Preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage by metal versus plastic stents for resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adequate preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is recommended in most patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). Most expert centers use endoscopic plastic stents rather than self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs). In the palliative setting, however, use of SEMSs has shown longer patency and superior survival. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare stent dysfunction of SEMSs versus plastic stents for PBD in resectable pCCA patients. METHODS: In this multicenter international retrospective cohort study, patients with potentially resectable pCCAs who underwent initial endoscopic PBD from 2010 to 2020 were included. Stent failure was a composite end point of cholangitis or reintervention due to adverse events or insufficient PBD. Other adverse events, surgical outcomes, and survival were recorded. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed on several baseline characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 474 patients had successful stent placement, of whom 61 received SEMSs and 413 plastic stents. PSM (1:1) resulted in 2 groups of 59 patients each. Stent failure occurred significantly less in the SEMSs group (31% vs 64%; P < .001). Besides less cholangitis after SEMSs placement (15% vs 31%; P = .012), other PBD-related adverse events did not differ. The number of patients undergoing surgical resection was not significantly different (46% vs 49%; P = .71). Complete intraoperative SEMSs removal was successful and without adverse events in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Stent failure was lower in patients with SEMSs as PBD compared with plastic stents in patients with resectable pCCA. Removal during surgery was quite feasible. Surgical outcomes were similar.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cholangiocarcinoma.

These guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology liver section. The guideline writing committee included a multidisciplinary team of experts from various specialties involved in the management of CCA, as well as patient/public representatives from AMMF (the Cholangiocarcinoma Charity) and PSC Support. Quality of evidence is presented using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) format. The recommendations arising are to be used as guidance rather than as a strict protocol-based reference, as the management of patients with CCA is often complex and always requires individual patient-centred considerations.

Photochemical Internalization of Gemcitabine Is Safe and Effective in Locally Advanced Inoperable Cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Photochemical internalization (PCI) is a novel technology for light-induced enhancement of the local therapeutic effect of cancer drugs, utilizing a specially designed photosensitizing molecule (fimaporfin). The photosensitizing molecules are trapped in endosomes along with macromolecules or drugs. Photoactivation of fimaporfin disrupts the endosomal membranes so that drug molecules are released from endosomes inside cells and can reach their therapeutic target in the cell cytosol or nucleus. Compared with photodynamic therapy, the main cytotoxic effect with PCI is disruption of the endosomal membrane resulting in delivery of chemotherapy drug, and not to the photochemical reactions per se. In this study we investigated the effect of PCI with gemcitabine in patients with inoperable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). METHODS: The in vitro cytotoxic effect of PCI with gemcitabine was studied on two CCA-derived cell lines. In a fimaporfin dose-escalation phase I clinical study, we administered PCI with gemcitabine in patients with perihilar CCA (n = 16) to establish a safe and tolerable fimaporfin dose and to get early signals of efficacy. The patients enrolled in the study had tumors in which the whole length of the tumor could be illuminated from the inside of the bile duct, using an optical fiber inserted via an endoscope (Fig. 1). Fimaporfin was administered intravenously at day 0; gemcitabine (i.v.) and intraluminal biliary endoscopic laser light application on day 4; followed by standard gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy. RESULTS: Preclinical experiments showed that PCI enhanced the effect of gemcitabine. In patients with CCA, PCI with gemcitabine was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities, and no unexpected safety signals. Disease control was achieved in 10 of 11 evaluable patients, with a clearly superior effect in the two highest dose groups. The objective response rate (ORR) was 42%, including two complete responses, while ORR at the highest dose was 60%. Progression-free survival at 6 months was 75%, and median overall survival (mOS) was 15.4 months, with 22.8 months at the highest fimaporfin dose. CONCLUSION: Photochemical internalization with gemcitabine was found to be safe and resulted in encouraging response and survival rates in patients with unresectable perihilar CCA.

Efficacy and Safety of Digital Single-Operator Cholangioscopy for Difficult Biliary Stones.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is not clear whether digital single-operator cholangioscopy (D-SOC) with electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy is effective in removal of difficult biliary stones. We investigated the safety and efficacy of D-SOC with electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy in an international, multicenter study of patients with difficult biliary stones. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 407 patients (60.4% female; mean age, 64.2 years) who underwent D-SOC for difficult biliary stones at 22 tertiary centers in the United States, United Kingdom, or Korea from February 2015 through December 2016; 306 patients underwent electrohydraulic lithotripsy and 101 (24.8%) underwent laser lithotripsy. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with technical failure and the need for more than 1 D-SOC electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy session to clear the bile duct. RESULTS: The mean procedure time was longer in the electrohydraulic lithotripsy group (73.9 minutes) than in the laser lithotripsy group (49.9 minutes; P < .001). Ducts were completely cleared (technical success) in 97.3% of patients (96.7% of patients with electrohydraulic lithotripsy vs 99% patients with laser lithotripsy; P = .31). Ducts were cleared in a single session in 77.4% of patients (74.5% by electrohydraulic lithotripsy and 86.1% by laser lithotripsy; P = .20). Electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy failed in 11 patients (2.7%); 8 patients were treated by surgery. Adverse events occurred in 3.7% patients and the stone was incompletely removed from 6.6% of patients. On multivariable analysis, difficult anatomy or cannulation (duodenal diverticula or altered anatomy) correlated with technical failure (odds ratio, 5.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-21.2; P = .02). Procedure time increased odds of more than 1 session of D-SOC electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.03; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter, international, retrospective analysis, we found D-SOC with electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy to be effective and safe in more than 95% of patients with difficult biliary stones. Fewer than 5% of patients require additional treatment with surgery and/or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy to clear the duct.

Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS).

Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are estimated to be present in 10-20% of individuals with symptomatic gallstones. They can result in a number of health problems, including pain, jaundice, infection and acute pancreatitis. A variety of imaging modalities can be employed to identify the condition, while management of confirmed cases of CBDS may involve endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, surgery and radiological methods of stone extraction. Clinicians are therefore confronted with a number of potentially valid options to diagnose and treat individuals with suspected CBDS. The British Society of Gastroenterology first published a guideline on the management of CBDS in 2008. Since then a number of developments in management have occurred along with further systematic reviews of the available evidence. The following recommendations reflect these changes and provide updated guidance to healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of adult patients with suspected or proven CBDS. It is not a protocol and the recommendations contained within should not replace individual clinical judgement.

Variation in gastroscopy rate in English general practice and outcome for oesophagogastric cancer: retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether variation in gastroscopy rates in English general practice populations is associated with inequality in oesophagogastric (OG) cancer outcome. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) dataset for England (2006-2008) linked to death registration. METHODS: were validated using independent local and national data. General practices with new cases of OG cancer were included. Practices were grouped into tertiles according to standardised elective gastroscopy rate per capita (low, medium or high). Outcome measures for cancer cases were: emergency admission during diagnostic pathway, major surgical resection and mortality at 1 year. Covariates were: age group, gender, comorbidity, general practice average deprivation and patient deprivation. RESULTS: 22 488 incident cases of OG cancer from 6513 general practices were identified. Patients registered with the low tertile group of practices had the lowest rate of major surgery, highest rate of emergency admission and highest mortality. The inequality was widest for the most socioeconomically deprived cases. After adjustment for covariates in logistic regression, the gastroscopy rate (low, medium or high) at the patient's general practice was an independent predictor of emergency admission, major surgery and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variation in the rate of gastroscopy among general practice populations in England. On average, OG cancer patients belonging to practices with the lowest rates of gastroscopy are at greater risk of poor outcome. These findings suggest that initiatives or current guidelines aimed at limiting the use of gastroscopy may adversely affect cancer outcomes.

Diagnostic utility of single-user peroral cholangioscopy in sclerosing cholangitis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of single-operator peroral cholangioscopy (SOC) in patients with sclerosing cholangitis. METHODS: All patients with sclerosing cholangitis who underwent SOC procedures due to suspicious biliary strictures, in one Swedish and four UK tertiary centers in 2008-2012, were retrospectively enrolled. For each SOC procedure in sclerosing cholangitis, another one attempted due to a single biliary stricture in the same center and calendar year was randomly selected as control. Patients were followed up until death or last clinic visit until November 2012. RESULTS: Fifty-four SOC procedures were attempted in 52 sclerosing cholangitis patients (48 with primary sclerosing cholangitis, 4 with IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis). Cannulation with the SOC system failed more frequently in sclerosing cholangitis (15% vs. 2% in controls; p = 0.015). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of SOC (including tissue sampling) for cancer diagnosis were similar in sclerosing cholangitis and controls (50% vs. 55%, 100% vs. 97%, and 88% vs. 80%, respectively) with largely overlapping confidence intervals. Adverse events were more common in sclerosing cholangitis, due to an increased frequency of cholangitis (11% vs. 2% in controls; p = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: SOC is equally accurate in cancer diagnosis in sclerosing cholangitis and patients with single biliary strictures. However, cholangioscope insertion may be hampered by bile duct narrowing and post-SOC cholangitis is more common in sclerosing cholangitis.

Metal stents: a bridge to surgery in hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive jaundice in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma is a known risk factor for hepatic failure after liver resection. Plastic stents are most widely used for preoperative drainage. However, plastic stents are known to have limited patency time and therefore, in palliative settings, the self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) is used. This type of stent has been shown to be superior because it allows for rapid biliary decompression and a reduced complication rate after insertion. This study explores the use of the SEMS for biliary decompression in patients with operable hilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of a prospectively maintained database at a tertiary hepatobiliary referral centre was carried out. All patients with resectable cholangiocarcinoma were recorded. RESULTS: Of 260 patients referred to this unit with cholangiocarcinoma between January 2008 and April 2012, 50 patients presented with operable cholangiocarcinoma and 27 of these had obstructive jaundice requiring stenting. Ten patients were initially treated with SEMSs; no stent failure occurred in these patients. Seventeen patients initially received plastic stents, seven of which failed in the interval between stent placement and laparotomy. These stents were replaced by SEMSs in four patients and by plastic stents in three patients. Median time to laparotomy was 45 days and 68 days in patients with SEMSs and plastic stents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Self-expanding metal stents provide adequate and rapid biliary drainage in patients with obstruction caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma. No re-interventions were required. This probably reflects the relatively short interval between stent placement and laparotomy.

ERCP for bile duct stones across a national service, demonstrating a high requirement for repeat procedures.

Background and study aims Bile duct stones (BDS) represent approximately 50 % of the requirement for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) within most services. Significant variation in outcome rates for BDS clearance at ERCP has been reported, and endoscopy societies have set standards for expected clearance rates. The aim of this study was to analyze procedure outcomes across a national service. Patients and methods Using verified hospital episode statistics (HES) data for the National Health Service (NHS) in England, we analyzed all patients having first ERCPs for BDS from 2015 to 2017, and followed these patients for at least 2 years. Results In total 37,468 patients underwent a first ERCP for BDS, with 69.8 % undergoing only one procedure. This figure of less than 70 % of BDS cleared at first ERCP is below the Key Performance Indicators as set by the British Society of Gastroenterology (> 75 %) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (> 90 %). Of 55,556 ERCPs done for BDS, 52.9 % were repeat procedures, with 11,322 patients needing multiple procedures. For hospitals performing significant numbers of ERCPs (more than 600 for BDS during the study period) patients undergoing repeat ERCPs for BDS ranged from 9 % to 50 %. Conclusions In this nationwide study, the performance at clearing BDS at first ERCP was suboptimal, with high numbers of repeat procedures required. This may have a negative impact on both patient outcomes and experience, and increase pressure on endoscopy services. Apparent variation of outcome between acute hospital care providers requires further analysis.

UK Joint Advisory Group consensus statements for training and certification in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Background and study aims Despite the high-risk nature of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a robust and standardized credentialing process to ensure competency before independent practice is lacking worldwide. On behalf of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations to form the framework of ERCP training and certification in the UK. Methods Under the oversight of the JAG, a modified Delphi process was conducted with stakeholder representation from the British Society of Gastroenterology, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, trainees and trainers. Recommendations on ERCP training and certification were formulated after formal literature review and appraised using the GRADE tool. These were subjected to electronic voting to achieve consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by JAG and relevant Specialist Advisory Committees before incorporation into the ERCP certification pathway. Results In total, 27 recommendation statements were generated for the following domains: definition of competence (9 statements), acquisition of competence (8 statements), assessment of competence (6 statements) and post-certification support (4 statements). The consensus process led to the following criteria for ERCP certification: 1) performing ≥ 300 hands-on procedures; 2) attending a JAG-accredited ERCP skills course; 3) in modified Schutz 1-2 procedures: achieving native papilla cannulation rate ≥80%, complete bile duct clearance ≥ 70 %, successful stenting of distal biliary strictures ≥ 75 %, physically unassisted in ≥ 80 % of cases; 4) 30-day post-ERCP pancreatitis rates ≤5 %; and 5) satisfactory performance in formative and summative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessments. Conclusions JAG certification in ERCP has been developed following evidence-based consensus to quality assure training and to ultimately improve future standards of ERCP practice.

Erratum: UK Joint Advisory Group consensus statements for training and certification in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1629-7540.].

A new partially covered metal stent for palliation of malignant dysphagia: a prospective follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Metal stents are frequently used for palliation of malignant dysphagia. Recently, a new stent design, the partially covered Wallflex stent (Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass), has been introduced. OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical effectiveness and safety of the esophageal Wallflex stent for the palliation of dysphagia. DESIGN: A prospective follow-up study evaluating a new stent design. SETTING: Three tertiary-care referral centers. PATIENTS: This study involved 37 patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastric cardia. INTERVENTIONS: Stent placement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Data were collected regarding technical and clinical outcome, complications, recurrent dysphagia, and survival. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (median age, 67 years; range, 48-84 years; 22 men [59%]) had a Wallflex stent placed. Stent placement was technically successful in all but 1 patient. Dysphagia improved from a median dysphagia score of 3 (ability to swallow liquids only) to 1 (ability to eat some solid foods) 4 weeks after stent placement. Major complications occurred in 3 patients (8%; pneumonia in 1, severe pain in 2), and 1 patient (3%) died from a complication (pneumonia). Minor complications included mild retrosternal pain in 10 patients (27%) and regurgitation in 7 patients (19%). In total, 8 patients (22%) developed recurrent dysphagia because of stent migration (n = 2 [6%]), food impaction (n = 2 [6%]), or tissue ingrowth or overgrowth (n = 4 [10%]). LIMITATIONS: Nonrandomized study design. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a partially covered Wallflex stent is safe and effective for the palliation of malignant dysphagia, with migration and tissue in- and overgrowth rates comparable to those of similarly designed stents. Retrosternal pain may occur more often with this stent than with other stent designs.

PHOTOSTENT-02: porfimer sodium photodynamic therapy plus stenting versus stenting alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND: Endobiliary stenting is standard practice for palliation of obstructive jaundice due to biliary tract cancer (BTC). Photodynamic therapy (PDT) may also improve biliary drainage and previous small studies suggested survival benefit. AIMS: To assess the difference in outcome between patients with BTC undergoing palliative stenting plus PDT versus stenting alone. METHODS: 92 patients with confirmed locally advanced or metastatic BTC, ECOG performance status 0-3 and adequate biliary drainage were randomised (46 per group) to receive porfimer sodium PDT plus stenting or stenting alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Toxicity and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary end points. Treatment arms were well balanced for baseline factors and prior therapy. RESULTS: No significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicities and no grade 3-4 adverse events due to PDT were observed. Thirteen (28%) PDT patients and 24 (52%) stent alone patients received subsequent palliative chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 8.4 months, OS and PFS were worse in patients receiving PDT compared with stent alone group (OS median 6.2 vs 9.8 months (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.43, p=0.048) and PFS median 3.4 vs 4.3 months (HR 1.43, 95% CI: 0.93 to 2.18, p=0.10), respectively). CONCLUSION: In patients with locally advanced or metastatic BTC, PDT was associated with worse outcome than stenting alone, explained only in part by the differences in chemotherapy treatments. We conclude that optimal stenting remains the treatment of choice for malignant biliary obstruction and the use of PDT for this indication cannot be recommended outside of clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 87712758; EudraCT 2005-001173-96; UKCRN ID: 1461.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation with sphincterotomy is safe and effective for biliary stone removal independent of timing and size of sphincterotomy.

AIM: To describe the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) in the management of bile duct stones in a Western population. METHODS: Data was collected from the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and Radiology electronic database along with a review of case notes over a period of six years from 1st August 2009 to 31st July 2015 and incorporated into Microsoft excel. Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc for Windows, version 12.5 (MedCalc Software, Ostend, Belgium). Simple statistical applications were applied in order to determine whether significant differences exist in comparison groups. We initially used simple proportions to describe the study populations. Furthermore, we used chi-square test to compare proportions and categorical variables. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was applied in order to compare continuous variables. All comparisons were deemed to be statistically significant if P values were less than 0.05. RESULTS: EPLBD was performed in 229 patients (46 females) with mean age of 68 ± 14.3 years. 115/229 (50%) patients had failed duct clearance at previous ERCP referred from elsewhere with standard techniques. Duct clearance at the Index* ERCP (1st ERCP at our centre) was 72.5%. Final duct clearance rate was 98%. EPLBD after fresh sphincterotomy was performed in 81 (35.4%). Median balloon size was 13.5 mm (10 - 18). In addition to EPLBD, per-oral cholangioscopy (POC) and electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) was performed in 35 (15%) patients at index* ERCP. 63 (27.5%) required repeat ERCP for stone clearance. 28 (44.5%) required POC and EHL and 11 (17.4%) had repeat EPLBD for complete duct clearance. Larger stone size (12.4 mm vs 17.4 mm, P < 0.000001), multiple stones (2, range (1-13) vs 3, range (1-12), P < 0.006) and dilated common bile duct (CBD) (12.4 mm vs 18.3 mm, P < 0.001) were significant predictors of failed duct clearance at index ERCP. 47 patients (20%) had ampullary or peri-ampullary diverticula. Procedure related adverse events included 2 cases of bleeding and pancreatitis (0.87%) each. CONCLUSION: EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for CBDS removal. There is no difference in outcomes whether it is performed at the time of sphincterotomy or at a later procedure or whether there is a full or limited sphincterotomy.

Sorafenib in combination with transarterial chemoembolisation in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (TACE 2): a randomised placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is the standard of care for patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma, while the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib improves survival in patients with advanced disease. We aimed to determine whether TACE with sorafenib improves progression-free survival versus TACE with placebo. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (TACE 2) in 20 hospitals in the UK for patients with unresectable, liver-confined hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients were eligible if they were at least aged 18 years, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and had Child-Pugh A liver disease. Patients were randomised 1:1 by computerised minimisation algorithm to continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice-daily) or matching placebo combined with TACE using drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE), which was given via the hepatic artery 2-5 weeks after randomisation and according to radiological response and patient tolerance thereafter. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre and serum α-fetoprotein concentration (<400 ng/mL and ≥400 ng/mL). Only the trial coordinator was unmasked to treatment allocation before patient progression during the study. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival defined as the interval between randomisation and progression according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) or death due to any cause, and was analysed by intention-to-treat. Safety was analysed by intention-to-treat. The trial has been completed and the final results are reported. The trial is registered at EudraCT, number 2008-005073-36, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN93375053. FINDINGS: Between Nov 4, 2010, and Dec 7, 2015, the trial enrolled 399 patients and was terminated after a planned interim futility analysis. 86 patients failed screening and 313 remaining patients were randomly assigned: 157 to sorafenib and 156 to placebo. The median daily dose was 660 mg (IQR 389·2-800·0) sorafenib versus 800 mg (758·2-800·0) placebo, and median duration of therapy was 120·0 days (IQR 43·0-266·0) for sorafenib versus 162·0 days (70·0-323·5) for placebo. There was no evidence of difference in progression-free survival between the sorafenib group and the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·99 [95% CI 0·77-1·27], p=0·94); median progression-free survival was 238·0 days (95% CI 221·0-281·0) in the sorafenib group and 235·0 days (209·0-322·0) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (29 [18%] of 157 patients in the sorafenib group vs 21 [13%] of 156 patients in the placebo group), abdominal pain (20 [13%] vs 12 [8%]), diarrhoea (16 [10%] vs four [3%]), gastrointestinal disorders (18 [11%] vs 12 [8%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (12 [8%] and none). At least one serious adverse event was reported in 65 (41%) of 157 patients in the sorafenib group and 50 (32%) of 156 in the placebo group, and 181 serious adverse events were reported in total, 95 (52%) in the sorafenib group and 86 (48%) in the placebo group. Three deaths occurred in each group that were attributed to DEB-TACE. Four deaths were attributed to study drug; three in the sorafenib group and one in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of sorafenib to DEB-TACE does not improve progression-free survival in European patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Alternative systemic therapies need to be assessed in combination with TACE to improve patient outcomes. FUNDING: Bayer PLC and BTG PLC.