Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary rendezvous after failed cannulation, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders: outcomes at a single tertiary-care centre

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.

Publication Details

Journal
Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona)
Published
2024-11-14
Primary Topic
Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary rendezvous after failed cannulation, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders: outcomes at a single tertiary-care centre

Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona)
Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
article

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary rendezvous after failed cannulation, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders: outcomes at a single tertiary-care centre

article en

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.

Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary rendezvous after failed cannulation, and comparison between benign vs malignant biliopancreatic disorders: outcomes at a single tertiary-care centre · Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS