BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is sometimes complicated by obstructive jaundice. However, ERCP may be challenging in patients who have advanced gastric cancer, or recurrent gastric cancer after surgical resection that is complicated by obstructive jaundice. In such cases, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is considered. Recently, EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been developed. We conducted a retrospective study to compare the efficacy of EUS-BD and PTBD in patients with obstructive jaundice due to gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients with gastric cancer complicated with obstructive jaundice who were contraindicated for standard ERCP were enrolled. RESULTS: A total of 47 consecutive patients were enrolled during the study period. The technical success rates of PTBD and EUS-BD were 88.9% (16/18) and 96.7% (29/30), respectively (P = 0.64). The stent patency period, including patient death was equivalent between the two groups (EUS-BD vs. PTBD: 188.4 days vs. 200.9 days, P = 0.974). Time to stent dysfunction in the EUS-BD group (391.1 days) was not significantly different as compared to that in the PTBD group (398.1 days) (P = 0.78). Adverse events were relatively severe in the PTBD group. CONCLUSIONS: Given the relative severity of adverse events in the PTBD group, EUS-BD might be the procedure of choice for gastric cancer patients with contraindications by inability to perform ERCP.
BACKGROUND:Gastric cancer is sometimes complicated by obstructive jaundice. However, ERCP may be challenging in patients who have advanced gastric cancer, or recurrent gastric cancer after surgical resection that is complicated by obstructive jaundice. In such cases, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is considered. Recently, EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been developed. We conducted a retrospective study to compare the efficacy of EUS-BD and PTBD in patients with obstructive jaundice due to gastric cancer. METHODS:Patients with gastric cancer complicated with obstructive jaundice who were contraindicated for standard ERCP were enrolled. RESULTS: A total of 47 consecutive patients were enrolled during the study period. The technical success rates of PTBD and EUS-BD were 88.9% (16/18) and 96.7% (29/30), respectively (P = 0.64). The stent patency period, including patientdeath was equivalent between the two groups (EUS-BD vs. PTBD: 188.4 days vs. 200.9 days, P = 0.974). Time to stent dysfunction in the EUS-BD group (391.1 days) was not significantly different as compared to that in the PTBD group (398.1 days) (P = 0.78). Adverse events were relatively severe in the PTBD group. CONCLUSIONS: Given the relative severity of adverse events in the PTBD group, EUS-BD might be the procedure of choice for gastric cancerpatients with contraindications by inability to perform ERCP.