Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy results in fewer complications than percutaneous drainage following failed ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction
- PMID: 40209763
- PMCID: PMC12417859
- DOI: 10.1055/a-2580-1316
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy results in fewer complications than percutaneous drainage following failed ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction
Abstract
Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), including choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), are alternative methods for biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Data on long-term outcomes, adverse events (AEs), and quality of life (QoL) after EUS-CDS and PTBD are limited. Therefore, we created a registry to evaluate the outcomes of both drainage procedures.Patients with distal MBO who underwent EUS-CDS or PTBD after unsuccessful ERCP were included in this multicenter investigator-initiated prospective registry over an 18-month inclusion period. Primary end points were procedure-related AEs and mortality within 90 days post-procedure. Secondary end points included technical and clinical success, reinterventions, hospital stay, and QoL.55 patients were included, with 12 patients undergoing PTBD (technical success 100%) and 43 patients EUS-CDS (technical success 97.7%). Prior to ERCP, 7/12 patients in the PTBD group and 12/43 patients in the EUS-CDS group opted for best supportive care. The 90-day mortality rate was 66.7% in the PTBD group and 20.9% in the EUS-CDS group (P = 0.005). Furthermore, 11/12 patients (91.7%) in the PTBD group and 19/43 (44.2%) in the EUS-CDS group developed one or more AEs (P = 0.004). The median post-procedural hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 2-6) in the PTBD group vs. 1 day (IQR 1-2) in the EUS-CDS group (P = 0.001).When both modalities were available and technically feasible, gastroenterologists preferred EUS-CDS over PTBD. EUS-CDS seems to be associated with lower mortality and AE rates, shorter hospital admission, and fewer reinterventions, but a randomized controlled trial should confirm these observations.
The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Conflict of interest statement
R.P. Voermans receives research grants from Boston Scientific and Prion Medical, is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Cook Medical, and has received speaker’s fees from Mylan and Zambon. F.P. Vleggaar is a consultant for Boston Scientific. M.J. Bruno has received research support from Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Pentax Medical, Mylan, and ChiRoStim, and is a consultant/lecturer for Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Pentax Medical, and AMBU. R.L.J. van Wanrooij is a consultant for Boston Scientific. P.D. Siersema has received research grants from Pentax, Fujifilm, Magentiq Eye, and Sanofi, all outside of the submitted work. M.J.P. de Jong, F. van Delft, E.-J.M. van Geenen, A. Bogte, R.C. Verdonk, N.G. Venneman, J.M.Vrolijk, J.-W.A. Straathof, R.A. Bijlsma, S.D. Kuiken, R. Quispel, M. Hadithi, K. Basiliya, T.M. Bisseling, and T.R. de Wijkerslooth declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
