Lower incidence of complications in endoscopic nasobiliary drainage for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

AIM: To identify the most effective endoscopic biliary drainage technique for patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: In total, 118 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma underwent endoscopic management [endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or endoscopic biliary stenting] as a temporary drainage in our institution between 2009 and 2014. We retrospectively evaluated all complications from initial endoscopic drainage to surgery or palliative treatment. The risk factors for biliary reintervention, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis, and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) were also analyzed using patient- and procedure-related characteristics. The risk factors for bilateral drainage were examined in a subgroup analysis of patients who underwent initial unilateral drainage. RESULTS: In total, 137 complications were observed in 92 (78%) patients. Biliary reintervention was required in 83 (70%) patients. ENBD was significantly associated with a low risk of biliary reintervention [odds ratio (OR) = 0.26, 95%CI: 0.08-0.76, P = 0.012]. Post-ERCP pancreatitis was observed in 19 (16%) patients. An absence of endoscopic sphincterotomy was significantly associated with post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR = 3.46, 95%CI: 1.19-10.87, P = 0.023). PTBD was required in 16 (14%) patients, and Bismuth type III or IV cholangiocarcinoma was a significant risk factor (OR = 7.88, 95%CI: 1.33-155.0, P = 0.010). Of 102 patients with initial unilateral drainage, 49 (48%) required bilateral drainage. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (OR = 3.24, 95%CI: 1.27-8.78, P = 0.004) and Bismuth II, III, or IV cholangiocarcinoma (OR = 34.69, 95%CI: 4.88-736.7, P < 0.001) were significant risk factors for bilateral drainage. CONCLUSION: The endoscopic management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma is challenging. ENBD should be selected as a temporary drainage method because of its low risk of complications.     

Efficacy of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Background/Purpose

Although percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage has previously been recommended as a primary preoperative step, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) is prevalent as an alternative procedure. Few reports assess the efficacy and safety of ENBD in a substantial patient cohort.

Methods

Of 116 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent surgery, 62 (43 men and 19 women, median age 69 years) underwent preoperative ENBD. After classification of lesions according to Bismuth–Corlette (B–C) criteria, we evaluated efficacy and safety with respect to B–C type.

Results

Patients were classified as B–C types I (n = 5), II (n = 21), IIIa (n = 23), IIIb (n = 5), and IV (n = 8). Preoperative single ENBD was effective in 46/62 patients (74%) including 5/5 (100%) B–C type I, 20/21 (94%) type II, 16/23 (70%) type IIIa, 4/5 (80%) type IIIb, and 1/8 (13%) type IV. Sixteen cases (26%) required additional drainages with ENBD or endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) in 8/16 (50%), and with PTBD in 8/16 (50%). Mild acute pancreatitis (n = 1, 2%), segmental cholangitis (n = 2, 3%), and acute cholangitis with catheter obstruction (n = 7, 11%) occurred with ENBD.

Conclusions

Preoperative single ENBD in the future remnant lobe is effective treatment for B–C type I–III hilar cholangiocarcimona. Preoperative ENBD was rarely complicated with segmental cholangitis.     

Result of endoscopic biliary drainage in hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Patients with hilar obstruction usually require bilateral biliary drainage. The prognosis of patients who fail bilateral biliary drainage after contrast injection into both intrahepatic ducts is poor due to a high infection rate in the undrained segments. The incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cholangitis in those with successful bilateral biliary drainage was less, but still significant. Incomplete subsegmental intrahepatic duct drainage is suggested to be responsible for post-biliary drainage cholangitis in cases of advanced hilar tumors. This study was undertaken to determine the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cholangitis, jaundice resolution, and stent clogging in different types of malignant biliary obstruction after biliary drainage. From our endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography database, there were 63 patients who underwent endoscopic biliary drainage between September 2000 and November 2001, for malignant biliary obstruction. Sixty-one endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies had biliary drainage performed (2 patients who failed biliary drainage were excluded). We divided our patients into 3 groups: Group 1 = Bismuth I, Group 2 = Bismuth II, and Group 3 = Bismuth III and IV. All but 2 Group 1 patients had successful biliary endoprosthesis (plastic [n = 13], metallic [n = 12], failed [n = 2]) placement into an extrahepatic duct. All patients from Group 2 (n = 10) and 20 patients from Group 3 (n = 26) had successful bilateral biliary drainage. Unilateral biliary drainage was performed in 6 patients from Group 3, each with a plastic endoprosthesis. The incidence of post-biliary drainage cholangitis (new onset of fever >38.5 degrees C with leukocytosis), jaundice resolution (normal bilirubin level), and the duration of endoprosthesis patency were compared among the 3 groups. The incidences of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cholangitis, jaundice resolution, and the duration of endoprosthesis patency were: Group 1 (4%, 96%, and 87.2 days, respectively), Group 2 (10%, 100%, and 69.1 days, respectively) and Group 3 (57.7%, 73.1%, and 41.3 days, respectively). Of those patients who did not undergo surgery, patients from Group 3 required endoprosthesis exchange sooner than others. The outcome of biliary drainage in patients with advanced hilar tumors (Bismuth III or IV) was poorer than hilar tumor at earlier stages (Bismuth I or II).     

One‐step,simultaneous triple endoscopic nasobiliary drainage for hilar biliary stricture

The management of advanced hilar malignant and benign biliary strictures remains difficult regardless of the advances in endoscopic biliary stenting. Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) is suitable for the management, but the number of ENBD tubes is limited by the diameter of the accessory channel of the duodenoscope. In the present study,we demonstrated the feasibility and safety of one‐step simultaneous triple ENBD insertion to manage hilar biliary strictures. A therapeutic duodenoscope with a 4.2‐mm accessory channel was advanced into the duodenum. Three guidewires were advanced into three different intrahepatic bile ducts, none of which communicated with the others.Then, the three 5‐Fr ENBD tubes were simultaneously inserted alongguidewire, one at a time. Three patients with hilar biliary stricture who suffered from acute cholangitis due to stent occlusion were successfully managed by one‐step, simultaneous triple ENBD insertion.There were no procedure‐related complications. One‐step simultaneous triple ENBD is the most suitable drainage method for patients with advanced hilar biliary obstruction, especially in the setting of acute cholangitis due to occlusion of the previously placed stent.     

肝门部胆管癌Bismuth分型与经内镜胆道塑料支架引流术后并发症及退黄效果之间的关系

目的:评估肝门部胆管癌Bismuth分型与经内镜胆道塑料支架引流术(ERBD)术后并发症及退黄效果之间的关系.方法:收集已确诊为肝门部胆管癌、且不能或不愿接受外科治疗的,在南昌大学第二附属医院消化科行ERBD的患者.分析各型肝门部胆管癌之间在行ERBD术后胆管炎、胰腺炎、出血发生率以及退黄效果的差异.结果:Bismut...     

肝门胆管癌的术前减黄问题

临床上习惯将恶性肿瘤直接侵及或压迫肝外胆道致胆汁排出受阻而引起的黄疸称为恶性梗阻性黄疸,根据阻塞部位一般可分为高位胆道梗阻和低位胆道梗阻.高位胆道梗阻多指高位胆管癌,即肝门胆管癌,部分胆囊癌向肝管方向浸润发展,也可致胆道梗阻;后者系壶腹周围恶性肿瘤所致的梗阻,通常包括胰头癌、胆总管下端癌及壶腹癌等.低位胆道肿瘤的经典手术方式为胰十二指肠切除术,外科处理原则相对比较统一,而肝门胆管癌因其解剖部位特殊、切除范围不同、机体受累状态和相应的术前准备不同,以及术者技术经验等差异,在临床实际处理上存在着颇多问题和争议.本文结合国内外文献和我们的临床经验,拟就肝门胆管癌的术前相关准备尤其减黄问题作一讨论.     

Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage is the most suitable preoperative biliary drainage method in the management of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Background

Controversy exists over the preferred technique of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCA). The goal of this retrospective study was to identify the preferred technique of PBD for HCA.

Methods

A total of 128 consecutive patients with HCA diagnosed between September 1999 and December 2009 who underwent PBD were included in this study. The study compared outcomes of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD), endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS), and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with HCA.

Results

There were no significant differences in preoperative laboratory data, rates of major hepatectomy, or decompression periods among the 3 groups. Complications were significantly more frequent in the EBS group compared with either the ENBD or PTBD group (p?<?0.05). Drainage tube occlusion with cholangitis was significantly more common in the EBS group compared with either the ENBD or PTBD group (p?<?0.0001). Patients in the PTBD group experienced serious complications including vascular injury (8%) and cancer dissemination (4%). Patients in the ENBD and EBS groups had mild post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (5%). Conversion procedures were significantly more common in the EBS group compared with the ENBD and PTBD groups (p?<?0.05). There was no significant difference in postsurgical morbidity or mortality among the 3 groups.

Conclusions

Drainage tube occlusion with cholangitis was a frequent complication associated with EBS. PTBD was associated with serious complications such as vascular injury and cancer dissemination. ENBD was found to be the most suitable method for initial PBD management in patients with HCA.     

Preoperative biliary drainage for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Hilar cholangiocarcinomas grow slowly, and metastases occur late in the natural history. Surgical cure and long-term survival have been demonstrated, when resection margins are clear. Preoperative biliary drainage has been proposed as a way to improve liver function before surgery, and to reduce post-surgical complications. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) with multiple drains was previously the preferred method for the preoperative relief of obstructive jaundice. However, the introduction of percutaneous transhepatic portal vein embolization (PTPE) and wider resection has changed preoperative drainage strategies. Drainage is currently performed only for liver lobes that will remain after resection, and for areas of segmental cholangitis. Endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) is less invasive than PTBD. Among EBD techniques, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) is preferable to endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS), because secondary cholangitis (due to the retrograde flow of duodenal fluid into the biliary tree) does not occur. ENBD needs to be converted to PTBD in patients with segmental cholangitis, those with a prolonged need for drainage, or when the extent of longitudinal tumor extension is not sufficiently well characterized.     

Oncological benefit of preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Due to advances in endoscopic equipment and techniques, preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) has been developed to serve as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). This study sought to clarify the benefit of EBD in comparison to PTBD in patients who underwent radical resections of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. One hundred and forty‐one patients underwent radical surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma between 2000 and 2008 were retrospectively divided into two groups based on the type of preoperative biliary drainage, PTBD (n = 67) or EBD (n = 74). We investigated if the different biliary drainage methods affected postoperative survival and mode of recurrence after median observation period of 82 months. The survival rate for patients who underwent EBD was significantly higher than those who had PTBD (P = 0.004). Multivariate analysis revealed that PTBD was one of the independent factors predictive of poor survival (hazard ratio: 2.075, P = 0.003). Patients with PTBD more frequently developed peritoneal seeding in comparison to those who underwent EBD (P = 0.0003). PTBD was the only independent factor predictive of peritoneal seeding. In conclusion, EBD might confer an improved prognosis over PTBD due to prevention of peritoneal seeding, and is recommended as the initial procedure for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.     

肝门部胆管恶性梗阻双支架引流22例临床应用

目的探讨肝门部胆管恶性梗阻双侧支架引流的疗效、安全性。方法回顾性分析首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院、北京市消化疾病中心2002年10月至2003年12月肝门部胆管恶性梗阻患者22例双侧支架引流的有效率、并发症发生率、支架畅通时间及生存时间。结果22例肝门部胆管恶性梗阻患者均一次置入双侧支架成功,引流有效率81.8%(18/22),并发症发生率22.7%,其中胆管炎4例、胰腺炎1例,中位支架畅通时间113d,中位生存时间138d。结论对于BismuthⅡ、Ⅲ型肝门部恶性梗阻,双侧支架引流是安全有效的;对于BismuthⅣ型,双侧支架引流需慎重。     

鼻胆管引流的应用及疗效分析

采用国产鼻胆管行内镜鼻胆管引流术（ＥＮＢＤ）７３例次，其中恶性胆道病变５０例，良性病变２３例，合并化脓性胆管炎１４例。置管成功率９３．２％，术后平均胆汁引流量３６１．７ｍｌ／ｄ，引流有效率７５．８％，显效率５８．１％。ＥＮＢＤ有较广的适应证，是一种简便有效的胆道减压引流方法，影响ＥＮＢＤ疗效的因素有病变性质、梗阻部位、引流部位及术后护理。     

The benefits of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage without sphincterotomy for acute cholangitis

Objective: Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage for acute cholangitis is performed with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy. However, sphincterotomy carries a small but important risk of complications. We evaluated the benefits of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage without sphincterotomy for acute cholangitis.
Methods: A total of 166 patients underwent endoscopic nasobiliary drainage with sphincterotomy (73 patients, sphincterotomy group) or without (93 patients, nonsphincterotomy group). The indications were acute cholangitis due to choledocholithiasis (120 patients) or benign (10 patients) or malignant (36 patients) biliary stricture. Patient backgrounds were similar in the two groups. The outcomes of nasobiliary drainage were compared between the groups.
Results: Nasobiliary drainage was successful in 69 patients (95%) in the sphincterotomy group and in 89 (96%) in the nonsphincterotomy group. Efficient drainage was achieved in 67 patients (92%) in the sphincterotomy group and in 87 (94%) in the nonsphincterotomy group. Procedure-related complications developed in eight sphincterotomy-group patients (hemorrhage in three, acute cholecystitis in three, acute pancreatitis in one, catheter withdrawal in one) and in two nonsphincterotomy patients (pancreatitis in one, catheter withdrawal in one) (11% vs 2%;   p < 0.05  ). There were no deaths.
Conclusions: Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage without endoscopic sphincterotomy is a simple, safe, and effective treatment for acute cholangitis. This procedure is especially useful for critically ill patients and those with coagulopathy.     

outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM To compare the outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage(ENBD) and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage(ERBD) in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD). METHODS Data from 153 consecutive patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage prior to PD between January 2009 and July 2016 were analyzed. we compared the clinical data, procedure-related complications of endoscopic biliary drainage(EBD) and postoperative complications of PD between the ENBD and ERBD groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses with odds ratios(ORs) and 95% confidence intervals(95%CIs) were used to identify the risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.RESULTS One hundred and two(66.7%) patients underwent ENBD, and 51(33.3%) patients underwent ERBD. Endoscopic sphincterotomy was less frequently performed in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group(P = 0.039); the EBD duration in the ENBD group was shorter than that in the ERBD group(P = 0.036). After EBD, the levels of total bilirubin(TB) and alanine aminotransferase(ALT) were obviously decreased in both groups, and the decreases of TB and ALT in the ERBD group were greater than those in the ENBD group(P = 0.004 and P = 0.000, respectively). However,the rate of EBD procedure-related cholangitis was significantly higher in the ERBD group than in the ENBD group(P = 0.007). The postoperative complications of PD as graded by the Clavien-Dindo classification system were not significantly different between the two groups(P = 0.864). However, the incidence of deep abdominal infection after PD was significantly lower in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group(P = 0.019). Male gender(OR = 3.92; 95%CI: 1.63-9.47; P = 0.002), soft pancreas texture(OR = 3.60; 95%CI: 1.37-9.49; P = 0.009), length of biliary stricture(≥ 1.5 cm)(OR = 5.20; 95%CI: 2.23-12.16; P = 0.000) and ERBD method(OR = 4.08; 95%CI: 1.69-9.87; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.CONCLUSION ENBD is an optimal method for patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to PD. ERBD is superior to ENBD in terms of patient tolerance and the effect of biliary drainage but is associated with an increased risk of EBD procedure-related cholangitis and deep abdominal infection after PD.     

经内镜鼻胆管引流术与经内镜胆道支架置入术在低位恶性梗阻性黄疸术前胆道引流效果比较的Meta分析

目的比较经内镜鼻胆管引流术(ENBD)和经内镜胆道支架置入术(EBS)在低位恶性梗阻性黄疸术前胆道引流中的有效性及安全性。方法在中英文数据库中检索从建库至2020年8月发表的有关ENBD与EBS在低位恶性梗阻性黄疸术前胆道引流疗效对照研究的所有中英文文献,对纳入的研究进行质量评价和数据提取后,采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析,比较ENBD与EBS术前胆管炎发生率、术前胰腺炎发生率、支架障碍率、术前术后总并发症发生率、术后胰漏率的差异。结果最终纳入6项研究,包括1182例患者。Meta分析结果显示,在术前胰腺炎发生率、支架障碍率、术前术后总并发症发生率方面,ENBD组与EBS组比较差异均无统计学意义(OR分别为0.66、1.14、0.69,95%CI分别为0.44~0.99、0.56~2.31、0.41~1.15,P值分别为0.05、0.72、0.15)。但是,ENBD组相较于EBS降低了术前胆管炎发生率和术后胰漏率,差异均有统计学意义(OR分别为0.34、0.53,95%CI分别为0.23~0.50、0.32~0.88,P值分别为<0.00001、0.01)。结论对于诊断明确的低位恶性胆道梗阻患者,术前胆道引流使用ENBD优于使用EBS。未来需要更多的多中心大样本随机对照试验来验证这一结论。     

经鼻胆管引流术后胆汁培养及药敏结果分析

目的对经鼻胆管引流术（ENBD）引流的胆汁培养阳性的细菌种类、比例及其药物敏感性进行分析,旨在指导胆道感染时正确选用抗生素。方法收集2013年1月至2013年4月在消化内科行经内镜逆行胰胆管造影（ERCP）后行ENBD的患者,对胆汁培养和药敏试验的结果作回顾性分析。结果208例患者中,180例为良性疾病,28例为恶性疾病,共112例（53.8％）胆汁培养阳性。最常见的细菌为大肠埃希菌（46.8％）、屎肠球菌（15.9％）、肺炎克雷伯杆菌（10.3％）和奇异变形杆菌（4.8oA）等。14例为多种微生物生长。无论患者疾病的良恶性、是否术前诊断急性胆管炎、是否术前已使用抗生素,其胆汁培养阳性率差异均无统计学意义（58.9％比71.4％,51.7％比67.9％,54.5％比52.9％,P〉0.05）。有无胆道手术史患者,其胆汁培养阳性率差异有统计学意义（87.09／6比49.7％,P〈0.01）。革兰阴性菌对泰能等敏感,革兰阳性菌对万古霉素等敏感。结论胆道手术史（包括ERCP及胆肠吻合）是胆道细菌生长的危险因素之一。胆道微生物的种类及药物敏感性,为临床经验性抗感染药物的选择提供了有力的依据。     

Treatment of severe Clonorchiasis sinensis by endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and oral praziquantel

AIM: To assess the therapeutic value of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) and oral praziquantel for severe Clonorchiasis sinensis infection.METHODS: Of the 84 Clonorchiasis sinensis-infected patients enrolled, 58 were treated with ENBD (as observing group, ENBD group), 26 received operations (control group,operation group). Both of the two groups were comparable in terms of patient‘s age, body mass index. Before and one week after treatment, the average diameters of common bile ducts were measured by ultrasound, andserum bilirubin, ALP,γ-GT and ALT were detected by biochemical methods, After ENBD or operation, the patients took praziquantel for two days. RESULTS: Compared with the patients in operation group,ENBD patients in ENBD group had higher recovery rates of abdominal pain and fever as well as jaundice, quicker remission,smaller trauma, fewer complications and lower cost.CONCLUSION: ENBD combined with oral praziquantel is an effective and safe method for the treatment of severe Clonorchiasis sinensis.     

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and drainage in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

The use of ultrasound-guided PTCD in 49 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma was evaluated. In 11 patients PTCD was performed as a preoperative measure either to outline tumor extension or to treat cholangitis. Postoperatively, the catheters were used to stent bilioenteric anastomoses and served to guide iridium wires for radiotherapy in nine patients with nonresectable tumor or tumor residue after resection. In 20 inoperable patients with tumor diameter smaller than 3 cm and in whom at least one catheter could be manipulated through the tumor, PTCD was combined with internal and external radiotherapy. The remaining 18 patients were palliated with PTCD only. In 29 patients (59%) complete drainage of the biliary system was achieved. Twenty-seven of these had complete internal drainage using endoprostheses. Two had a combination of an endoprosthesis and external catheter drainage. Of the 20 patients (41%) with incomplete drainage, 12 had endoprostheses, four had a catheter and an endoprosthesis, and in the remaining four external catheter drainage was the optimum result. PTCD was successful in treating eight of ten patients with cholangitis and 12 of 16 patients with pruritus. Procedure-related complication occurred in 11 patients (22%). With the exception of one, all complications could be classified as minor, requiring only conservative measures. A major complication was seen in a patient with ascitic fluid and severe cholangitis. PTCD caused a bacterial peritonitis, of which the patient died. The median survival of patients treated with PTCD alone only was 4 months. A significant increase in survival was noted in patients treated with PTCD and radiotherapy (median survival 8 months).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Current status of endoscopic biliary drainage for unresectable malignant hilar biliary strictures

The management of jaundice and cholangitis is important for improving the prognosis and quality of life of patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary strictures (UMHBS). In addition, effective chemotherapy, such as a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin, requires the successful control of jaundice and cholangitis. However, endoscopic drainage for UMHBS is technical demanding, and continuing controversies exist in the selection of the most appropriate devices and techniques for stent deployment. Although metallic stents (MS) are superior to the usual plastic stents in terms of patency, an extensive comparison between MS and “inside stents”, which are deployed above the sphincter of Oddi, is necessary. Which techniques are preferred remains as yet unresolved: for instance, whether to use a unilateral or bilateral drainage, or a stent-in-stent or side-by-side method for the deployment of bilateral MS, although a new cell design and thin delivery system for MS allowed us to accomplish successful deployments of bilateral MS. The development of techniques and devices for re-intervention after stent occlusion is also imperative. Further critical investigations of more effective devices and techniques, and increased randomized controlled trials are warranted to resolve these important issues.