International multicenter comparative trial of transluminal EUS-guided biliary drainage via hepatogastrostomy vs. choledochoduodenostomy approaches

Abstract

Background and study aims: 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.

Patients and methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Fig. 1

Fluoroscopic images demonstrating metallic stents across created choledochoduodenostomy ( a ) and hepatogastrostomy ( b ).

Fig. 2

Kaplan-Meier plot estimates of the stent patency duration after EUS-CDS and EUS-HG. Dashed line represents probability of stent patency at 1 year: EUS-CDS 0.98 (96 %CI: 0.76 – 0.96) vs EUS-HG 0.60 (95 %CI: 0.35 – 0.78). Stent patency duration was not significantly different via log-rank test ( P =  0.228).

Fig. 3

Kaplan-Meier plot estimates of the overall survival after EUS-CDS and EUS-HG. Median survival times (95 % CI) were 252 days (131 – 369) for EUS-CDS and 142 days (82 – 256) for EUS-HG. There was no significant difference in survival times between the two groups ( P =  0.357 via log rank test). Survival probabilities (95 % CI) at 6 months were EUS-CDS 0.57 (0.41 – 0.71) vs EUS-HG 0.44 (0.30 – 0.57); and at 1 year, EUS-CDS 0.39 (0.22 – 0.55) vs EUS-HG 0.20 (0.09 – 0.35), as indicated by the dashed line.