DEN open · 2024
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy versus hepaticogastrostomy combined with gastroenterostomy in malignant double obstruction (CABRIOLET_Pro): A prospective comparative study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Vanella Giuseppe, Leone Roberto, Frigo Francesco, Bronswijk Michiel, van Wanrooij Roy L J, Tamburrino Domenico, Orsi Giulia, Belfiori Giulio, Macchini Marina, Reni Michele, Aldrighetti Luca, Falconi Massimo, Capurso Gabriele, van der Merwe Schalk, Arcidiacono Paolo Giorgio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Malignant double obstruction, defined as the simultaneous presence of biliary and gastric outlet obstruction, represents a challenging clinical scenario. Previous retrospective experiences have demonstrated shorter dysfunction-free survival (DyFS) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) versus EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) in this setting, but no prospective evidence is available.
METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with malignant double obstruction, treated with EUS-gastroenterostomy (and EUS-guided biliary drainage, following a previously failed ERCP, were enrolled in a prospective observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04813055) comparing EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS. Efficacy and safety were evaluated, with Biliary Dysfunctions as the primary outcome and DyFS using Kaplan-Meier estimates as a primary measure.
RESULTS: Twenty patients (75% with pancreatic cancer, 50% with metastatic disease) with EUS-gastroenterostomy were included (seven EUS-CDS and 13 EUS-HGS). No significant difference was detected at baseline. Technical success was 100% in both groups. EUS-CDS compared to EUS-HGS showed similar clinical success (100% vs. 92.3%, p = 0.5), a higher rate of post-procedural adverse events (42.9% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.067, mostly related to severe/fatal cholangitis in the EUS-CDS group) and a higher rate of biliary dysfunctions during follow-up (71.4% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.002).DyFS was significantly shorter in the EUS-CDS group (39 [15-62] vs. 268 [192-344] days, p = 0.0023), with a 30-days DyFS probability of 57.1% vs. 100% (hazard ratio = 7.8 [1.4-44.2]).
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective comparison of patients with malignant double obstruction undergoing EUS-gastroenterostomy, treating jaundice with EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS resulted in a reduced probability of survival without biliary events and an increased risk of biliary dysfunctions (number needed to harm = 1.8), with detection of severe/fatal cholangitis.
METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with malignant double obstruction, treated with EUS-gastroenterostomy (and EUS-guided biliary drainage, following a previously failed ERCP, were enrolled in a prospective observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04813055) comparing EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS. Efficacy and safety were evaluated, with Biliary Dysfunctions as the primary outcome and DyFS using Kaplan-Meier estimates as a primary measure.
RESULTS: Twenty patients (75% with pancreatic cancer, 50% with metastatic disease) with EUS-gastroenterostomy were included (seven EUS-CDS and 13 EUS-HGS). No significant difference was detected at baseline. Technical success was 100% in both groups. EUS-CDS compared to EUS-HGS showed similar clinical success (100% vs. 92.3%, p = 0.5), a higher rate of post-procedural adverse events (42.9% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.067, mostly related to severe/fatal cholangitis in the EUS-CDS group) and a higher rate of biliary dysfunctions during follow-up (71.4% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.002).DyFS was significantly shorter in the EUS-CDS group (39 [15-62] vs. 268 [192-344] days, p = 0.0023), with a 30-days DyFS probability of 57.1% vs. 100% (hazard ratio = 7.8 [1.4-44.2]).
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective comparison of patients with malignant double obstruction undergoing EUS-gastroenterostomy, treating jaundice with EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS resulted in a reduced probability of survival without biliary events and an increased risk of biliary dysfunctions (number needed to harm = 1.8), with detection of severe/fatal cholangitis.