Endoscopy · 2025
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder versus bile duct drainage for first-line therapy of malignant biliary obstruction: international multicenter trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mangiavillano Benedetto, Ramai Daryl, Fugazza Alessandro, Franchellucci Gianluca, Spadaccini Marco, Barbera Carmelo, Arcidiacono Paolo Giorgio, De Nucci Germana, Martínez-Moreno Belén, Di Mitri Roberto, Di Matteo Francesco, Larghi Alberto, Robles Medranda Carlos, Anderloni Andrea, De Luca Luca, Teoh Anthony Y B, Vargas-Madrigal Jorge, Forti Edoardo, Bronswijk Michiel, Bertani Helga, Lakhtakia Sundeep, Do-Cong Pham Khanh, Crinò Stefano Francesco, Repici Alessandro, Facciorusso Antonio, Biliary Therapeutic EUS Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) with lumen-apposing metal stents are alternative approaches to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. We compared EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS as first-line therapies in the management of distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO).
METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, retrospective, observational study at 28 tertiary care centers from April 2017 to August 2024. Outcomes were compared using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes included technical success, adverse events, and overall survival.
RESULTS: 291 patients (mean age 74 [SD 12] years; 130 male) underwent EUS-guided drainage (82 EUS-GBD, 209 EUS-CDS). Most patients developed distal MBO from pancreatic cancer (84 %). After 1-to-1 propensity score matching, 154 patients were selected (77 per group). EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS had similar rates of technical success (96 % [95 %CI 89 %-99 %] vs. 99 % [95 %CI 92 %-99 %]; P = 0.36) and clinical success (86 % [95 %CI 75 %-92 %] vs. 92 % [95 %CI 83 %-97 %]; P = 0.17), respectively. Overall, 11 patients (14.2 % [95 %CI 7 %-24 %]) in each group experienced an adverse event, of which 6 in each group (8 % [95 %CI 2 %-16 %]) were serious.
CONCLUSION: Our study showed that in patients with distal MBO, the use of EUS-GBD or EUS-CDS were comparable, with similar rates of efficacy and safety. EUS-GBD could represent an easy and safe option in patients with DMBO without previous cholecystectomy and with clear patency of the cystic duct.
METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, retrospective, observational study at 28 tertiary care centers from April 2017 to August 2024. Outcomes were compared using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes included technical success, adverse events, and overall survival.
RESULTS: 291 patients (mean age 74 [SD 12] years; 130 male) underwent EUS-guided drainage (82 EUS-GBD, 209 EUS-CDS). Most patients developed distal MBO from pancreatic cancer (84 %). After 1-to-1 propensity score matching, 154 patients were selected (77 per group). EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS had similar rates of technical success (96 % [95 %CI 89 %-99 %] vs. 99 % [95 %CI 92 %-99 %]; P = 0.36) and clinical success (86 % [95 %CI 75 %-92 %] vs. 92 % [95 %CI 83 %-97 %]; P = 0.17), respectively. Overall, 11 patients (14.2 % [95 %CI 7 %-24 %]) in each group experienced an adverse event, of which 6 in each group (8 % [95 %CI 2 %-16 %]) were serious.
CONCLUSION: Our study showed that in patients with distal MBO, the use of EUS-GBD or EUS-CDS were comparable, with similar rates of efficacy and safety. EUS-GBD could represent an easy and safe option in patients with DMBO without previous cholecystectomy and with clear patency of the cystic duct.