Relief of jaundice in malignant biliary obstruction: When should we consider endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy as an option?
EUS-guided biliary drainage
EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy
Hepaticogastrostomy
Interventional EUS
Journal
Hepatobiliary & pancreatic diseases international : HBPD INT
ISSN: 1499-3872
Titre abrégé: Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int
Pays: Singapore
ID NLM: 101151457
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
11
07
2021
accepted:
23
02
2022
pubmed:
20
3
2022
medline:
11
5
2022
entrez:
19
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Since it was first described in 2001, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative procedure for achieving an endoscopic internal drainage in case of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Biliary drainage can be achieved by either a transduodenal extrahepatic approach through EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), or a transgastric intrahepatic approach, namely EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) which already holds a remarkable place in the treatment of patients with malignant biliary obstruction. For this review we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE from inception to May 31, 2021 for papers with a significant sample size (at least 20 patients enrolled) dealing with EUS-HGS. Data on technical success, clinical success and rate of adverse events were collected. A total of 22 studies with different design, comprising 874 patients, were included. Technical success was achieved in about 96% of cases (ranging from 65% to 100%). Clinical success was obtained in almost 91% of cases (ranging from 76% to 100%). Overall rate of adverse events was 19% (ranging from 0% to 35%). Abdominal pain, self-limiting pneumoperitoneum, bile leak, cholangitis, bleeding, perforation and intraperitoneal migration of the stent were the most common. Despite both safety and efficacy profile, at the moment HGS still remains a challenging procedure at every single step and must therefore be conducted by a very experienced endoscopist in interventional EUS and ERCP procedures, who is able to deal with the possible severe adverse events of this procedure. A rapid introduction in clinical practice of dedicated devices is desiderable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Since it was first described in 2001, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative procedure for achieving an endoscopic internal drainage in case of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Biliary drainage can be achieved by either a transduodenal extrahepatic approach through EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), or a transgastric intrahepatic approach, namely EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) which already holds a remarkable place in the treatment of patients with malignant biliary obstruction.
DATA SOURCES
METHODS
For this review we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE from inception to May 31, 2021 for papers with a significant sample size (at least 20 patients enrolled) dealing with EUS-HGS. Data on technical success, clinical success and rate of adverse events were collected.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies with different design, comprising 874 patients, were included. Technical success was achieved in about 96% of cases (ranging from 65% to 100%). Clinical success was obtained in almost 91% of cases (ranging from 76% to 100%). Overall rate of adverse events was 19% (ranging from 0% to 35%). Abdominal pain, self-limiting pneumoperitoneum, bile leak, cholangitis, bleeding, perforation and intraperitoneal migration of the stent were the most common.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Despite both safety and efficacy profile, at the moment HGS still remains a challenging procedure at every single step and must therefore be conducted by a very experienced endoscopist in interventional EUS and ERCP procedures, who is able to deal with the possible severe adverse events of this procedure. A rapid introduction in clinical practice of dedicated devices is desiderable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35304087
pii: S1499-3872(22)00021-2
doi: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2022.03.003
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
234-240Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine in China. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.