Comparing outcomes of 2 nonanatomic EUS-guided BD routes after failed ERCP

Everson L.A. Artifon, MD, FASGE from the Department of Surgery at the University of Sao Paulo in Sao Paulo, Brazil discusses his Original Article “Hepaticogastrostomy or choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP: Is there any difference?”

The study demonstrated that both hepaticogastrostomy (HG) and choledochoduodenostomy (CDT) are feasible to create an EUS-guided fistula in those cases with failed ERCP and distal malignant cancer.

This is the first prospective study comparing both  techniques.

Regarding technical and clinical success, quality of life, adverse events, and survival, it was demonstrated that all domains had no statistical difference.

Further multicenter and larger studies are needed to validate this trend.

Figure 1 Figure 1. Overall flow diagram of patients allocation. RV,  rendezvous; HPG, hepaticogastrostomy; CD, choledochoduodenostomy; PTS, patients.

Find the article abstract online.

The information presented in Endoscopedia reflects the opinions of the authors and does not represent the position of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). ASGE expressly disclaims any warranties or guarantees, expressed or implied, and is not liable for damages of any kind in connection with the material, information, or procedures set forth.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s