Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/216492
Title: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary rendezvous after failed cannulation, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders: outcomes at a single tertiary-care centre
Author: Gornals Soler, Joan B.
Sumalla-Garcia, Albert
Quintana, Sergi
Luna-Rodriguez, Daniel
Velasquez Rodriguez, Julio G.
Puigcerver-Mas, Maria
Escuer-Turu, Julia
Maisterra, Sandra
Marin, Mar
Munoa, Virginia
Laquente, Berta
Busquets Barenys, Juli
Keywords: Malalties del tracte biliar
Cateterisme
Colangiopancreaticografia retrògrada endoscòpica
Drenatge
Bilious diseases and biliousness
Catheterization
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograph
Drainage
Issue Date: 1-Dec-2024
Publisher: Finnish Medical Society Duodecim
Abstract: Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary rendezvous (RV) is an EUS-assisted technique described as a rescue method in cases of failed biliary cannulation via endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). Current literature remains unclear regarding its current role. The study aim was to evaluate the effectiveness for biliary EUS-RV, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders. Methods: Retrospective observational study with prospective consecutive inclusion in a specific database from a tertiary-center. All patients with biliopancreatic diseases that underwent a EUS-assisted ERC between October-2010 and November-2022 for failed ERC were included. Main outcomes were technical/overall success. Secondary outcomes were safety, potential factors related to failure/success or safety; and a comparative analysis between EUS-RV and EUS-guided transmural drainage (TMD) in malignant cases. Results: A total of 69 patients who underwent EUS-RV procedures, with benign and malignant pathologies (n = 40 vs n = 29), were included. Technical / overall success and related-adverse events (AEs) were 79.7% (95%CI, 68.3-88.4) / 74% (95%CI, 61-83.7) and 24% (95%CI, 15.1-36.5), respectively. Failed cases were mainly related with guidewire manipulation. Seven failed RV were successfully rescued by EUS-TMD. On multivariable analysis, EUS-RV and malignant pathology was associated with a greater failure rate (technical success: OR,0.21; 95%CI,0.05-0.72; p = 0.017), and higher AEs rate (OR,3.46; 95%CI,1.13-11.5; p = 0.034). Also, the EUS-TMD group had greater technical success (OR,16.96; 95%CI,4.69-81.62; p < 0.001) and overall success (OR, 3.09; 95%CI,1.18-8-16; p < 0.026) with a lower AEs rate (OR,0.30; 95%CI,0.11-0.78; p = 0.014) than EUS-RV in malignant disorders. Conclusions: EUS-RV is a demanding technique with better outcomes in benign than in malignant biliopancreatic diseases. Comparison of the EUS-TMD group on malignant disorders showed worse outcomes with EUS-RV. Given these findings, maybe EUS-RV is not the best option for malignant biliopancreatic disorders.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2024.2416607
It is part of: Annals of Medicine, 2024, vol. 56, num.1
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/216492
Related resource: https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2024.2416607
ISSN: 0785-3890
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Ciències Clíniques)
Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
870382.pdf848.96 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons