Cargando…

Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) are alternate therapies to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement for biliary decompression. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sawas, Tarek, Bailey, Natashay J., Yeung, Kit Ying Kitty Au, James, Theodore W., Reddy, Sumana, Fleming, Chad J., Marya, Neil B., Storm, Andrew C., Abu Dayyeh, Barham K., Petersen, Bret T., Martin, John A., Levy, Michael J., Baron, Todd H., Bun Teoh, Anthony Yuen, Chandrasekhara, Vinay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35102902
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/EUS-D-21-00031
_version_ 1784741448787165184
author Sawas, Tarek
Bailey, Natashay J.
Yeung, Kit Ying Kitty Au
James, Theodore W.
Reddy, Sumana
Fleming, Chad J.
Marya, Neil B.
Storm, Andrew C.
Abu Dayyeh, Barham K.
Petersen, Bret T.
Martin, John A.
Levy, Michael J.
Baron, Todd H.
Bun Teoh, Anthony Yuen
Chandrasekhara, Vinay
author_facet Sawas, Tarek
Bailey, Natashay J.
Yeung, Kit Ying Kitty Au
James, Theodore W.
Reddy, Sumana
Fleming, Chad J.
Marya, Neil B.
Storm, Andrew C.
Abu Dayyeh, Barham K.
Petersen, Bret T.
Martin, John A.
Levy, Michael J.
Baron, Todd H.
Bun Teoh, Anthony Yuen
Chandrasekhara, Vinay
author_sort Sawas, Tarek
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) are alternate therapies to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement for biliary decompression. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the technical and clinical success of PTBD to EUS-CD in patients with distal biliary obstruction. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), need for reintervention, and survival. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study from three different centers was performed. Cox regression was used to compare time to reintervention and survival and logistic regression to compare technical and clinical success and AE rates. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). RESULTS: A total of 86 patients (58 PTBD and 28 EUS-CD) were included. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and cause of biliary obstruction, with malignancy being the most common etiology (80.2%). EUS-CD utilized lumen-apposing metal stents in 15 patients and self-expandable metal biliary stents in 13 patients. Technical success was similar been EUS-CD (100%) and PTBD (96.6%; P = 0.3). EUS-CD was associated with higher clinical success compared to PTBD (84.6% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.04). There was a trend toward lower rates of AEs with EUS-CD 14.3% versus PTBD 29.3%, odds ratio: 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12–1.33, P = 0.14). The need for reintervention was significantly lower among patients who underwent EUS-CD (10.7%) compared to PTBD (77.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02–0.24; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis of only patients with MBO demonstrated similar rate of reintervention between the groups in individuals who survived 50 days or less after the biliary decompression. However, reintervention rates were lower for EUS-CD in those with longer survival. CONCLUSION: EUS-CD is a technically and clinically highly successful procedure with a trend toward lower AEs compared to PTBD. EUS-CD minimizes the need for reintervention, which may enhance end-of-life quality in patients with MBO and expected survival longer than 50 days.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9258024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92580242022-07-07 Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study Sawas, Tarek Bailey, Natashay J. Yeung, Kit Ying Kitty Au James, Theodore W. Reddy, Sumana Fleming, Chad J. Marya, Neil B. Storm, Andrew C. Abu Dayyeh, Barham K. Petersen, Bret T. Martin, John A. Levy, Michael J. Baron, Todd H. Bun Teoh, Anthony Yuen Chandrasekhara, Vinay Endosc Ultrasound Original Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) are alternate therapies to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement for biliary decompression. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the technical and clinical success of PTBD to EUS-CD in patients with distal biliary obstruction. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), need for reintervention, and survival. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study from three different centers was performed. Cox regression was used to compare time to reintervention and survival and logistic regression to compare technical and clinical success and AE rates. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). RESULTS: A total of 86 patients (58 PTBD and 28 EUS-CD) were included. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and cause of biliary obstruction, with malignancy being the most common etiology (80.2%). EUS-CD utilized lumen-apposing metal stents in 15 patients and self-expandable metal biliary stents in 13 patients. Technical success was similar been EUS-CD (100%) and PTBD (96.6%; P = 0.3). EUS-CD was associated with higher clinical success compared to PTBD (84.6% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.04). There was a trend toward lower rates of AEs with EUS-CD 14.3% versus PTBD 29.3%, odds ratio: 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12–1.33, P = 0.14). The need for reintervention was significantly lower among patients who underwent EUS-CD (10.7%) compared to PTBD (77.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02–0.24; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis of only patients with MBO demonstrated similar rate of reintervention between the groups in individuals who survived 50 days or less after the biliary decompression. However, reintervention rates were lower for EUS-CD in those with longer survival. CONCLUSION: EUS-CD is a technically and clinically highly successful procedure with a trend toward lower AEs compared to PTBD. EUS-CD minimizes the need for reintervention, which may enhance end-of-life quality in patients with MBO and expected survival longer than 50 days. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9258024/ /pubmed/35102902 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/EUS-D-21-00031 Text en Copyright: © 2022 SPRING MEDIA PUBLISHING CO. LTD https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sawas, Tarek
Bailey, Natashay J.
Yeung, Kit Ying Kitty Au
James, Theodore W.
Reddy, Sumana
Fleming, Chad J.
Marya, Neil B.
Storm, Andrew C.
Abu Dayyeh, Barham K.
Petersen, Bret T.
Martin, John A.
Levy, Michael J.
Baron, Todd H.
Bun Teoh, Anthony Yuen
Chandrasekhara, Vinay
Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title_full Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title_fullStr Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title_short Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study
title_sort comparison of eus-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: a multicenter cohort study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35102902
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/EUS-D-21-00031
work_keys_str_mv AT sawastarek comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT baileynatashayj comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT yeungkityingkittyau comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT jamestheodorew comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT reddysumana comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT flemingchadj comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT maryaneilb comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT stormandrewc comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT abudayyehbarhamk comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT petersenbrett comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT martinjohna comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT levymichaelj comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT barontoddh comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT bunteohanthonyyuen comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy
AT chandrasekharavinay comparisonofeusguidedcholedochoduodenostomyandpercutaneousdrainagefordistalbiliaryobstructionamulticentercohortstudy