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
. 2021 Mar 26;100(12):e25268.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025268.

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in first-line biliary drainage for malignant distal bile duct obstruction: A multicenter randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in first-line biliary drainage for malignant distal bile duct obstruction: A multicenter randomized controlled trial

Masahiro Itonaga et al. Medicine (Baltimore). .

Abstract

Introduction: In patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction and normal gastrointestinal anatomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is indicated when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. The ERCP drainage route passes through the tumor, whereas the EUS-CDS route does not. Therefore, EUS-CDS is expected to have a longer stent patency than ERCP. However, for first-line biliary drainage, it remains unclear whether EUS-CDS or ERCP is superior in terms of stent patency. To reduce the frequency of highly adverse events (AEs) such as bile peritonitis or stent migration following EUS-CDS, we developed an antimigration metal stent with a thin delivery system for tract dilatation. This study is designed to assess whether EUS-CDS with this novel stent is superior to ERCP with a traditional metal stent in terms of stent patency when the two techniques are used for first-line drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Methods/design: This study is a multicenter single-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving 95 patients in four tertiary centers. Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction that is unresectable or presents a very high surgical risk and who pass the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized to EUS-CDS or ERCP in a 1:1 proportion. The primary endpoint is the stent patency rate 180 days after stent insertion. Secondary outcomes include the rates of technical success, clinical success, technical success in cases not requiring fistulous-tract dilation (only EUS-CDS group), procedure-related AEs, re-intervention success, patients receiving post-drainage chemotherapy, procedure time, and overall survival time.

Discussion: If EUS-CDS is superior to ERCP in terms of stent patency and safety for the first-line drainage of malignant distal biliary obstruction, it is expected that the first-line drainage method will be changed from ERCP to EUS-CDS, and that interruption of chemotherapy due to stent dysfunction can be avoided.

Trial registration: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), ID: UMIN000041343. Registered on August 6, 2020. https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000047201Version number: 1.2, December 7, 2020.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The stent and delivery system (Covered BileRush Advance, Piolax Medical Devices, Yokohama, Japan). (A) The expanded stent has a diameter of 8 mm and is 60 mm in length. It is made of laser-cut nitinol wire and is partially covered by a silicone membrane. A 5-mm section at the proximal end of the stent is uncovered and flared to a diameter of 10.5 mm to prevent distal migration. The distal end is also flared to a diameter of 10.5 mm to prevent inward migration. (B) This stent is delivered with a 7.0-Fr pull-back delivery catheter. The tip of the delivery system is shaped (2.6 Fr) to enable stent deployment without fistula dilation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flowchart of the study design.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Standard protocol items (SPIRIT): schedule for data collection.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Das A, Sivak MV, jr. Endoscopic palliation for inoperable pancreatic cancer. Cancer Control 2000;7:452–7. - PubMed
    1. Inamdar S, Slattery E, Bhalla R, et al. Comparison of adverse events for endoscopic vs percutaneous biliary drainage in the treatment of malignant biliary tract obstruction in an inpatient national cohort. JAMA Oncol 2016;2:112–7. - PubMed
    1. Almadi MA, Barkun A, Martel M. Plastic vs. self-expandable metal stents for palliation in malignant biliary obstruction: a series of meta-analyses. Am J Gastroenterol 2017;112:260–73. - PubMed
    1. Gardner TB, Spangler CC, Byanova KL, et al. Cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy of biliary stents in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;84:460–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Minaga K, Kitano M. Recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage. Dig Endosc 2018;30:38–47. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms