We aimed to determine risk factors for technical failure of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), evaluate short- and long-term consequences, and identify salvage techniques in patients with biliary obstruction.

 This retrospective multicenter study of EUS-CDS (2018-2024) included technical failure, classified as type 1 (digestive flange mispositioned), type 2 (biliary flange mispositioned), type 3 (stent deployment failure), type 4 (catheter/lumen-apposing metal stent [LAMS] through the bile duct), and type 5 (others). Controls were successful EUS-CDS in the same center and period. The primary end point was risk factors for failure. Secondary end points were endoscopic rescue techniques and immediate- and long-term consequences.

 Technical failure occurred in 7 % (95 %CI 5-9). Across 23 centers, 296 patients were analyzed (mean age 71 [SD 16] years, 53 % male), including 100 technical failures: type 1 (26 %), type 2 (41 %), type 3 (11 %), type 4 (6 %), type 5 (16 %). Risk factors for technical failure in multivariate analysis included CBD diameter ≤ 15 mm, duodenal stenosis, wired technique, and low operator experience (≤ 10 LAMS). Endoscopic salvage was successful in 77 %, with 53 % using a covered metal stent and 22 % using a new LAMS. Early failures were mild in 56 % of cases, but 12 % resulted in death within 30 days. Immediate endoscopic salvage reduced severe clinical adverse events (P < 0.001) and increased success rates (P < 0.001).

 EUS-CDS failures were not rare and were severe in half of cases. Recognizing risk factors, identifying failures during the procedure, and knowing endoscopic salvage methods are crucial.

Endoscopic ultrasound-biliary drainage and choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDD) are increasingly being used as alternative procedures for biliary drainage in patients in whom endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Novel electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (EC-LAMS) are expected to be widely used for EUS-CDD. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the technical and clinical success of EUS-CDD using EC-LAMS.

We performed a comprehensive search of several databases from inception to May 2022 to search for relevant studies on the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage using EC-LAMS. The pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and early and late adverse events were calculated.

Ten studies with a total of 481 patients were included in this analysis. The overall technical success rate was 94.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] (91.5%-96.2%), The overall clinical success rate was 94.9%, 95% CI (92%-96.7%). The overall early adverse event rate was 5.1%, 95% CI (3.4%-7.8%), and the overall late adverse event rate was 10.8%, 95% CI (6.6%-17.2%).

In patients with biliary obstruction with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, EUS-CDD using EC-LAMS is a good alternate management option with a high success rate and relatively low adverse events.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the following: 1: The role of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients after failed ERCP. 2: The role of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy in resolving distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. 3: The role of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy. 4: The role of EUS-BD versus E-ERCP and PTBD in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy other than RYGB. 5: The role of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary transcystic gallbladder drainage in resolving acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy.

In a recent issue of the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, a meta-analysis investigated the safety and efficacy of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent (ECE-LAMS) implantation for managing malignant biliary obstruction following failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. This manuscript endeavors to offer a comprehensive look at the progression of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) technologies, weighing their merits and drawbacks against traditional percutaneous methods. Several meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials have compared the performance of EUS-BD and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage (PTCD). These studies revealed that the technical success rate, clinical success rate, and adverse events were similar between EUS-BD and PTCD. Nevertheless, given that most of these studies predate 2015, the safety and effectiveness of novel EUS-BD techniques, including ECE-LAMS, compared with those of percutaneous biliary drainage remain elusive. Further investigation is imperative to ascertain whether these novel EUS-BD techniques can safely and efficaciously replace conventional percutaneous therapeutic approaches.

Introduction: Endosonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) serves as a rescue treatment modality for patients with malignant biliary obstruction when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. Objectives: This study explores the effects of EUS-BD on liver function and quality of life (QoL). Patients and Methods: Patients with malignant biliary obstruction and failed ERCP were enrolled to undergo EUS-BD. QoL, including pruritus severity, was evaluated using EQ-5D-5L and PSS-10 questionnaires before and after EUS-BD. Serum bilirubin and liver function tests were measured on the procedure day, two days, and at least 14 days post-procedure. Results: During a 20-month study period, 1755 ERCPs were performed, with 595 for malignant cases. Of these, 49 underwent EUS-BD following failed ERCP, and 37 (54% women, age range 34-87 years) completed the 14-day follow-up. Pancreatic cancer was the most common (49%) condition, and the median hospital stay was 4 days. Serum bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma-glutamyl transferase significantly decreased 2 and 14 days after EUS-BD (all p < 0.001). Pruritus significantly improved, with an average reduction of 5.19 points on the PSS-10 scale two weeks post-procedure (p < 0.001). EUS-BD led to improvements in anxiety and depression according to the EQ-5D-5L (p = 0.013). Conversely, deteriorations were observed in the Mobility, Self-Care, and Usual Activities domains over time (all p < 0.05). Successful EUS-BD enabled the resumption of chemotherapy in 11 (30%) patients. The median post-procedure survival was 112 (range 27-1030) days. Conclusions: EUS-BD improves liver parameters and some aspects of life quality in patients with malignant biliary obstruction, thereby increasing their eligibility for optimal palliative care.

Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.

The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.

The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

In the past decades, endoscopic ultrasound has developed from a diagnostic tool to a platform for many therapeutic interventions. Various technological advancements have emerged since the last Brazilian Consensus, demanding a review and update of the recommendations based on the best scientific evidence.

A group of 32 renowned echoendoscopists selected eight relevant topics to be discussed to generate clinical questions. After that, a literature review was conducted to answer these questions based on the most updated evidence.

Thirty-three statements were formulated and voted on by the experts to reach a consensus. The Oxford System was used to grade the level of evidence.

There is mo-derate evidence to support that the needle shape, gauge, or aspiration technique does not influence the yield of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling of pancreatic solid lesions. There is moderate evidence to support using EUS-TTNB of the cyst wall to differentiate between mucinous and non-mucinous cystic neoplasms. There is little evidence to support the EUS-guided treatment of gastric varices. There is a high level of evidence to support that EUS-guided biliary drainage and ERCP present similar outcomes in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction. There is a high level of evidence for using EUS to diagnose neoplastic pancreatic cysts and detect necrosis before indicating drainage. There is moderate evidence to support EUS-GE over duodenal stent for malignant gastric outlet obstruction in patients with a life expectancy higher than 2 months. There is a high level of evidence to support the use of RFA in treating both functioning and non-functioning types of NET.

Hepaticogastrostomy drainage through endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-HGS) has emerged in the 2010s as a new technique for biliary decompression in cases of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Substantial technical and procedural progress in performing EUS-HGS has been achieved, allowing high technical and clinical success and an acceptable risk of adverse events in studies mainly focusing on short-term outcomes. However, the long-term effects of EUS-HGS and the risk of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) have not been fully evaluated.

To evaluate the long-term effects of EUS-HGS and the risk of RBO.

Data from 211 patients undergoing technically successful EUS-HGS in three academic centers were retrospectively collected. Clinical success, adverse events, RBO, and reinterventions were evaluated.

In total, 198 patients underwent technically successful EUS-HGS for MBO. The median overall survival was 144 days [108, 2011] after the procedure. Mean patient age was 69.39 (12.91) years. The cause of MBO was pancreatic cancer (n = 98, 49.5%) followed by cholangiocarcinoma (n = 29, 14.6%). The location of MBO was distal in 27.6% of cases and proximal in 68.4%. Adverse events were observed during the follow-up in 65 patients (33%). On multivariate analysis, the use of partially covered self-expandable metal stents (PCSEMS) was associated with a lower risk of RBO (HR = 0.47 [0.24-0.95], p = 0.034). Additionally, patients with distal stenoses had a trend toward better stent patency (HR = 0.06[0-0.77], p = 0.031). RBO developed in 38 cases (19.1%) mainly due tumor ingrowth (36.8%) with a high success rate of endoscopic management.

While RBO occurred in a notable proportion of patients, the primary cause of mortality was progression of the underlying malignancy rather than stent dysfunction. The efficiency of stents, particularly PCSEMS, and the high success rate of endoscopic management for RBO underscore the effectiveness and reliability of these treatments in managing biliary complications.

The purpose of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is to reduce complications during the perioperative period. The extrahepatic bile duct comprises distal and hilar bile ducts and assessing the need for PBD must be considered separately for each duct, as surgical procedures and morbidities vary. The representative disease-causing distal bile duct obstruction is pancreatic cancer. A randomized controlled trial has revealed that PBD carries the risk of recurrent cholangitis and pancreatitis before surgery, thus eliminating the need for PBD when early surgery is feasible. However, neoadjuvant therapy has seen a rise in recent years, resulting in longer preoperative waiting periods and an increased demand for PBD. In such cases, metal stents are preferable to plastic stents due to their lower stent occlusion rates. When endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage (EBD) is not viable, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage may be a suitable substitute. In the hilar bile duct, the representative disease-causing obstruction is hilar cholangiocarcinoma. PBD's necessity has long been a subject of contention. In spite of earlier criticisms of routine PBD, recent views have emerged recommending PBD, particularly when major hepatectomy is required, to prevent postoperative liver failure. Given the risk of tumor seeding associated with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EBD is preferable. Nevertheless, as its shortcomings involve recurrent cholangitis until surgery due to stent or tube obstruction, it is necessary to seek out novel approaches to circumvent complications. In this review we summarize the current evidence for PBD in patients with distal and hilar biliary obstruction.

This editorial delves into Peng et al's article, published in the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. Peng et al's meta-analysis investigates the effectiveness of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (ECE-LAMS) in ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for alleviating malignant biliary obstruction. Examining 14 studies encompassing 620 participants, the research underscores a robust technical success rate of 96.7%, highlighting the efficacy of ECE-LAMS, particularly in challenging cases which have failed endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography. A clinical success rate of 91.0% underscores its impact on symptom alleviation, while a reasonably tolerable adverse event rate of 17.5% is observed. However, the 7.3% re-intervention rate stresses the need for post-procedural monitoring. Subgroup analyses validate consistent outcomes, bolstering the applicability of ECE-LAMS. These findings advocate for the adoption of ECE-LAMS as an appropriate approach for biliary palliation, urging further exploration in real-world clinical contexts. They offer valuable insights for optimizing interventions targeting malignant biliary obstruction management.

Interventional radiology (IR) is a unique specialty that incorporates a diverse set of skills ranging from imaging, procedures, consultation, and patient management. Understanding how IR generates value to the healthcare system is important to review from various perspectives. IR specialists need to understand how to meet demands from various stakeholders to expand their practice improving patient care. Thus, this review discusses the domains of value contributed to medical systems and outlines the parameters of success. IR benefits five distinct parties: patients, practitioners, payers, employers, and innovators. Value to patients and providers is delivered through a wide set of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Payers and hospital systems financially benefit from the reduced cost in medical management secondary to fast patient recovery, outpatient procedures, fewer complications, and the prestige of offering diverse expertise for complex patients. Lastly, IR is a field of rapid innovation implementing new procedural technology and techniques. Overall, IR must actively advocate for further growth and influence in the medical field as their value continues to expand in multiple domains. Despite being a nascent specialty, IR has become indispensable to modern medical practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (BD) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows for biliary access when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is unsuccessful. The technique can be divided based on biliary access route: intrahepatic or extrahepatic, as well as on stenting approach: rendezvous approach (EUS-RV), antegrade placement, or transluminal (intra or extra hepatic) placement. There is no clear consensus on which approach is superior. Compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage, EUS-BD offers lower rates of adverse events without the need for an external drain. Compared to conventional ERCP, EUS-BD shows comparable, and in some cases superior, outcomes related to technical success, clinical success, and adverse events.

Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021.

Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop.

In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing.

The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

The progress of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment for inflammatory diseases of the biliary tract and pancreas have been remarkable. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-elastography are used for the diagnosis of early chronic pancreatitis and evaluation of endocrine and exocrine function in chronic pancreatitis. Notably, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy have improved the endoscopic stone removal rate in patients for whom pancreatic stone removal is difficult. Studies have reported the use of self-expanding metal stents for stent placement for pancreatic duct stenosis and EUS-guided pancreatic drainage for refractory pancreatic duct strictures. Furthermore, EUS-guided drainage using a double-pigtailed plastic stent has been performed for the management of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collection after acute pancreatitis. Recently, lumen-apposing metal stents have led to advances in the treatment of walled-off necrosis after acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an alternative to refractory endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for the treatment of acute cholangitis. The placement of an inside stent followed by switching to uncovered self-expanding metal stents in difficult-to-treat cases has been proposed for acute cholangitis by malignant biliary obstruction. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for severe and some cases of moderate acute cholecystitis. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage has been reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. However, it is important to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each drainage method and select the optimal drainage method for each case.

In this 14th document in a series of papers entitled "Controversies in Endoscopic Ultrasound" we discuss various aspects of EUS-guided biliary drainage that are debated in the literature and in practice. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography is still the reference technique for therapeutic biliary access, but EUS-guided techniques for biliary access and drainage have developed into safe and highly effective alternative options. However, EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques are technically demanding procedures for which few training models are currently available. Different access routes require modifications to the basic technique and specific instruments. In experienced hands, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage is also a good alternative. Therefore, in this paper, we compare arguments for different options of biliary drainage and different technical modifications.

Primary biliary tract tumors are malignancies that originate in the liver, bile ducts, or gallbladder. These tumors often present with jaundice of unknown etiology, leading to delayed diagnosis and advanced disease. Currently, several palliative treatment options are available for primary biliary tract tumors. They include percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), biliary stenting, and surgical interventions such as biliary diversion. Systemic therapy is also commonly used for the palliative treatment of primary biliary tract tumors. It involves the administration of chemotherapy drugs, such as gemcitabine and cisplatin, which have shown promising results in improving overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract tumors. PTBD is another palliative treatment option for patients with unresectable or inoperable malignant biliary obstruction. Biliary stenting can also be used as a palliative treatment option to alleviate symptoms in patients with unresectable or inoperable malignant biliary obstruction. Surgical interventions, such as biliary diversion, have traditionally been used as palliative options for primary biliary tract tumors. However, biliary diversion only provides temporary relief and does not remove the tumor. Primary biliary tract tumors often present in advanced stages, making palliative treatment the primary option for improving the quality of life of patients.

Multiple meta-analyses have evaluated the technical and clinical success of EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD), but meta-analyses concerning adverse events (AEs) are limited. The present meta-analysis analyzed AEs associated with various types of EUS-BD.

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from 2005 to September 2022 for studies analyzing the outcome of EUS-BD. The primary outcomes were incidence of overall AEs, major AEs, procedure-related mortality, and reintervention. The event rates were pooled using a random-effects model.

One hundred fifty-five studies (7887 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled clinical success rates and incidence of AEs with EUS-BD were 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.1-95.9) and 13.7% (95% CI, 12.3-15.0), respectively. Among early AEs, bile leak was the most common followed by cholangitis with pooled incidences of 2.2% (95% CI, 1.8-2.7) and 1.0% (95% CI, .8-1.3), respectively. The pooled incidences of major AEs and procedure-related mortality with EUS-BD were .6% (95% CI, .3-.9) and .1% (95% CI, .0-.4), respectively. The pooled incidences of delayed migration and stent occlusion were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.3-12.8), respectively. The pooled event rate for reintervention (for stent migration or occlusion) after EUS-BD was 16.2% (95% CI, 14.0-18.3; I2 = 77.5%).

Despite a high clinical success rate, EUS-BD may be associated with AEs in one-seventh of the cases. However, major AEs and mortality incidence remain less than 1%, which is reassuring.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has an important role in the management algorithm of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), typically for its diagnostic utilities. The past two decades have seen a rapid expansion of the therapeutic capabilities of EUS. Interventional EUS is now one of the more exciting developments within the field of endoscopy. The local effects of PDAC tend to be in anatomical areas which are difficult to target and endoscopy has cemented itself as a key role in managing the clinical sequelae of PDAC. Interventional EUS is increasingly utilized in situations whereby conventional endoscopy is either impossible to perform or unsuccessful. It also adds a different dimension to the host of oncological and surgical treatments for patients with PDAC. In this review, we aim to summarize the various ways in which interventional EUS could benefit patients with PDAC and aim to provide a balanced commentary on the current evidence of interventional EUS in the literature.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may fail to achieve biliary drainage in 5% to 10% of cases. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are alternative therapeutic options in such cases. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and PTBD for biliary decompression after failed ERCP.

A comprehensive search of literature from inception to September 2022 was done of 3 databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and PTBD for biliary drainage after failed ERCP. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated for all the dichotomous outcomes. Continuous variables were analyzed using mean difference (MD).

A total of 24 studies were included in the final analysis. Technical success was comparable between EUS-BD and PTBD (OR=1.12, 0.67-1.88). EUS-BD was associated with a higher clinical success rate (OR=2.55, 1.63-4.56) and lower odds of adverse events (OR=0.41, 0.29-0.59) compared with PTBD. The incidence of major adverse events (OR=0.66, 0.31-1.42) and procedure-related mortality (OR=0.43, 0.17-1.11) were similar between the groups. EUS-BD was associated with lower odds of reintervention with an OR of 0.20 (0.10-0.38). The duration of hospitalization (MD: -4.89, -7.73 to -2.05) and total treatment cost (MD: -1355.46, -2029.75 to -681.17) were significantly lower with EUS-BD.

EUS-BD may be preferred over PTBD in patients with biliary obstruction after failed ERCP where appropriate expertise is available. Further trials are required to validate the findings of the study.

Neoplasms of the biliopancreatic confluence may present with obstruction of the bile tract, leading to jaundice, pruritus and cholangitis. In these cases drainage of the bile tract is imperative. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with placement of a choledochal prosthesis is an effective treatment in about 90% of cases, even in experienced hands. In cases of ERCP failure, therapeutic options traditionally include surgical bypass by hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) or percutaneous transparietohepatic drainage (DPTH). In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage techniques have gained space because they are less invasive, effective and have an acceptable incidence of complications. Endoscopic echo-guided drainage of the bile duct can be performed through the stomach (hepatogastrostomy), duodenum (choledochoduodenostomy) or by the anterograde drainage technique. Some services consider ultrasound-guided drainage of the bile duct the procedure of choice in the event of ERCP failure. The objective of this review is to present the main types of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage and compare them with other techniques.

A biliary stricture is an abnormal narrowing in the ductal drainage system of the liver that can result in clinically and physiologically relevant obstruction to the flow of bile. The most common and ominous etiology is malignancy, underscoring the importance of a high index of suspicion in the evaluation of this condition. The goals of care in patients with a biliary stricture are confirming or excluding malignancy (diagnosis) and reestablishing flow of bile to the duodenum (drainage); the approach to diagnosis and drainage varies according to anatomic location (extrahepatic vs perihilar). For extrahepatic strictures, endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition is highly accurate and has become the diagnostic mainstay. In contrast, the diagnosis of perihilar strictures remains a challenge. Similarly, the drainage of extrahepatic strictures tends to be more straightforward and safer and less controversial than that of perihilar strictures. Recent evidence has provided some clarity in multiple important areas pertaining to biliary strictures, whereas several remaining controversies require additional research. The goal of this guideline is to provide practicing clinicians with the most evidence-based guidance on the approach to patients with extrahepatic and perihilar strictures, focusing on diagnosis and drainage.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an alternative to interventional radiology-guided rendezvous ERCP in patients who failed biliary cannulation with conventional ERCP. However, there is significant variation in reported rates of success and adverse events associated with EUS-RV-assisted ERCP. We performed a systematic review and a proportion meta-analysis to reliably assess the effectiveness and safety of the EUS-RV-assisted ERCP.

We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings (from inception through August 2020) to identify studies reporting EUS-RV-assisted ERCP in patients who failed biliary cannulation with conventional ERCP techniques. Using the random-effects model described by DerSimonian and Laird, we calculated the pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events of EUS-RV-assisted ERCP.

Twelve studies reporting a total of 342 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled rate of technical success (12 studies reporting a total of 342 patients) was 86.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 78.4-91.3]. The pooled rate of clinical success (4 studies reporting a total of 94 patients) was 80.8% (95% CI: 64.1-90.8). The pooled rate of overall adverse events (12 studies; 42 events in 342 patients) was 14% (95% CI: 10.5-18.4). Low to moderate heterogeneity was noted in the analyses.

EUS-RV-assisted ERCP appears to be effective and safe in patients who failed biliary cannulation with conventional ERCP. Given the risk of adverse events, it should be performed in centers with expertise in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound.

Therapeutic EUS has witnessed exponential growth in the last decade, but it has been considered investigational until recently. An increasing body of good-quality evidence is now demonstrating clear advantages over established alternatives, adding therapeutic EUS to management algorithms of complex hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) and gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. In this review, the available evidence and clinical role of therapeutic EUS in established and evolving applications will be discussed. A Graphical Summary for each scenario will provide (1) technical steps, (2) anatomical sketch, (3) best-supporting evidence, and (4) role in changing current and future GI practice. Therapeutic EUS has accepted well-established applications such as drainage of symptomatic peripancreatic fluid collections, biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and treatment of acute cholecystitis in unfit-for-surgery patients. In addition, good-quality evidence on several emerging indications (e.g., treatment of gastric outlet obstruction, local ablation of pancreatic solid lesions, etc.) is promising. Specific emphasis will be given to how these technical innovations have changed management paradigms and algorithms and expanded the possibilities of gastroenterologists to provide therapeutic solutions to old and emerging clinical needs. Therapeutic EUS is cementing its role in everyday practice, radically changing the treatment of different HPB diseases and other conditions (e.g., GI obstruction). The development of dedicated accessories and increased training opportunities will expand the ability of gastroenterologists to deliver highly effective yet minimally invasive therapies, potentially translating into a better quality of life, especially for oncological and fragile patients.

ERCP is the first line of treatment for malignant biliary obstruction and EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is usually used for patients who have failed ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has been suggested as a rescue treatment for patients who fail EUS-BD and ERCP. In this meta-analysis, we have evaluated the efficacy and safety of EUS-GBD as a rescue treatment of malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP and EUS-BD. We reviewed several databases from inception to August 27, 2021, to identify studies that evaluated the efficacy and/or safety of EUS-GBD as a rescue treatment in the management of malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP and EUS-BD. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success, adverse events, technical success, stent dysfunction requiring intervention, and difference in mean pre- and postprocedure bilirubin. We calculated pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical variables and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous variables. We analyzed data using a random-effects model. We included five studies with 104 patients. Pooled rates (95% CI) of clinical success and adverse events were 85% (76%, 91%) and 13% (7%, 21%). Pooled rate (95% CI) for stent dysfunction requiring intervention was 9% (4%, 21%). The postprocedure mean bilirubin was significantly lower compared to preprocedure bilirubin, SMD (95% CI): -1.12 (-1.62--0.61). EUS-GBD is a safe and effective option to achieve biliary drainage after unsuccessful ERCP and EUS-BD in patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

The enteric nervous system (ENS) is an extensive network of neurons and glia within the wall of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that regulates many essential GI functions. Consequently, disorders of the ENS due to developmental defects, inflammation, infection, or age-associated neurodegeneration lead to serious neurointestinal diseases. Despite the prevalence and severity of these diseases, effective treatments are lacking as they fail to directly address the underlying pathology. Neuronal stem cell therapy represents a promising approach to treating diseases of the ENS by replacing the absent or injured neurons, and an autologous source of stem cells would be optimal by obviating the need for immunosuppression. We utilized the swine model to address key questions concerning cell isolation, delivery, engraftment, and fate in a large animal relevant to human therapy. We successfully isolated neural stem cells from a segment of small intestine resected from 1-month-old swine. Enteric neuronal stem cells (ENSCs) were expanded as neurospheres that grew optimally in low-oxygen (5%) culture conditions. Enteric neuronal stem cells were labeled by lentiviral green fluorescent protein (GFP) transduction, then transplanted into the same swine from which they had been harvested. Endoscopic ultrasound was then utilized to deliver the ENSCs (10,000-30,000 neurospheres per animal) into the rectal wall. At 10 and 28 days following injection, autologously derived ENSCs were found to have engrafted within rectal wall, with neuroglial differentiation and no evidence of ectopic spreading. These findings strongly support the feasibility of autologous cell isolation and delivery using a clinically useful and minimally invasive technique, bringing us closer to first-in-human ENSC therapy for neurointestinal diseases.

Video 1Narrated case of an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy facilitated by opacification and distention of the left intrahepatic ducts using an existing percutaneous drain tract.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was associated with better clinical success and a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) than fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in recent single center studies with mainly retrospective design and small case numbers (< 50). The aim of this prospective European multicenter study is to compare both drainage procedures using ultrasound-guidance and primary metal stent implantation in patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction (PUMa Trial).

The study is designed as a non-randomized, controlled, parallel group, non-inferiority trial. Each of the 16 study centers performs the procedure with the best local expertise (PTBD or EUS-BD). In PTBD, bile duct access is performed by ultrasound guidance. EUS-BD is performed as an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AGS). Insertion of a metal stent is intended in both procedures in the first session. Primary end point is technical success. Secondary end points are clinical success, duration pf procedure, AEs graded by severity, length of hospital stay, re-intervention rate and survival within 6 months. The target case number is 212 patients (12 calculated dropouts included).

This study might help to clarify whether PTBD is non-inferior to EUS-BD concerning technical success, and whether one of both interventions is superior in terms of efficacy and safety in one or more secondary endpoints. Randomization is not provided as both procedures are rarely used after failed endoscopic biliary drainage and study centers usually prefer one of both procedures that they can perform best.

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03546049 (22.05.2018).

Over the last two decades, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with biliary obstruction and failed ERCP. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) as the gold standard is associated with relevant morbidity and need for re-intervention. The aim of our work was to evaluate in a phase II study the safety and efficacy profile of EUS-HGS. A PTBD arm was considered a control group.

We conducted a prospective, randomized, noncomparative phase II study in three French tertiary centers involving patients with benign or malignant obstructive jaundice after failure of ERCP. Patients were randomized to either PTBD or EUS-HGS.

Fifty-six patients (mean age 64 years) have been included between 2011 and 2015. Twenty-one underwent PTBD and thirty-five were drained using EUS-HGS. An interim analysis after the inclusion of 41 patients revealed an unexpected high 30-day morbidity rate for PTBD (13 out of 21 patients), justifying to stop randomization and inclusion in this control arm in 2013. The primary objective was reached with 10 out of the 35 EUS-HGS patients (28.6%) having observed complications (90%-level bilateral exact binomial confidence interval [CI] [16.4%-43.6%], left-sided exact binomial test to the objectified 50% unacceptable rate P = 0.0083). Both methods achieved comparable technical success rate (TSR) and clinical success rate (CSR) (TSR: PTBD 100% vs. EUS-HGS 94.3%, P = 0.28; CSR: PTBD 66.7% vs. EUS-HGS 80%, P = 0.35). Long-term follow-up showed EUS-HGS patients being at lower risk for re-intervention (relative risk = 0.47, 95% CI [0.27-0.83]).

In cases of ERCP failure, EUS-HGS is a valuable alternative for biliary drainage with a high TSR and CSR. PTBD is associated with an unacceptable 30-day morbidity rate, whereas EUS-HGS seems to have a decent safety profile, suggesting that it may be the treatment of choice in appropriately selected patients.

To summarize the current status and future perspectives of the endoscopic management of biliary strictures.

In addition to conventional diagnostic modalities, such as cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), per-oral cholangioscopy is helpful for indeterminate biliary strictures. It allows direct visualization of the biliary tract and targeted biopsy. For distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard of care. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an emerging alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in cases with failed ERCP. EUS-BD is also an effective salvage option for perihilar MBO, which can not be managed via ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Preoperative drainage is necessary for most jaundiced patients as neoadjuvant chemotherapy is widely administered for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and a SEMS is preferred in this setting, too. For benign biliary strictures, a covered SEMS can improve stricture resolution and reduce the number of endoscopic sessions as compared to plastic stents.

ERCP and EUS play a central role in the diagnosis and drainage for both malignant and benign biliary strictures.

Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography is a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure that involves inserting a needle into the biliary tree, followed by the immediate insertion of a catheter. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a novel technique that allows BD by echoendoscopy and fluoroscopy using a stent from the biliary tree to the gastrointestinal tract.

To compare the technical aspects and outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) and EUS-BD.

Different databases, including PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses to obtain studies comparing PTBD and EUS-BD.

Among the six studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, PTBD patients underwent significantly more reinterventions (4.9 vs 1.3), experienced more postprocedural pain (4.1 vs 1.9), and experienced more late adverse events (53.8% vs 6.6%) than EUS-BD patients. There was a significant reduction in the total bilirubin levels in both the groups (16.4-3.3 μmol/L and 17.2-3.8 μmol/L for EUS-BD and PTBD, respectively; P = 0.002) at the 7-d follow-up. There were no significant differences observed in the complication rates between PTBD and EUS-BD (3.3 vs 3.8). PTBD was associated with a higher adverse event rate than EUS-BD in all the procedures, including reinterventions (80.4% vs 15.7%, respectively) and a higher index procedure (39.2% vs 18.2%, respectively).

The findings of this systematic review revealed that EUS-BD is linked with a higher rate of effective BD and a more manageable procedure-related adverse event profile than PTBD. These findings highlight the evidence for successful EUS-BD implementation.

There is scarce evidence on the comparison between different methods for the drainage of distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of these techniques. We searched main databases through September 2021 and identified five randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was clinical success. The secondary outcomes were technical success, overall and serious adverse event rate. Percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage was found to be inferior to other interventions (PTBD: RR 1.01, 0.88-1.17 with EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD); RR 1.03, 0.86-1.22 with EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG); RR 1.42, 0.90-2.24 with surgical hepaticojejunostomy). The comparison between EUS-HG and EUS-CD was not significant (RR 1.01, 0.87-1.17). Surgery was not superior to other interventions (RR 1.40, 0.91-2.13 with EUS-CD and RR 1.38, 0.88-2.16 with EUS-HG). No difference in any of the comparisons concerning adverse event rate was detected, although PTBD showed a slightly poorer performance on ranking analysis (SUCRA score 0.13). In conclusion, all interventions seem to be effective for the drainage of DMBO, although PTBD showed a trend towards higher rates of adverse events.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary interventions have evolved to become an integral part of advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy units. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an accepted alternative for patients with failed ERCP or altered surgical anatomy. The potential advantages of EUS-guided interventions include choice of biliary access from stomach or duodenum, choice of stent exit in stomach and duodenum, and possibility of avoiding traversing through the obstruction. A variety of procedures have been described depending on the level of obstruction. Maximum evidence is available for distal malignant obstruction, and more studies are needed for hilar obstruction and benign indications.