Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Endoscopy ; 53(1): 55-62, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32515005

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may not provide complete biliary drainage in patients with Bismuth III/IV malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). Complete biliary drainage is accomplished by adding percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). We prospectively compared recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rates between combined ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) vs. bilateral PTBD. METHODS: Patients with MHBO undergoing endoscopic procedures (group A) were compared with those undergoing bilateral PTBD (group B). The primary outcome was the 3-month RBO rate. RESULTS: 36 patients were recruited into groups A (n = 19) and B (n = 17). Rates of technical and clinical success, and complications of group A vs. B were 84.2 % (16/19) vs. 100 % (17/17; P = 0.23), 78.9 % (15/19) vs. 76.5 % (13/17; P > 0.99), and 26.3 % (5/19) vs. 35.3 % (6/17; P = 0.56), respectively. Within 3 and 6 months, RBO rates of group A vs. group B were 26.7 % (4/15) vs. 88.2 % (15/17; P  = 0.001) and 22.2 % (2/9) vs. 100 % (9/9; P = 0.002), respectively. At 3 months, median number of biliary reinterventions in group A was significantly lower than in group B (0 [interquartile range] 0-1 vs. 1 [1-2.5]), respectively (P < 0.001). Median time to development of RBO was longer in group A than in group B (92 [56-217] vs. 40 [13.5-57.8] days, respectively; P  =  0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Combined ERCP and EUS procedures provided significantly lower RBO rates at 3 and 6 months vs. bilateral PTBD, with similar complication rates and no significant mortality difference.


Subject(s)
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Cholestasis , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/adverse effects , Cholestasis/etiology , Cholestasis/surgery , Drainage , Endosonography , Humans , Ultrasonography, Interventional
2.
Clin Endosc ; 53(6): 678-685, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31914724

ABSTRACT

In high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis who are not candidates for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy, gallbladder (GB) drainage is an alternative treatment option. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is a recommended first line intervention because of its high efficacy and feasibility in most centers. However, with the advent of endoscopic accessories and technology, endoscopic GB drainage has been chosen as a more favorable choice by endoscopists. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) can be performed under either fluoroscopic or peroral cholangioscopic guidance via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography by the transpapillary placement of a long double-pigtail stent. In a patient with common bile duct stones, this procedure is accompanied with stone removal. ETGBD is especially useful for acute cholecystitis patients who are contraindicated for PTGBD or those with severe coagulopathy, thrombocytopenia, and abnormal anatomy. Moreover, the advantage of ETGBD is its preservation of the external GB structure. Thereby it would not disturb the future cholecystectomy. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using plastic, fully covered metallic, or lumen-apposing metal stents transmurally has emerged as a modality for GB drainage with higher technical and clinical success rates. EUS-GBD can provide a more permanent GB drainage than PTGBD and ETGBD.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...