Surgical endoscopy · 2024
A retrospective comparative study of biliary drainage using balloon endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound for malignant obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Hakuta Ryunosuke, Ishida Kota, Nakai Yousuke, Kogure Hirofumi, Nishio Hiroto, Kurihara Kouhei, Tange Shuichi, Fukuda Rintaro, Takaoka Shinya, Suzuki Yukari, Oyama Hiroki, Kanai Sachiko, Noguchi Kensaku, Suzuki Tatsunori, Sato Tatsuya, Ishigaki Kazunaga, Saito Tomotaka, Hamada Tsuyoshi, Takahara Naminatsu, Fujishiro Mitsuhiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in patients with surgically altered anatomy is challenging, and technical difficulty could differ by the anatomy. Balloon endoscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (BE-ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) are both emerging procedures, and we conducted the single-center, retrospective study to compare clinical outcomes of BE-ERCP and EUS-BD for MBO.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with surgically altered anatomy who underwent BE-ERCP or EUS-BD for MBO were retrospectively studies. Technical and clinical success rates, adverse events (AEs), and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) were compared.
RESULTS: Patient characteristics were comparable between BE-ERCP (n = 118) and EUS-BD (n = 32), other than more patients with hepaticojejunostomy in the BE-ERCP group (66% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). Technical success rate was significantly higher in the EUS-BD group (70% vs. 94%, P = 0.005), but clinical success rates (84% vs. 90%, P = 0.55), early AE (14% vs. 22%, P = 0.29) and late AE rates (42% vs. 38%, P = 0.84), and RBO rates (31% vs. 34%, P = 0.67) were comparable between the groups. TRBO was 170 and 206 days in the BE-ERCP and EUS-BD group (P = 0.37). In the subgroup analysis of patients with the intact papilla, the technical success rate of BE-ERCP was as low as 55%, compared to 94% in EUS-BD (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: EUS-BD was associated with higher technical success rate than BE-ERCP for MBO in patients with surgically altered anatomy.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with surgically altered anatomy who underwent BE-ERCP or EUS-BD for MBO were retrospectively studies. Technical and clinical success rates, adverse events (AEs), and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) were compared.
RESULTS: Patient characteristics were comparable between BE-ERCP (n = 118) and EUS-BD (n = 32), other than more patients with hepaticojejunostomy in the BE-ERCP group (66% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). Technical success rate was significantly higher in the EUS-BD group (70% vs. 94%, P = 0.005), but clinical success rates (84% vs. 90%, P = 0.55), early AE (14% vs. 22%, P = 0.29) and late AE rates (42% vs. 38%, P = 0.84), and RBO rates (31% vs. 34%, P = 0.67) were comparable between the groups. TRBO was 170 and 206 days in the BE-ERCP and EUS-BD group (P = 0.37). In the subgroup analysis of patients with the intact papilla, the technical success rate of BE-ERCP was as low as 55%, compared to 94% in EUS-BD (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: EUS-BD was associated with higher technical success rate than BE-ERCP for MBO in patients with surgically altered anatomy.