Aroon Siripun1, Pimsiri Sripongpun1, Bancha Ovartlarnporn1. 1. Aroon Siripun, Bancha Ovartlarnporn, NKC Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) in patients with surgically altered anatomies. METHODS: We performed a search of the MEDLINE database for studies published between 2001 to July 2014 reporting on EUS-BD in patients with surgically altered anatomy using the terms "EUS drainage" and "altered anatomy". All relevant articles were accessed in full text. A manual search of the reference lists of relevant retrieved articles was also performed. Only full-text English papers were included. Data regarding age, gender, diagnosis, method of EUS-BD and intervention, type of altered anatomy, technical success, clinical success, and complications were extracted and collected. Anatomic alterations were categorized as: group 1, Billroth I; group 2, Billroth II; group 4, Roux-en-Y with gastric bypass; and group 3, all other types. RESULTS: Twenty three articles identified in the literature search, three reports were from the same group with different numbers of cases. In total, 101 cases of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy were identified. Twenty-seven cases had no information and were excluded. Seventy four cases were included for analysis. Data of EUS-BD in patients categorized as group 1, 2 and 4 were limited with 2, 3 and 6 cases with EUS-BD done respectively. Thirty four cases with EUS-BD were reported in group 3. The pooled technical success, clinical success, and complication rates of all reports with available data were 89.18%, 91.07% and 17.5%, respectively. The results are similar to the reported outcomes of EUS-BD in general, however, with limited data of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy rendered it difficult to draw a firm conclusion. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD may be an option for patients with altered anatomy after a failed endoscopic-retrograde-cholangiography in centers with expertise in EUS-BD procedures in a research setting.
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) in patients with surgically altered anatomies. METHODS: We performed a search of the MEDLINE database for studies published between 2001 to July 2014 reporting on EUS-BD in patients with surgically altered anatomy using the terms "EUS drainage" and "altered anatomy". All relevant articles were accessed in full text. A manual search of the reference lists of relevant retrieved articles was also performed. Only full-text English papers were included. Data regarding age, gender, diagnosis, method of EUS-BD and intervention, type of altered anatomy, technical success, clinical success, and complications were extracted and collected. Anatomic alterations were categorized as: group 1, Billroth I; group 2, Billroth II; group 4, Roux-en-Y with gastric bypass; and group 3, all other types. RESULTS: Twenty three articles identified in the literature search, three reports were from the same group with different numbers of cases. In total, 101 cases of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy were identified. Twenty-seven cases had no information and were excluded. Seventy four cases were included for analysis. Data of EUS-BD in patients categorized as group 1, 2 and 4 were limited with 2, 3 and 6 cases with EUS-BD done respectively. Thirty four cases with EUS-BD were reported in group 3. The pooled technical success, clinical success, and complication rates of all reports with available data were 89.18%, 91.07% and 17.5%, respectively. The results are similar to the reported outcomes of EUS-BD in general, however, with limited data of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy rendered it difficult to draw a firm conclusion. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD may be an option for patients with altered anatomy after a failed endoscopic-retrograde-cholangiography in centers with expertise in EUS-BD procedures in a research setting.
Authors: Mitchal A Schreiner; Lily Chang; Michael Gluck; Shayan Irani; S Ian Gan; John J Brandabur; Richard Thirlby; Ravi Moonka; Richard A Kozarek; Andrew S Ross Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-01-31 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: K Hara; K Yamao; S Hijioka; N Mizuno; H Imaoka; M Tajika; S Kondo; T Tanaka; S Haba; O Takeshi; Y Nagashio; T Obayashi; A Shinagawa; V Bhatia; Y Shimizu; H Goto; Y Niwa Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2013-01-21 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Jacques Devière; D Nageshwar Reddy; Andreas Püspök; Thierry Ponchon; Marco J Bruno; Michael J Bourke; Horst Neuhaus; André Roy; Ferrán González-Huix Lladó; Alan N Barkun; Paul P Kortan; Claudio Navarrete; Joyce Peetermans; Daniel Blero; Sundeep Lakhtakia; Werner Dolak; Vincent Lepilliez; Jan W Poley; Andrea Tringali; Guido Costamagna Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Do Hyun Park; Ji Woong Jang; Sang Soo Lee; Dong-Wan Seo; Sung Koo Lee; Myung-Hwan Kim Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Michel Kahaleh; Everson L A Artifon; Manuel Perez-Miranda; Kapil Gupta; Takao Itoi; Kenneth F Binmoeller; Marc Giovannini Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Tae Hoon Lee; Jun Hyuck Choi; Sang Soo Lee; Hyun Deuk Cho; Dong Wan Seo; Sang-Heum Park; Sung Koo Lee; Myung-Hwan Kim; Do Hyun Park Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Hugo Gonçalo Guedes; Roberto Iglesias Lopes; Joel Fernandez de Oliveira; Everson Luiz de Almeida Artifon Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-10-25
Authors: Mouen A Khashab; Mohamad H El Zein; Kaveh Sharzehi; Fernando P Marson; Oleh Haluszka; Aaron J Small; Yousuke Nakai; Do Hyun Park; Rastislav Kunda; Anthony Y Teoh; Irene Peñas; Manuel Perez-Miranda; Vivek Kumbhari; Schalk Van der Merwe; Everson L Artifon; Andrew S Ross Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2016-08-30