A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy
Abstract Objectives In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS–HGS) has been performed as an important salvage option for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary drainage. However, technical issues, such as puncture site (bile duct of segment 3 [...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | DEN Open |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/deo2.201 |
| _version_ | 1797837222757531648 |
|---|---|
| author | Masanari Sekine Yusuke Hashimoto Taro Shibuki Kei Okumura Ikuhiro Kobori Aki Miyagaki Yoshihiro Sasaki Yuichi Takano Keita Matsumoto Hirosato Mashima |
| author_facet | Masanari Sekine Yusuke Hashimoto Taro Shibuki Kei Okumura Ikuhiro Kobori Aki Miyagaki Yoshihiro Sasaki Yuichi Takano Keita Matsumoto Hirosato Mashima |
| author_sort | Masanari Sekine |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Objectives In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS–HGS) has been performed as an important salvage option for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary drainage. However, technical issues, such as puncture site (bile duct of segment 3 [B3] or bile duct of segment 2 [B2]), dilation method, stent selection, and procedural safety, need to be resolved for the optimization of EUS–HGS. The present study was to compare the safety, difficulty, and technical and functional success between biliary access via B2 and B3 during EUS–HGS. Methods We conducted a retrospective investigation of 161 consecutive EUS–HGS cases across a total of 6 facilities, including those at our hospital. The patients were divided into two groups according to the successful drainage route: the puncture to B2 (P‐B2) or the puncture to B3 (P‐B3). We compared the technical and functional success rates, technical difficulty, and adverse events between the two groups. We also conducted a subgroup analysis to show the factors related to the procedure time. Results There were 92 cases in the P‐B2 group and 69 cases in the P‐B3 group. There were no significant differences in the technical success, functional success, or adverse events between the groups; however, the procedure time was significantly shorter in P‐B2 cases than in P‐B3 cases. The multivariate analysis showed that the puncture site was the only factor related to the procedure time. Conclusions Based on these findings, P‐B2 appears useful and safe. P‐B2 is as effective as P‐B3 and was able to be performed in a shorter period of time. The B2 approach can be considered a useful option for EUS–HGS. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:22:24Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4c3a3eeedbdf4a7fa6d64c284db17124 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2692-4609 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:22:24Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | DEN Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-4c3a3eeedbdf4a7fa6d64c284db171242023-04-29T05:12:58ZengWileyDEN Open2692-46092023-04-0131n/an/a10.1002/deo2.201A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomyMasanari Sekine0Yusuke Hashimoto1Taro Shibuki2Kei Okumura3Ikuhiro Kobori4Aki Miyagaki5Yoshihiro Sasaki6Yuichi Takano7Keita Matsumoto8Hirosato Mashima9Department of Gastroenterology Jichi Medical University, Saitama Medical Center Saitama JapanDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology National Cancer Center Hospital East Chiba JapanDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology National Cancer Center Hospital East Chiba JapanDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology National Cancer Center Hospital East Chiba JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology Dokkyo Medical University Saitama Medical Center Saitama JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology Toyooka Hospital Hyogo JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology National Organization Disaster Medical Center Tokyo JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fujigaoka Hospital Showa University Kanagawa JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology Jichi Medical University, Saitama Medical Center Saitama JapanDepartment of Gastroenterology Jichi Medical University, Saitama Medical Center Saitama JapanAbstract Objectives In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS–HGS) has been performed as an important salvage option for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary drainage. However, technical issues, such as puncture site (bile duct of segment 3 [B3] or bile duct of segment 2 [B2]), dilation method, stent selection, and procedural safety, need to be resolved for the optimization of EUS–HGS. The present study was to compare the safety, difficulty, and technical and functional success between biliary access via B2 and B3 during EUS–HGS. Methods We conducted a retrospective investigation of 161 consecutive EUS–HGS cases across a total of 6 facilities, including those at our hospital. The patients were divided into two groups according to the successful drainage route: the puncture to B2 (P‐B2) or the puncture to B3 (P‐B3). We compared the technical and functional success rates, technical difficulty, and adverse events between the two groups. We also conducted a subgroup analysis to show the factors related to the procedure time. Results There were 92 cases in the P‐B2 group and 69 cases in the P‐B3 group. There were no significant differences in the technical success, functional success, or adverse events between the groups; however, the procedure time was significantly shorter in P‐B2 cases than in P‐B3 cases. The multivariate analysis showed that the puncture site was the only factor related to the procedure time. Conclusions Based on these findings, P‐B2 appears useful and safe. P‐B2 is as effective as P‐B3 and was able to be performed in a shorter period of time. The B2 approach can be considered a useful option for EUS–HGS.https://doi.org/10.1002/deo2.201bile duct of segment 2bile duct of segment 3endoscopic ultrasonographyendoscopic ultrasound–guided biliary drainageEUS‐guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| spellingShingle | Masanari Sekine Yusuke Hashimoto Taro Shibuki Kei Okumura Ikuhiro Kobori Aki Miyagaki Yoshihiro Sasaki Yuichi Takano Keita Matsumoto Hirosato Mashima A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy DEN Open bile duct of segment 2 bile duct of segment 3 endoscopic ultrasonography endoscopic ultrasound–guided biliary drainage EUS‐guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title | A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title_full | A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title_fullStr | A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title_full_unstemmed | A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title_short | A retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to B2 and B3 in endoscopic ultrasound–guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| title_sort | retrospective multicenter study comparing the punctures to b2 and b3 in endoscopic ultrasound guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| topic | bile duct of segment 2 bile duct of segment 3 endoscopic ultrasonography endoscopic ultrasound–guided biliary drainage EUS‐guided hepaticogastrostomy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/deo2.201 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT masanarisekine aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yusukehashimoto aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT taroshibuki aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT keiokumura aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT ikuhirokobori aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT akimiyagaki aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yoshihirosasaki aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yuichitakano aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT keitamatsumoto aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT hirosatomashima aretrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT masanarisekine retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yusukehashimoto retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT taroshibuki retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT keiokumura retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT ikuhirokobori retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT akimiyagaki retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yoshihirosasaki retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT yuichitakano retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT keitamatsumoto retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy AT hirosatomashima retrospectivemulticenterstudycomparingthepuncturestob2andb3inendoscopicultrasoundguidedhepaticogastrostomy |