pancreatic cancer.

The multi-hole self-expandable metal stent (MHSEMS) is a novel SEMS with multiple small side holes on the covering membrane to prevent stent migration while minimizing tumor ingrowth. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of MHSEMS in comparison with conventional covered SEMS (c-CMS). Consecutive patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent initial SEMS placement (MHSEMS or c-CMS) for malignant distal biliary obstruction were analyzed. Technical success, clinical success, causes of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), non-RBO adverse events, time to RBO (TRBO), and endoscopic reintervention were compared between groups. A total of 65 patients were included (MHSEMS: 27, c-CMS: 38). The technical success, clinical success, and non-RBO adverse event rates were similar between groups. Although stent migration was less frequently observed in the MHSEMS group (0% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.032), overall RBO rates were similar between groups (53.8% vs. 55.9%, p > 0.99). The most common cause of RBO within 14 days in the MHSEMS group was non-occlusion cholangitis. Median TRBO was significantly shorter in the MHSEMS group (101 vs. 227 days, p = 0.030) and MHSEMS was an independent predictor for shorter TRBO in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 2.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-4.86; p = 0.034). Outcomes after endoscopic interventio were not significantly different between groups. Stent removal was successful in all attempted cases in both groups. MHSEMS was associated with a significantly shorter TRBO compared to c-CMS. Further modifications of the present MHSEMS may be needed.

Comparative Effectiveness of ERCP and EUS-Guided Techniques for "Primary Biliary Drainage" in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a viable alternative in cases with failed ERCP transpapillary drainage (ERCP-TPD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD for primary biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO). We searched Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD in DMBO, from inception until September 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical success and secondary endpoints included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. Eight studies (815 patients, 56.1% male) were included in this analysis. Indications for biliary drainage were pancreatic carcinoma (75.1%), followed by cholangiocarcinoma (10.1%). Clinical success was comparable between EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.40; P=0.32). Technical success was similar between the 2 groups (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 0.83-5.25; P=0.12). There was a trend toward fewer adverse events in the EUS-BD group (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40-1.07; P=0.09), with significantly lower odds of post-procedure pancreatitis (OR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; P=0.001). EUS-BD is comparable to ERCP for primary biliary drainage in DMBO patients with shorter procedural time and a significantly reduced risk of post-procedure pancreatitis.

Efficacy and safety of a novel polytetrafluoroethylene-coated self-expandable metal stent for distal malignant biliary obstruction.

Stent migration and sludge formation remain significant problems associated with covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs). The EGIS biliary stent fully covered flare type (EGIS biliary stent), a new type of polytetrafluoroethylene-coated self-expandable metal stent with low axial force and an anti-migration system, was developed to overcome these disadvantages. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this stent in comparison with conventional CSEMS (c-CSEMS). We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer who received initial CSEMS for distal malignant biliary obstruction. The primary outcome was time to recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO). Secondary outcomes included technical success rate, functional success rate, stent-related adverse events, causes of RBO, and re-intervention. A total of 40 patients were included (EGIS group: 20; c-CSEMS group: 20). The technical and functional success rates were similar between the two groups. Stent-related adverse event rates (20% vs. 15%, p > 0.99) and overall RBO rates (56% vs. 50%, p > 0.99) were not significantly different between the two groups. Stent migration was the most common cause of RBO in the EGIS group, while stent occlusion was in the c-CSEMS group. The median time to RBO (102 vs. 434 days, p = 0.10) was not significantly different between the two groups. Endoscopic transpapillary re-intervention was successful in most patients in both groups. The EGIS biliary stent was not associated with a longer time to RBO compared to c-CSEMS. Further improvements, especially against stent migration, are needed to improve its efficacy.

Same versus separate sessions of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched study

ABSTRACT Background Same-session endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an attractive policy for patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) requiring fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and biliary drainage. However, scanty and conflicting data exists regarding safety and efficacy when comparing these two procedures performed in same versus separate sessions. Methods Single-center, retrospective, propensity score-matched study including patients with DMBO who underwent EUS-FNB followed by ERCP during the same or separate sessions. The primary outcome was the safety of the procedure [number of patients experiencing adverse events (AEs), overall AEs, its severity, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP)]. Secondary outcomes were successful ERCP, use of advanced cannulation techniques, EUS-FNB adequacy, length of hospital stay, overall procedure time, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Results After propensity matching, 87 patients were allocated to each group. AEs developed in 23 (26.4%) vs. 17 (19.5%) patients in the same and separate sessions group, respectively (p = 0.280). The overall number, the severity of AEs, and the rate of PEP were similar in the two groups. Secondary outcome parameters were also comparable in the 2 groups. Conclusions Same-session EUS-FNB followed by ERCP with biliary drainage is safe and does not impair technical outcomes of tissue adequacy and biliary cannulation.

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.

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. 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 (AEs) were compared between the EUS-HGS and ERCP-BD groups. Risk factors for early RBO were also evaluated. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Both procedures demonstrated 100% technical and clinical success rates, with a similar incidence of AE (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). EUS-HGS can be a viable option for treating pancreatic cancer with asymptomatic DI.

Safety and Efficacy of Primary EUS-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is preferred for biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is considered a rescue therapy for failed ERCP. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this technique as the primary modality for MDBO biliary drainage. Methods: An electronic database search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines to identify studies on EUS-CDS for primary biliary drainage in MDBO. A meta-analysis was performed using random and fixed effects models. Results: We extracted data from 10 eligible studies comprising 519 patients. The mean age for the study was 70 years ± SD 2.66. The pooled technical success rate was 92.36% (95% CI = 88.39–95.56), and the clinical success rate was 88.91% (95% CI = 85.22–92.13). The pooled stent dysfunction rate was 13.66% (95% CI = 7.47–21.35), and the reintervention rate was 15.91% (95% CI = 11.00–21.54) of patients. The mean stent patency duration was 229.20 days ± SD 113.9. The total pooled adverse events rate was 17.50% (95% CI = 12.90–22.64), and 9.03% (95% CI = 4.43–15.05) was considered moderate to severe. Procedure-related pancreatitis had a pooled rate of 0%. The pooled adverse event rate of acute cholangitis was 6.84% (95% CI = 3.69–10.88), and for acute cholecystitis it was 2.61% (95% CI = 1.06–4.83). Conclusions: EUS-CDS demonstrates favorable outcomes when used as a primary approach in MDBO. With a long stent patency duration and no procedure-related acute pancreatitis, it may be considered the primary technique when expertise is available.

Endoscopic ultrasound- versus ERCP-guided primary drainage of inoperable malignant distal biliary obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

We assessed efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as first-line intervention in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until 01 /12 /2023 for randomized controlled trials of EUS-BD vs. ERCP for primary biliary drainage in patients with inoperable MDBO. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were clinical success, adverse events, mean procedure time, 1-year stent patency, and overall survival. Relative risk (RR) with 95 %CI were calculated using a random effects model. Five studies (519 patients) were included. RR (95 %CI) for EUS-BD was 1.06 (0.96 to 1.17; P = 0.27) for pooled technical success and 1.02 (0.97 to 1.08; P = 0.45) for clinical success. 1-year stent patency was similar between the groups (RR 1.15, 0.94 to 1.42; P = 0.17), with lower reintervention with EUS-BD (RR 0.58, 0.37 to 0.9; P = 0.01). The RR was 0.85 (0.49 to 1.46; P = 0.55) for adverse events and 0.97 (0.10 to 0.17; P = 0.98) for severe adverse events. On subgroup analysis, EUS-guided placement of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) outperformed ERCP in terms of technical success (RR 1.17, 1.01 to 1.35; P = 0.03). Procedure time was lower with EUS-BD (standardized mean difference -2.36 minutes [-2.68 to -2.05; P < 0.001]). EUS-BD showed a statistically significant lower reintervention rate than ERCP, but with similar technical success, stent patency, clinical success, and safety. Technical success of EUS-BD with LAMS was better than ERCP.

Combined EUS and ERCP in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction is associated with reduced time to oncological therapy compared to ERCP and sampling alone.

Standard ERCP sampling techniques for pancreaticobiliary malignancy have modest yields that could lead to delays in treatment. We aimed to evaluate whether combining EUS guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) with ERCP versus ERCP alone at the time of index procedure improved time to first outpatient evaluation and oncological treatment. All patients without a prior pathological diagnosis who underwent index ERCP at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom, for malignant distal biliary obstruction from 2015 to 2020 were considered. A total of 292 patients were included, of whom 74.7% (n = 202) underwent EUS-TA/ERCP. A combined approach was more likely to establish a positive diagnosis (96.5% (n = 195) vs 57.8% (n = 52), p < 0.01) and less likely to require further sampling procedures (2.0% (n = 4) vs 17.8% (n = 16), p < 0.01). Mean times to first outpatient evaluation (16.9 vs 24.5 days (p = 0.01)) and oncological treatment (55.1 vs 79.3 days (p = 0.03)) were significantly shorter in the EUS-TA/ERCP group. A third (n = 86) of patients with a positive diagnosis did not receive oncological/surgical treatment. In our cohort of patients, a combined approach was associated with improved diagnostic yield, reduced need for repeat sampling procedures and reduced time to evaluation and treatment, with similar therapeutic success and adverse event rates. Careful multidisciplinary discussion is recommended to avoid performing unnecessary EUS procedures on patients who will not benefit from further treatment.

Potential of 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched study

Potential of 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched study

Covered Versus Uncovered Metal Stents for the Drainage of the Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction With ERCP: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction is a condition that should be treated with drainage and clearance of the biliary duct. self-expanded metal stents (SEMS) are known to be better and more effective than plastic stents because the patency is longer. The actual evidence is insufficient to recommend if it is better the use of SEMSu over SEMSc or vice versa for the drainage of the malignant distal biliary obstruction during ERCP. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to demonstrate if exists superiority between one or other type of SEMS performed by ERCP. We conducted a systematic review in different databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane, Medline, and OVID database. A search was made of all studies published up to May 2023. Seven studies were analyzed. A total of 1070 patients were included. Of the total of patients, 48.9% were male. The cumulative stent patency, the failure rate, the survival probably and the adverse events rate, were similar between SEMSc and SEMSu groups. The stent migration rate was higher in the SEMSc group (RR=2.34 [95% CI: 1.35-4.08]). The tumor overgrowth was higher in the SEMSc group (RR=2.05 [95% CI: 1.13-3.72]). The tumor ingrowth was higher in the SEMSu group (RR=0.25 [95% CI: 0.11-0.61]). The conclusions of our study show that there are no differences between the use of uncovered SEMS and covered SEMS for palliative treatment of distal biliopancreatic obstructions, and it has no impact on mortality or patient survival. New functional studies regarding the type of stent cover, radial force or length thereof are required.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A case series and review of literature

Abstract Obstructive jaundice is a common clinical manifestation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Pancreaticobiliary malignancy causes a significant proportion of distal biliary obstructions, most of which are unresectable at the time of diagnosis. Palliative biliary drainage is required in cases of unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Surgical, endoscopic, or percutaneous methods can relieve biliary obstruction. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is the most common alternative method if endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. The complication rate of PTBD and associated comorbidities is high. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has two access routes, i.e., intrahepatic and extrahepatic. The technical and clinical success rate of EUS-BD is high, exceeding 90%. When ERCP fails, the EUS rendezvous approach should be attempted first if papilla is accessible. Transmural drainage is the preferred method if the papilla is inaccessible. For distal and mid-common bile duct obstruction, we perform EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). For EUS-CDS, one can use either a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) or a lumen-apposing metal stent. EUS-BD procedures are technically challenging, and adverse events are common even in expert hands. A multidisciplinary approach is most appropriate for patients with distal MBO who fail ERCP.