Cargando…

A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction

Background and study Aims: Selective biliary cannulation is unsuccessful in 5 % to 10 % of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD) has been the gold standard, but endoscopic ultraso...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bill, Jason G., Darcy, Michael, Fujii-Lau, Larissa L., Mullady, Daniel K., Gaddam, Srinivas, Murad, Faris M., Early, Dayna S., Edmundowicz, Steven A., Kushnir, Vladimir M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5025302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27652305
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-112584
_version_ 1782453934864990208
author Bill, Jason G.
Darcy, Michael
Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.
Mullady, Daniel K.
Gaddam, Srinivas
Murad, Faris M.
Early, Dayna S.
Edmundowicz, Steven A.
Kushnir, Vladimir M.
author_facet Bill, Jason G.
Darcy, Michael
Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.
Mullady, Daniel K.
Gaddam, Srinivas
Murad, Faris M.
Early, Dayna S.
Edmundowicz, Steven A.
Kushnir, Vladimir M.
author_sort Bill, Jason G.
collection PubMed
description Background and study Aims: Selective biliary cannulation is unsuccessful in 5 % to 10 % of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD) has been the gold standard, but endoscopic ultrasound guided rendezvous (EUSr) have been increasingly used for biliary decompression in this patient population. Our aim was to compare the initial success rate, long-term efficacy, and safety of PBD and EUSr in relieving MDBO after failed ERC Patients and methods: A retrospective study involving 50 consecutive patients who had an initial failed ERCP for MDBO. Twenty-five patients undergoing EUSr between 2008 – 2014 were compared to 25 patients who underwent PBD immediately prior to the introduction of EUSr at our center (2002 – 2008). Comparisons were made between the two groups with regard to technical success, duration of hospital stay and adverse event rates after biliary decompression. Results: The mean age at presentation was 66.5 (± 12.6 years), 28 patients (54.9 %) were female. The etiology of MDBO was pancreaticobiliary malignancy in 44 (88 %) and metastatic disease in 6 (12 %) cases. Biliary drainage was technically successful by EUSr in 19 (76 %) cases and by PBD in 25 (100 %) (P = 0.002). Median length of hospital stay after initial drainage was 1 day in the EUSr group vs 5 days in PBD group (P = 0.02). Repeat biliary intervention was required for 4 patients in the EUSr group and 15 in the PBD group (P = 0.001). Conclusions: Initial technical success with EUSr was significantly lower than with PBD, however when EUSr was successful, patients had a significantly shorter post-procedure hospital stay and required fewer follow-up biliary interventions. Meeting presentations: Annual Digestive Diseases Week 2015
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5025302
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50253022016-09-20 A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction Bill, Jason G. Darcy, Michael Fujii-Lau, Larissa L. Mullady, Daniel K. Gaddam, Srinivas Murad, Faris M. Early, Dayna S. Edmundowicz, Steven A. Kushnir, Vladimir M. Endosc Int Open Background and study Aims: Selective biliary cannulation is unsuccessful in 5 % to 10 % of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD) has been the gold standard, but endoscopic ultrasound guided rendezvous (EUSr) have been increasingly used for biliary decompression in this patient population. Our aim was to compare the initial success rate, long-term efficacy, and safety of PBD and EUSr in relieving MDBO after failed ERC Patients and methods: A retrospective study involving 50 consecutive patients who had an initial failed ERCP for MDBO. Twenty-five patients undergoing EUSr between 2008 – 2014 were compared to 25 patients who underwent PBD immediately prior to the introduction of EUSr at our center (2002 – 2008). Comparisons were made between the two groups with regard to technical success, duration of hospital stay and adverse event rates after biliary decompression. Results: The mean age at presentation was 66.5 (± 12.6 years), 28 patients (54.9 %) were female. The etiology of MDBO was pancreaticobiliary malignancy in 44 (88 %) and metastatic disease in 6 (12 %) cases. Biliary drainage was technically successful by EUSr in 19 (76 %) cases and by PBD in 25 (100 %) (P = 0.002). Median length of hospital stay after initial drainage was 1 day in the EUSr group vs 5 days in PBD group (P = 0.02). Repeat biliary intervention was required for 4 patients in the EUSr group and 15 in the PBD group (P = 0.001). Conclusions: Initial technical success with EUSr was significantly lower than with PBD, however when EUSr was successful, patients had a significantly shorter post-procedure hospital stay and required fewer follow-up biliary interventions. Meeting presentations: Annual Digestive Diseases Week 2015 © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016-09 2016-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC5025302/ /pubmed/27652305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-112584 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Bill, Jason G.
Darcy, Michael
Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.
Mullady, Daniel K.
Gaddam, Srinivas
Murad, Faris M.
Early, Dayna S.
Edmundowicz, Steven A.
Kushnir, Vladimir M.
A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title_full A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title_fullStr A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title_full_unstemmed A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title_short A comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ERCP for malignant distal biliary obstruction
title_sort comparison between endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous and percutaneous biliary drainage after failed ercp for malignant distal biliary obstruction
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5025302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27652305
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-112584
work_keys_str_mv AT billjasong acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT darcymichael acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT fujiilaularissal acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT mulladydanielk acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT gaddamsrinivas acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT muradfarism acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT earlydaynas acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT edmundowiczstevena acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT kushnirvladimirm acomparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT billjasong comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT darcymichael comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT fujiilaularissal comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT mulladydanielk comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT gaddamsrinivas comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT muradfarism comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT earlydaynas comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT edmundowiczstevena comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction
AT kushnirvladimirm comparisonbetweenendoscopicultrasoundguidedrendezvousandpercutaneousbiliarydrainageafterfailedercpformalignantdistalbiliaryobstruction