MENU ▼
Read by QxMD icon Read
search
OPEN IN READ APP
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of EUS-guided Choledochoduodenostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter, Randomized, Clinical Trial

Kosuke Minaga, Takeshi Ogura, Hideyuki Shiomi, Hajime Imai, Noriyuki Hoki, Mamoru Takenaka, Hidefumi Nishikiori, Yukitaka Yamashita, Takeshi Hisa, Hironari Kato, Hideki Kamada, Atsushi Okuda, Ryota Sagami, Hiroaki Hashimoto, Kazuhide Higuchi, Yasutaka Chiba, Masatoshi Kudo, Masayuki Kitano
Digestive Endoscopy: Official Journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society 2019 March 25
30908711

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) can be performed via two different approaches: choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). We compared the efficacy and safety of these approaches in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) patients using a prospective, randomized clinical trial.

METHODS: MDBO patients after failed ERCP were randomly selected for either CDS or HGS. The procedures were performed at nine tertiary centers from September 2013 to March 2016. The primary endpoint was the technical success rate, and the noninferiority of HGS to CDS was examined with a one-sided significance level of 5%, where the noninferiority margin was set at 15%. The secondary endpoints were clinical success, adverse events (AEs), stent patency, survival time, and overall technical success including alternative EUS-BD procedures.

RESULTS: Forty-seven patients (HGS, 24; CDS, 23) were enrolled. The technical success rates were 87.5% and 82.6% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively, where the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval of the risk difference was -12.2% (P = 0.0278). The clinical success rates were 100% and 94.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.475). The overall AE rate, stent patency, and survival time did not differ between the groups. The overall technical success rates were 100% and 95.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.983).

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests HGS is not inferior to CDS in terms of technical success. When one procedure is particularly challenging, readily switching to the other could increase technical success. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Comments

You need to log in or sign up for an account to be able to comment.

No comments yet, be the first to post one!

Related Papers

Available on the App Store

Available on the Play Store
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
30908711
×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"