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
Comparative Study
. 2025 Jan;37(1):103-114.
doi: 10.1111/den.14750. Epub 2024 Feb 21.

Effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided choledochoduodenostomy vs. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for jaundice in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Retrospective, multicenter study (GALLBLADEUS Study)

Antoine Debourdeau #  1   2 , Jules Daniel #  1 , Ludovic Caillo  1 , Eric Assenat  2 , Martin Bertrand  3 , Thomas Bardol  4 , François-Régis Souche  4 , Philippe Pouderoux  1 , Romain Gerard  5 , Diane Lorenzo #  6 , Jean-François Bourgaux #  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided choledochoduodenostomy vs. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for jaundice in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Retrospective, multicenter study (GALLBLADEUS Study)

Antoine Debourdeau et al. Dig Endosc. 2025 Jan.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) vs. EUS-gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for jaundice resulting from malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO).

Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients with obstructive jaundice secondary to MDBO who underwent EUS-GBD or EUS-CDS with lumen-apposing metal stents after failed ERCP. The primary end-point was clinical success rate. Secondary end-points were technical success, periprocedural adverse events rate (<24 h), late adverse events rate (>24 h), overall survival, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction.

Results: A total of 78 patients were included: 41 underwent EUS-GBD and 37 underwent EUS-CDS. MDBO was mainly the result of pancreatic cancer (n = 63/78, 80.7%). Clinical success rate was similar for both procedures: 87.8% for EUS-GBD and 89.2% for EUS-CDS (P = 0.8). Technical success rate was 100% for EUS-GBD and 94.6% for EUS-CDS (P = 0.132). Periprocedural morbidity (<24 h) rates were similar between both groups: 4/41 (9.8%) for EUS-GBD and 5/37 (13.5%) for EUS-CDS (P = 0.368). There was a significantly higher rate of late morbidity (>24 h) among patients in the EUS-CDS group (8/37 [21.6%]) than in the EUS-GBD group (3/41 [7.3%]) (P = 0.042). The median follow-up duration was 4.7 months. Overall survival and time to recurrent biliary obstruction did not significantly differ between the groups.

Discussion: After failed ERCP for MDBO, EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS show comparable clinical success rates and technical success. EUS-GBD appears to be a promising alternative for MDBO, even as a second-line treatment after failed ERCP. Further studies are needed to validate these findings and compare the long-term outcomes of EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS.

Keywords: EUS; biliary drainage; endoscopy; gallbladder; pancreatic cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors declare no conflict of interest for this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of overall survival between endoscopic ultrasound‐guided gallbladder drainage (EUS‐GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound‐guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS‐CDS) groups.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of biliary patency between endoscopic ultrasound‐guided gallbladder drainage (EUS‐GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound‐guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS‐CDS) groups.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Olsson G, Enochsson L, Swahn F, Andersson B. Antibiotic prophylaxis in ERCP with failed cannulation. Scand J Gastroenterol 2021; 56: 336–341. - PubMed
    1. Dumonceau JM, Tringali A, Papanikolaou I et al. Endoscopic biliary stenting: Indications, choice of stents, and results: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) clinical guideline. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 910–930. - PubMed
    1. Sharaiha RZ, Khan MA, Kamal F et al. Efficacy and safety of EUS‐guided biliary drainage in comparison with percutaneous biliary drainage when ERCP fails: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 904–914. - PubMed
    1. Khan MA, Akbar A, Baron TH et al. Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided biliary drainage: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61: 684–703. - PubMed
    1. Jacques J, Privat J, Pinard F et al. EUS‐guided choledochoduodenostomy by use of electrocautery‐enhanced lumen‐apposing metal stents: A French multicenter study after implementation of the technique. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 134–141. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources