Scholarlink

Background <p>In patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an important rescue option. This study compared the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS alone versus EUS-HGS with antegrade stenting (EUS-HGAS).</p> Methods <p>PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS in MBO. Primary outcomes included reintervention rates, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO). Secondary outcomes were technical success, clinical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. Individual patient data for TRBO were reconstructed from Kaplan Meier curves and analyzed using restricted mean survival time.</p> Results <p>Five observational studies including 451 patients were analyzed (250 EUS-HGS, 201 EUS-HGAS). Reintervention rates were significantly higher in the EUS-HGS group compared with the EUS-HGAS group (RR = 3.00; 95% CI: 1.69–5.34; P = 0.0002). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of technical success, clinical success, procedure duration, overall adverse events, cholangitis, or bleeding. TRBO was significantly longer with EUS-HGAS (mean 651 vs. 227 days; HR = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.03,0.83; P = 0.03), indicating improved stent patency. EUS-HGS was associated with a lower risk of pancreatitis (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03–0.60; P=0.008) but a higher risk of bile leakage (RR 5.58; 95% CI 1.03–30.09; P=0.05).</p> Conclusion <p>This meta-analysis suggests that EUS-HGAS may provide longer time to recurrent biliary obstruction and lower reintervention rates compared with EUS-HGS, while maintaining similar technical and clinical success and procedure time. Overall adverse events were comparable, although bile leakage was more frequent with EUS-HGS and acute pancreatitis with EUS-HGAS. These findings may indicate a potential advantage of EUS-HGAS in terms of stent durability, warranting further studies for confirmation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stent placement in patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月11日

查看全文
  • Mahmoud Shaaban Abdelgalil,
  • Ahmad Abdelrazek,
  • Mahmoud Samir Mohamed,
  • Amro Hassan,
  • Manar Alaa Mabrouk,
  • Mohamed Nasser,
  • Eyad Khalil Alhmeid,
  • Abdullah Nizar,
  • Abid Wazir,
  • Noha Ali,
  • Adam Hraybi,
  • Ryad iqbal,
  • Sadia Paracha,
  • Shray Amin

摘要

Background

In patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails, endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an important rescue option. This study compared the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS alone versus EUS-HGS with antegrade stenting (EUS-HGAS).

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS in MBO. Primary outcomes included reintervention rates, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO). Secondary outcomes were technical success, clinical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. Individual patient data for TRBO were reconstructed from Kaplan Meier curves and analyzed using restricted mean survival time.

Results

Five observational studies including 451 patients were analyzed (250 EUS-HGS, 201 EUS-HGAS). Reintervention rates were significantly higher in the EUS-HGS group compared with the EUS-HGAS group (RR = 3.00; 95% CI: 1.69–5.34; P = 0.0002). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of technical success, clinical success, procedure duration, overall adverse events, cholangitis, or bleeding. TRBO was significantly longer with EUS-HGAS (mean 651 vs. 227 days; HR = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.03,0.83; P = 0.03), indicating improved stent patency. EUS-HGS was associated with a lower risk of pancreatitis (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03–0.60; P=0.008) but a higher risk of bile leakage (RR 5.58; 95% CI 1.03–30.09; P=0.05).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that EUS-HGAS may provide longer time to recurrent biliary obstruction and lower reintervention rates compared with EUS-HGS, while maintaining similar technical and clinical success and procedure time. Overall adverse events were comparable, although bile leakage was more frequent with EUS-HGS and acute pancreatitis with EUS-HGAS. These findings may indicate a potential advantage of EUS-HGAS in terms of stent durability, warranting further studies for confirmation.