Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting in patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched case-control study.

antegrade stenting endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage hepaticogastrostomy malignant distal biliary obstruction pancreatic cancer

Journal

Gastrointestinal endoscopy
ISSN: 1097-6779
Titre abrégé: Gastrointest Endosc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0010505

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 Feb 2024
Historique:
received: 20 08 2023
revised: 10 02 2024
accepted: 15 02 2024
medline: 22 2 2024
pubmed: 22 2 2024
entrez: 21 2 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a rescue procedure when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Peritonitis and recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) are adverse events (AEs) associated with EUS-HGS. Antegrade stenting across a malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) followed by EUS-HGS (EUS-HGAS) creates two biliary drainage routes, potentially reducing peritonitis and prolonging time to RBO (TRBO). We compared the outcomes of the two techniques. Data of consecutive patients with MDBO who underwent attempted EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS across five institutions from January 2014 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. A matched cohort of the patients was obtained using one-to-one propensity score matching. The primary outcome was TRBO, and secondary outcomes included AEs except for RBO and overall survival (OS). Among 360 patients, 283 (176 and 107 in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively) were eligible. The matched cohorts included 81 patients in each group. AEs developed in 10 (12.3%) and 15 (18.5%) patients (p=0.38) in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively. RBO occurred in 18 and 2 patients in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively (p<0.001). TRBO was significantly longer in the HGAS group (median 194 vs. 716 days; hazard ratio [HR]=0.050, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.0066-0.37, p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (median 97 vs. 112 days; HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.66-1.4, p=0.88). EUS-HGAS extended TRBO compared with EUS-HGS, while AEs, except for RBO and OS, did not differ. The longer TRBO of EUS-HGAS could benefit patients with longer life expectancy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OBJECTIVE
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a rescue procedure when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Peritonitis and recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) are adverse events (AEs) associated with EUS-HGS. Antegrade stenting across a malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) followed by EUS-HGS (EUS-HGAS) creates two biliary drainage routes, potentially reducing peritonitis and prolonging time to RBO (TRBO). We compared the outcomes of the two techniques.
METHODS METHODS
Data of consecutive patients with MDBO who underwent attempted EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS across five institutions from January 2014 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. A matched cohort of the patients was obtained using one-to-one propensity score matching. The primary outcome was TRBO, and secondary outcomes included AEs except for RBO and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS RESULTS
Among 360 patients, 283 (176 and 107 in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively) were eligible. The matched cohorts included 81 patients in each group. AEs developed in 10 (12.3%) and 15 (18.5%) patients (p=0.38) in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively. RBO occurred in 18 and 2 patients in the HGS and HGAS groups, respectively (p<0.001). TRBO was significantly longer in the HGAS group (median 194 vs. 716 days; hazard ratio [HR]=0.050, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.0066-0.37, p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (median 97 vs. 112 days; HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.66-1.4, p=0.88).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
EUS-HGAS extended TRBO compared with EUS-HGS, while AEs, except for RBO and OS, did not differ. The longer TRBO of EUS-HGAS could benefit patients with longer life expectancy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38382887
pii: S0016-5107(24)00109-3
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.02.012
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Hirotoshi Ishiwatari (H)

Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan. Electronic address: ishihiro481019@gmail.com.

Takeshi Ogura (T)

Endoscopy Center, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Osaka, Japan.

Susumu Hijioka (S)

Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

Takuji Iwashita (T)

First Department of Internal Medicine, Gifu University Hospital, Gifu, Japan.

Saburo Matsubara (S)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Saitama Medical Center, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, Japan.

Kazuma Ishikawa (K)

Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.

Fumitaka Niiya (F)

Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.

Junya Sato (J)

Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.

Atsushi Okuda (A)

Second Department of Internal Medicine, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Osaka, Japan.

Saori Ueno (S)

Second Department of Internal Medicine, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Osaka, Japan.

Yoshikuni Nagashio (Y)

Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

Yuta Maruki (Y)

Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

Shinya Uemura (S)

First Department of Internal Medicine, Gifu University Hospital, Gifu, Japan.

Akifumi Notsu (A)

Clinical Research Center, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.

Classifications MeSH