Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jul;22(7):1213-1220.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-3731-z. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD) for Malignant Biliary Obstruction Associated with Ascites: Results of a Pilot Study

Affiliations

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD) for Malignant Biliary Obstruction Associated with Ascites: Results of a Pilot Study

María Victoria Alvarez-Sánchez et al. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018 Jul.

Abstract

Background: It has been suggested that EUS-BD may be a feasible and safer alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed ERCP in patients with ascites. To date, no study has specifically evaluated the performance of EUS-BD in this context.

Methods: Retrospective analysis was done for patients with and without ascites who underwent EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP between July 2010 and September 2014. Complications and technical and clinical successes between the two groups were compared.

Results: A total of 31 patients were included: 20 patients without ascites (group 1) and 11 with ascites (group 2). Nineteen patients underwent EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (six in group 2), and 12 underwent EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (five in group 2). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical success was observed in 95% (n = 19) in group 1 and 64% (n = 7) in group 2 (p = 0.042). In three out of four patients without clinical success in group 2, the follow-up period was not long enough to observe the clinical response because of early death within the 2 weeks after EUS-BD secondary to disease progression or preprocedural unresponsive sepsis. No significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 either in the overall rates of procedural-related complications (20 and 9%, respectively, p = 0.63) or in the rates of major complications (15 vs 9%, respectively, p = 0.639). Stent migration occurred in one patient in each group, intra- or post-procedural bleeding occurred in two patients in group 1, which was conservatively managed, and one patient in group 1 presented biliary leakage. Stent patency and the number of re-interventions were not significantly different.

Conclusions: EUS-BD is technically feasible in patients with ascites. Our results suggest that EUS-BD may be a clinically effective and safe alternative after failed ERCP in patients with ascites.

Keywords: Ascites; Choledocoduonenostomy; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage; Hepaticogastrostomy; Malignant biliary obstruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rofo. 2000 Feb;172(2):179-83 - PubMed
    1. Endoscopy. 2001 Jan;33(1):31-8 - PubMed
    1. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Mar 7;19(9):1372-9 - PubMed
    1. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012 Apr;23(4):521-7 - PubMed
    1. Endoscopy. 2015 Jun;47(6):503-7 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources