Hilar Biliary Obstruction Research Articles

Bilateral Percutaneous Biliary Drainage in a Patient with Hilar Biliary Obstruction and Multifocal Hydatid Liver Disease

Bilateral Percutaneous Biliary Drainage in a Patient with Hilar Biliary Obstruction and Multifocal Hydatid Liver Disease

Management of malignant hilar biliary obstruction by endoscopy. Results and prognostic factors.

Between January 1983 and December 1987, 103 patients who had hilar biliary obstruction (59 men, 44 women, median age 73 years) were referred to our institution. The causes of hilar biliary obstruction were carcinoma of the bile ducts (55), hepatic metastases or hepatocellular carcinoma (30), and carcinoma of the gallbladder (18). When endoscopic retrograde cholangiography was performed, the stricture was classified as type I in 28%, type II in 41%, and type III in 31% of the patients. In 92 patients, we tried to insert endoscopically a 10, 11, or 12 F Amsterdam type prosthesis; it proved possible in 66 (74%), and the prosthesis proved functional without further procedure in 49 cases (53%); no combined percutaneous and endoscopic method was used. At death or discharge, 45 patients (49%) had a successful drainage. Cholangitis was the main procedure-related complication and occurred in 25 patients. The 30-day mortality was 43%. Results varied according to type of stenosis: successful drainage was performed in 15% of the patients with type III stenosis, compared with 86% when the stenosis was of type I. Under a multivariate analysis the independent prognostic factors of 30-day mortality were: (1) development of infectious complications after endoscopic attempt at drainage (P less than 0.0001), and (2) absence of successful drainage (P less than 0.0001). In conclusion, endoscopic endoprosthesis placement allows a sufficient drainage in 53% of the cases. In type III stenosis, the high rate of 30-day mortality leads us the conclusion that endoscopic drainage must be avoided.

Choice of palliation for malignant hilar biliary obstruction

Clinical data from 50 consecutive patients with unresectable hilar tumors situated at or proximal to the common hepatic duct were retrospectively analyzed to aid in the selection of appropriate palliative measures. Thirty-four patients had cholangioenteric bypass (CEB) to either left (28 patients), right (3 patients), or both (3 patients) intrahepatic ductal systems. Sixteen patients had nonoperative drainage (NOD) established either endoscopically (4 patients), percutaneously (9 patients), or using a combined endoscopic-percutaneous approach (3 patients). When compared with patients with CEB, patients with NOD had more frequent medical problems (p < 0.03) and lower serum albumin levels on admission (p < 0.03). While comparable postprocedural complications (13 CEB patients versus 4 NOD patients) were observed, patients with NOD had a significantly higher hospital mortality (9 CEB patients versus 9 NOD patients, p < 0.05). Excluding the 12 patients (6 CEB patients versus 6 NOD patients) who died within 30 days after drainage, the quality of survival of the remaining 38 patients was analyzed with reference to 6 objective parameters. Although patients with NOD had significantly more frequent admissions relating to their catheters (p < 0.02), there was no qualitative difference in the survival rate between the two groups of patients. For selected high-risk patients with limited life expectancy, NOD should be offered. However, additional prospective studies are required to decide the best choice of palliation for patients who are not at such high risk.

A Comparison of Right Versus Left Hepatic Duct Endoprosthesis Insertion in Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstruction

Endoscopic endoprosthesis insertion plays an increasingly important role in the palliation of jaundice in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (HBO). Drainage of both obstructed lobes in Types II and III HBO is not necessary to achieve adequate palliation, providing 25% of the liver volume is drained by a single endoprosthesis. The anatomy of the main hepatic ducts suggests some benefit may accrue from preferential drainage of the left hepatic duct. We have reviewed a consecutive series of 151 patients with Type II and III HBO over a 4-year period to compare the outcome of endoprosthesis placement in either the right (RHD) or left (LHD) hepatic duct, to test this hypothesis. No significant difference was found in terms of successful drainage, complications, 30-day mortality, number of endoprosthesis changes and survival between patients with right system drainage compared with those with left sided drainage (chi 2-test and Mann Whitney U test). When dealing with a patient with a Type II or III HBO, we would recommend single endoscopic endoprosthesis insertion into the technically most accessible obstructed system. This would achieve adequate palliation in 84% of the patients.