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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Jul;88(1):9-17.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.012. Epub 2018 Mar 21.

Stent placement by EUS or ERCP for primary biliary decompression in pancreatic cancer: a randomized trial (with videos)

Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Stent placement by EUS or ERCP for primary biliary decompression in pancreatic cancer: a randomized trial (with videos)

Ji Young Bang et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Jul.
Free article

Abstract

Background and aims: Studies on EUS-guided transmural biliary drainage (EUS-BD) have evaluated its efficacy as a rescue technique after failed ERCP. We performed a single-center, single-blind, randomized trial to compare EUS-BD and ERCP as primary treatment for distal biliary obstruction in pancreatic cancer.

Methods: Patients underwent EUS-BD (n = 33) or ERCP (n = 34). The primary endpoint was the rate of adverse events. Secondary endpoints were technical success, treatment success (defined as decline in serum bilirubin by 50% at a 2-week follow-up), reinterventions, and intraoperative technical outcome, when applicable. Follow-up was until death or a minimum of 6 months.

Results: The rates of adverse events were 21.2% (6.1% moderate severity; others mild severity) in the EUS-BD group and 14.7% (5.9% moderate severity; others mild severity) in the ERCP group (risk ratio, .69; 95% confidence interval, .24-1.97; P = .49). There were no procedure-related deaths. There was no significant difference in the rates of technical success (90.9% vs 94.1%, P = .67), treatment success (97% vs 91.2%, P = .61), or reinterventions (3.0% vs 2.9%, P = .99) between EUS-BD and ERCP cohorts, respectively. The endoscopic interventions did not impede subsequent pancreaticoduodenectomy that was performed in 5 of 33 patients (15.2%) in the EUS-BD and 5 of 34 patients (14.7%) in the ERCP group (P = .99).

Conclusions: Given the similar rates of adverse events and treatment outcomes in this randomized trial, EUS-BD is a practical alternative to ERCP for primary biliary decompression in pancreatic cancer. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03054987.).

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources