Efficacy of EUS-guided and ERCP-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction: prospective randomized controlled study

Park, Joo Kyung; Woo, Youngmin; Noh, Dong Hyo; Yang, Ju-Il; Bae, So Young; Yun, Hae Ran; Lee, Jong Kyun; Lee, Kyu Taek; Lee, Kwang Hyuck

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.015

Cited by 182 publications

(210 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

180

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…29 Three randomized controlled trials that compared EUS-BD with transpapillary-BD indicated that the success rate of both techniques is similar, but AEs and reintervention rates might be lower for EUS-BD. [30][31][32] The newest systematic review and metaanalysis also showed the same results. 33 For preoperative biliary drainage, PSs are generally used.…”

Section: Endoscopic Therapy For Malignant Biliary Stricturesmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…Recently, EUS‐BD for patients in whom the transpapillary approach is difficult is widely performed . Three randomized controlled trials that compared EUS‐BD with transpapillary‐BD indicated that the success rate of both techniques is similar, but AEs and reintervention rates might be lower for EUS‐BD . The newest systematic review and meta‐analysis also showed the same results …”

Section: Endoscopic Therapy For Malignant Biliary Stricturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recent innovations in therapeutic endoscopy for pancreatobiliary diseases

Irisawa¹,

Miyoshi

Itoi

et al. 2019

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of endoscopic treatment for pancreatobiliary diseases in recent years is remarkable. In addition to conventional transpapillary treatments under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), new endoscopic ultrasound‐guided therapy is being developed and implemented. On the other hand, due to the development/improvement of various devices such as new metal stents, a new therapeutic strategy under ERCP is also advocated. The present review focuses on recent advances in the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts, walled‐off necrosis, malignant biliary strictures, and benign biliary/pancreatic duct strictures.

show abstract

Section: Endoscopic Therapy For Malignant Biliary Stricturesmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section: Endoscopic Therapy For Malignant Biliary Stricturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent innovations in therapeutic endoscopy for pancreatobiliary diseases

Irisawa¹,

Miyoshi

Itoi

et al. 2019

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparative data of EUS‐BD and ERCP are shown in Table . The type of adverse events of EUS‐BD and ERCP differ but the adverse event rates were comparable or even lower in EUS‐BD in randomized controlled trials . While post‐ERCP pancreatitis is a major adverse event after ERCP, bile leak is a potential severe adverse event after EUS‐BD.…”

Section: Questions and Clinical Questions Of The Guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical practice guidelines for safe performance of endoscopic ultrasound/ultrasonography‐guided biliary drainage: 2018

Isayama

Nakai

Itoi

et al. 2019

J Hepato Biliary Pancreat

105

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endoscopic ultrasound/ultrasonography‐guided biliary drainage (EUS‐BD) is a relatively new modality for biliary drainage after failed or difficult transpapillary biliary cannulation. Despite its clinical utility, EUS‐BD can be complicated by severe adverse events such as bleeding, perforation, and peritonitis. The aim of this paper is to provide practice guidelines for safe performance of EUS‐BD as well as safe introduction of the procedure to non‐expert centers. The guidelines comprised patient–intervention–comparison–outcome‐formatted clinical questions (CQs) and questions (Qs), which are background statements to facilitate understanding of the CQs. A literature search was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Statement, evidence level, and strength of recommendation were created according to the GRADE system. Four committees were organized: guideline creation, expert panelist, evaluation, and external evaluation committees. We developed 13 CQs (methods, device selection, supportive treatment, management of adverse events, education and ethics) and six Qs (definition, indication, outcomes and adverse events) with statements, evidence levels, and strengths of recommendation. The guidelines explain the technical aspects, management of adverse events, and ethics of EUS‐BD and its introduction to non‐expert institutions.

show abstract

“…Only recently, 3 prospective randomized trials comparing ERCP and EUS-BD in patients with malignant biliary obstruction showed largely equivalent or better results in the EUS-BD group [136-138]. Interestingly, when transduodenal EUS-BD was performed, no complications arose from stent dislocation after a stable enterobiliary fistula had formed [137]. In theory, this may also be applied to patients with CP and BBS not responding to transpapillary stent therapy and not suitable for operation.…”

Section: Endoscopic Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%