Safety of biliary drainage with 6-mm metallic stent for preoperative obstructive jaundice in pancreatic cancer: PURPLE SIX STUDY.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The 10-mm self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is the standard for endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage before pancreatic cancer surgery. However, the efficacy of stents thinner than 10 mm has not been adequately validated. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the safety of a 6-mm fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) for distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) during preoperative chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This was a single-arm, multicenter, prospective phase II study of endoscopic transpapillary initial biliary drainage for DMBO before pancreatic cancer surgery. The primary endpoint was stent-related adverse events, and the key secondary endpoint was the non-recurrent biliary obstruction (non-RBO) rate during the observation period for both resectable (R) and borderline resectable (BR) pancreatic cancers. RESULTS: The study enrolled 33 patients, among whom 32 received the study treatment. There were 23 and 9 cases of R and BR pancreatic cancers, respectively. The technical and clinical success rates were 97.0% and 90.1%, respectively. The stent-related adverse event rate was 3.1% (n = 1, acute pancreatitis) (95% confidential interval, 0.00-16.2), which met the criteria to be considered safe. The overall non-RBO rate during the observation period (median 96 days) was 78.1% (82.6% and 66.7% for R and BR pancreatic cancer cases, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-mm FCSEMS is an extremely safe metallic stent with a low stent-related adverse event rate of 3.1% for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer. It is considered the optimal stent for preoperative biliary drainage in terms of the non-RBO rate. UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN-CTR 000041704).

Secondary uncovered versus fully-covered metal stents for the management of occluded stent in unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been widely placed for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (UDMBO). However, the dysfunction rate is 19-40% and its treatment is controversial. We aimed asses the efficacy and safety of a secondary biliary stents (uncovered (UC) versus fully-covered (FC) stent) for the management of occluded SEMS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2015 and June 2023, 41 patients with UDMBO underwent secondary biliary stent placement as "stent-in-stent" (20 FCSEMS and 21 UCSEMS). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success of SEMS placement. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), patency and survival. Patients were prospectively followed until death or loss of follow-up. RESULTS: Technical (100% vs 85.5%) and clinical (100% vs 95.2%) success rates were similar in FCSEMS and UCSEMS groups. The median follow-up period was 510 days (range 290-630). The median duration of stent patency of FCSEMS (220 days, IQR 137.5-442.5) was longer than UCSEMS (150 days, IQR 110-362.5) (P=0.395), although stent dysfunction within 6 months was not different between groups. Multivariate analysis indicated that sex (HR=0.909, 0.852-0.970), antitumor treatment (HR=0.248, 0.032-0.441), stent patency (HR=0.992, 0.986-0.998) and clinical success (HR=0.133, 0.026-0.690) were significant factors for overall survival. There were no remarkable differences in AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of additional biliary stent using the stent-in-stent method is an effective and safe rescue treatment for patients with UDMBO and occluded stent. In addition, the use of FCSEMS compared UCSEMS has unclear benefits regarding stent patency and overall survival.

Long-term outcomes of duckbill-type anti-reflux metal stents versus conventional covered metal stents in reinterventions after covered biliary metal stent dysfunction in unresectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The use of duckbill-type anti-reflux metal stents (DMS) in reinterventions after covered metal stent (CMS) dysfunction has been reported in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). However, the superiority of DMS over conventional CMS (c-CMS) has not been established. Therefore, we conducted this retrospective study to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of DMS as a second stent in comparison with c-CMS. METHODS: We investigated consecutive patients with distal MBO due to unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent reintervention after dysfunction of initial biliary CMS at our institution. We compared causes of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), adverse events (AEs), and reintervention rates of DMS and c-CMS in this stenting. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included (DMS 41 and c-CMS 35). While overall RBO rates were similar between the two groups (46% vs. 63%, p = 0.172), RBO due to non-occlusion cholangitis tended to be less frequent in the DMS group than in the c-CMS group (2% vs. 14%, p = 0.089). Median TRBO was significantly longer in the DMS group (286 days vs. 112 days, p = 0.029). DMS was identified as the only significant risk factor for TRBO (hazard ratio, 0.52; p = 0.044). Overall AE rates were significantly lower in the DMS group (2% vs. 23%, p = 0.010), with non-occlusion cholangitis being the most common AE in the c-CMS group. Endoscopic reintervention was successfully performed in all patients in both groups, despite failed stent removal in 15% of patients in DMS group. CONCLUSIONS: DMS was associated with a significantly longer TRBO and lower rate of AEs compared with c-CMS in reinterventions after initial CMS dysfunction. DMS may be preferable to c-CMS as a second stent after biliary CMS dysfunction.

EUS-guided biliary drainage with LAMS for distal malignant biliary obstruction when ERCP fails: single-center retrospective study and maldeployment management.

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with Lumen Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) is a mini-invasive approach for jaundice palliation in distal malignant biliary obstruction (D-MBO) not amenable to ERCP, with good efficacy and not exiguous adverse events. AIMS AND METHODS: From January 2015 to December 2019, we retrospectively enrolled all the EUS-BD with electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for biliary decompression in unresectable D-MBO and failed ERCP. Primary study aims were to evaluate technical/clinical success and AEs rate. In case of maldeployment, we estimated the efficacy of an intra-operative rescue therapy. Secondary aims were to assess the jaundice recurrence and gastric outlet obstruction symptoms. RESULTS: Thirty-six EUS-BD were enrolled over a cohort of 738 patients (ERCP cannulation failure rate was 2.6%): 31 choledocho-duodenostomy and 5 cholecystogastrostomy. A pre-loaded guidewire through the LAMS was systematically used in case of common bile duct ≤ 15 mm or scope instability for a safe/preventive biliary entryway in case of intra-procedural complications. Technical success was 80.6% (29/36 patients). Seven cases of LAMS maldeployment during EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy were successfully treated with RT by an over-the-wire fully-covered Self-Expandable Metal Stent (FC-SEMS). The FC-SEMS was released through the novel fistula tract in endoscopic fashion in 5/7 cases and transpapillary in percutaneous-transhepatic-endoscopic rendezvous (1/7) and laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous (1/7) in the two remaining cases. The total efficacy of rescue therapy was 100%. Same-session duodenal SEMS was placed in 17 patients with optimal gastric outlet obstruction management. Final clinical success was 100% and no other late adverse events or FC-SEMS migration were observed. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD with LAMS is effective for jaundice palliation after ERCP failure but with considerable adverse events. Maldeployment remains a serious complication with fatal evolution if not correctly recognized/managed. Rescue therapy must be promptly applied especially in tertiary-care centers with highly skilled endoscopists, interventional radiologist and dedicated surgeon.

One-step versus two-step distal self-expandable metal stent placement: A multicenter prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Two methods of transpapillary covered self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement are used for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO): after initial drainage by plastic stent (two-step method) and without previous drainage (one-step method). METHODS: In total, 90 patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer and distal MBO were enrolled in this prospective multicenter randomized study and allocated to one-step (n = 45) and two-step (n = 45) groups. The main outcome was the time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO). Secondary outcomes were the rates of early and late adverse events, survival time, the time required for bilirubin level reduction, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The median TRBO did not differ significantly between the one-step and two-step groups (not available vs 314 days, P = 0.134). SEMS migration occurred significantly more frequently in the two-step group (14.3% vs 0%, P = 0.026). No significant difference was observed between groups in early (7.3% vs 14.3%, P = 0.483) or late (12.2% and 11.9%, P = 1) adverse events other than RBO, survival time (P = 0.104), or the median number of days required to reach a bilirubin level considered to be acceptable for chemotherapy administration (<3 mg/dL; P = 0.881). The total costs of stent placement and reintervention were significantly lower in the one-step SEMS group (3347 vs 5465 US dollars, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The superiority of TRBO with two-step SEMS placement was not demonstrated. One-step SEMS placement might be a promising method from the viewpoints of cost-effectiveness and less invasiveness (UMIN-CTR clinical trial registration number: UMIN000016010).

Estimation and comparison of cumulative incidences of biliary self-expandable metallic stent dysfunction accounting for competing risks.

BACKGROUND: Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is widely carried out for distal malignant biliary obstruction, and survival analysis is used to evaluate the cumulative incidences of SEMS dysfunction (e.g. the Kaplan-Meier [KM] method and the log-rank test). However, these statistical methods might be inappropriate in the presence of 'competing risks' (here, death without SEMS dysfunction), which affects the probability of experiencing the event of interest (SEMS dysfunction); that is, SEMS dysfunction can no longer be observed after death. A competing risk analysis has rarely been done in studies on SEMS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We introduced the concept of a competing risk analysis and illustrated its impact on the evaluation of SEMS outcomes using hypothetical and actual data. Our illustrative study included 476 consecutive patients who underwent SEMS placement for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction. RESULTS: A significant difference between cumulative incidences of SEMS dysfunction in male and female patients via theKM method (P = 0.044 by the log-rank test) disappeared after applying a competing risk analysis (P = 0.115 by Gray's test). In contrast, although cumulative incidences of SEMS dysfunction via the KM method were similar with and without chemotherapy (P = 0.647 by the log-rank test), cumulative incidence of SEMS dysfunction in the non-chemotherapy group was shown to be significantly lower (P = 0.031 by Gray's test) in a competing risk analysis. CONCLUSION: Death as a competing risk event needs to be appropriately considered in estimating a cumulative incidence of SEMS dysfunction, otherwise analytical results may be biased.

Novel antireflux covered metal stent for recurrent occlusion of biliary metal stents: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Feasibility of antireflux metal stent (ARMS), designed to prevent duodenobiliary reflux, was reported in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction. In this prospective pilot study, we aimed to evaluate a newly designed ARMS as a reintervention for self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) occlusion believed to be caused by duodenobiliary reflux. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with non-resectable distal malignant biliary obstruction were included in whom a prior SEMS was occluded as a result of sludge or food impaction between March 2010 and January 2012 at two Japanese tertiary referral centers. The occluded SEMS were endoscopically removed, if possible, and subsequently replaced by a newly designed ARMS. We evaluated the technical success rate and complications of ARMS and compared the time to occlusion of ARMS with that of prior SEMS. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were included. ARMS was successfully placed in all patients in a single procedure. No procedure-related complications were identified. ARMS occlusion occurred in two patients (15%), the causes of which were sludge in one patient and unknown in the other. ARMS migration occurred in four patients (31%). ARMS patency time was significantly longer than that of prior SEMS (median, not available vs 58 days; P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: This newly designed ARMS is a technically feasible, safe, and effective reintervention for SEMS occlusion as a result of sludge or food impaction. An anti-migration mechanism to improve the outcomes of ARMS should be considered.

Outcomes of 6-mm diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer.

Background: 10-mm self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are commonly used for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer. However, smaller diameter SEMSs have attracted attention with the attempt to reduce stent-related adverse events (AEs). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) placement from April 2015 to May 2023. The primary outcome was stent-related non-event rate (NER), which was defined as the rate of completion of surgery without developing any preoperative events (recurrent biliary obstruction [RBO] or stent-related AEs). Secondary outcomes included stent-related AEs, causes of RBO, and cumulative incidence of RBO. Risk factors for pancreatitis, RBO, and stent migration were also examined. Results: A total of 76 patients were included (6-mm group: 23; 10-mm group: 53). Stent-related NER (57% vs. 64%, p = 0.610), stent-related AEs (4% vs. 15%, p = 0.263), overall RBO rates (39% vs. 23%, p = 0.168), cumulative incidence of RBO (hazard ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-5.25; p = 0.065) were not significantly different between the two groups. Tumor involvement of the pancreatic duct was identified as a risk-reducing factor for pancreatitis, while an FCSEMS diameter of 6 mm was not identified as a risk factor for RBO and stent migration. Conclusions: Stent-related NER was not significantly affected by FCSEMS diameter. Further studies are needed to confirm the usefulness of 6-mm diameter FCSEMS for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Re-intervention with 10-mm vs 12-mm covered self-expandable metallic stent for recurrent unresectable distal biliary obstruction in patients with previous stent implantation.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) involves placing a 10-mm covered self-expandable metallic stent (CSEMS). In recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), replacement of the CSEMS is recommended; however, the appropriate stent type remains unknown. We speculated that large-bore CSEMSs would provide longer patency. We compared the efficacy of 10-mm and 12-mm CSEMS in patients with RBO. METHODS: We retrospectively retrieved data on patients who underwent CSEMS replacement from the endoscopic database. We investigated the time to RBO (TRBO) after CSEMS replacement. The hazard ratio (HR) for the the second TRBO was estimated using the Cox proportional hazard model. The estimated median second TRBO was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among the 493 patients with DMBOs treated with 10-mm CSEMS, 48 and 29 patients underwent re-intervention with 10-mm and 12-mm CSEMS, respectively. The use of 12-mm CSEMS was inversely associated with second TRBO (multivariable-adjusted HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.98; P = .042). The estimated median second TRBO was greater with the 12 mm CSEMS than with the 10 mm variety (562 days vs 207 days; P = .019). CONCLUSION: The second intervention with 12-mm CSEMS was associated with a longer TRBO.

The efficacy and safety of a duckbill-type anti-reflux metal stent as the initial metal stent for distal malignant biliary obstruction in unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Background: The usefulness of duckbill-type anti-reflux metal stent (DMS) in self-expandable metal stent-naïve pancreatic cancer (PC) patients has not been well-studied. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMS in such patients. Methods: We analyzed consecutive patients with unresectable PC who received a covered metal stent (CMS) as the initial self-expandable metal stent at our institution. Technical success, functional success, causes of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), adverse events (AEs), and reintervention rates were compared between DMS and conventional CMS (c-CMS). Results: A total of 69 patients were included (DMS: 28, c-CMS: 41). Technical success, functional success, and AEs were similar between groups. Tumor ingrowth was more common in the DMS group (18% vs. 0%, p = 0.009), while non-occlusion cholangitis tended to be more common in the c-CMS group (0% vs. 15%, p = 0.074). Median time to RBO was similar between groups (276 vs. 273 days, p = 0.915). The anti-reflux valve of DMS was found torn in 56% of patients. Endoscopic reintervention was successful in all cases, despite failed stent removal in 88% of patients in the DMS group. Conclusions: DMS was not associated with longer time to RBO compared to c-CMS in self-expandable metal stent-naïve patients.

Potential significance of uncovered self-expandable metal stents for distal malignant biliary obstruction: A propensity score-adjusted competing risk regression analysis.

Objectives: Selection criteria for self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) with or without cover during palliative treatment of distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) remain unclear. We evaluated factors associated with time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) in fully covered SEMSs (FCSEMSs) and uncovered SEMSs (UCSEMSs). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with DMBO who received a SEMS. TRBO was determined using the Kaplan-Meier analysis, and complications were compared between the FCSEMS and UCSEMS groups. After TRBO-associated factors were extracted using multivariate competing-risks regression (CRR), propensity score-adjusted CRRs were performed to verify their robustness. Results: There were 180 patients (66 FCSEMSs and 114 UCSEMSs) enrolled in this study. There was no significant difference between median TRBO in the FCSEMS and UCSEMS groups (275 vs. 255 days, p = 0.67). Complications were more frequent in the FCSEMS than UCSEMS group (21.2% vs. 8.8%; p = 0.023). Multivariate CRR for TRBO-associated factors revealed that "pancreatic ductal carcinoma (PDAC) treated with UCSEMS" was the only independent predictor of TRBO (p = 0.03). Similarly, the propensity score-adjusted CRRs showed no significant difference in TRBO in "FCSEMS" vs "UCSEMS" (p = 0.96); however, there was a significant difference in "PDAC using UCSEMS" vs "other" (p = 0.043). In the palliative care group including any DMBO without chemotherapy, the first quartile of the TRBO of UCSEMS was 100 days. Conclusions: UCSEMSs are a possible option for both patients with DMBO arising from PDAC and for patients with any DMBO receiving palliative care who should avoid SEMS-related complications.

Effectiveness of a new approach to minimally invasive surgery in palliative treatment of patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Palliative endoscopic biliary drainage is the primary treatment option for the management of patients with jaundice which results from distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO). In this group of patients, decompression of the bile duct (BD) allows for pain reduction, symptom relief, chemotherapy administration, improved quality of life, and increased survival rate. To reduce the unfavorable effects of BD decompression, minimally invasive surgical techniques require continuous improvement. AIM: To develop a technique for internal-external biliary-jejunal drainage (IEBJD) and assess its effectiveness in comparison to other minimally invasive procedures in the palliative treatment of patients with DMBO. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed, which included 134 patients with DMBO who underwent palliative BD decompression. Biliary-jejunal drainage was developed to divert bile from the BD directly into the initial loops of the small intestine to prevent duodeno-biliary reflux. IEBJD was carried out using percutaneous transhepatic access. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), endoscopic retrograde biliary stenting (ERBS), and internal-external transpapillary biliary drainage (IETBD) were used for the treatment of study patients. Endpoints of the study were the clinical success of the procedure, the frequency and nature of complications, and the cumulative survival rate. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the frequency of minor complications between the study groups. Significant complications occurred in 5 (17.2%) patients in the IEBJD group, in 16 (64.0%) in the ERBS group, in 9 (47.4%) in the IETBD group, and in 12 (17.4%) in the PTBD group. Cholangitis was the most common severe complication. In the IEBJD group, the course of cholangitis was characterized by a delayed onset and shorter duration as compared to other study groups. The cumulative survival rate of patients who underwent IEBJD was 2.6 times higher in comparison to those of the PTBD and IETBD groups and 20% higher in comparison to that of the ERBS group. CONCLUSION: IEBJD has advantages over other minimally invasive BD decompression techniques and can be recommended for the palliative treatment of patients with DMBO.

Current Status of Endoscopic Biliary Drainage in Patients with Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction.

Distal malignant biliary obstruction is caused by various malignant diseases that require biliary drainage. In patients with operable situations, preoperative biliary drainage is required to control jaundice and cholangitis until surgery. In view of tract seeding, endoscopic biliary drainage is the first choice. Since neoadjuvant therapies are being developed, the time to surgery is increasing, especially in pancreatic cancer cases. Therefore, it requires long stent patency. Recently, preoperative biliary drainage using self-expandable metal stents has been reported as a useful modality to secure long stent patency. In patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction, self-expandable metal stent is the first choice for maintaining long stent patency. Although there are many comparison studies between a covered and an uncovered self-expandable metal stent, their use is still controversial. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage has been performed as an alternative treatment. The clinical success and stent patency are favorable. We should take into consideration that both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage have advantages and disadvantages and chose the drainage method depending on the patient's situation or the expertise of the endoscopist. Here, we discuss the current status of endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.

New antireflux plastic stent for patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic biliary stenting is a well-established palliative treatment for patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). However, the main problem with stent placement is the relatively short duration of stent patency. Although self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) have a longer patency period than plastic stents (PSs), the higher costs limit the wide use of SEMSs. A PS with an antireflux valve is an attractive idea to prolong stent patency, but no ideal design for an antireflux PS (ARPS) has been proposed. We developed a new ARPS with a "duckbilled" valve attached to the duodenal end of the stent. AIM: To compare the patency of ARPSs with that of traditional PSs (TPSs) in patients with unresectable distal MBO. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. This study was conducted at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University. Consecutive patients with extrahepatic MBO were enrolled prospectively. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either an ARPS or a TPS. Patients were followed by clinic visits or telephone interviews every 1-2 mo until stent exchange, death, or the final study follow-up in October 2018. The primary outcome was the duration of stent patency. Secondary outcomes included the rate of technical success, the rate of clinical success, adverse events, and patient survival. RESULTS: Between February 2016 and December 2017, 38 patients were randomly assigned to two groups, with 19 patients in each group, to receive ARPSs or TPSs. Stent insertion was technically successful in all patients. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the rates of clinical success or the rates of early or late adverse events (P = 0.660, 1.000, and 1.000, respectively). The median duration of stent patency in the ARPS group was 285 d [interquartile range (IQR), 170], which was significantly longer than that in the TPS group (median, 130 d; IQR, 90, P = 0.005). No significant difference in patient survival was noted between the two groups (P = 0.900). CONCLUSION: The new ARPS is safe and effective for the palliation of unresectable distal MBO, and has a significantly longer stent patency than a TPS.

Feasibility of one-step endoscopic metal stenting for distal malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to clarify the clinical usefulness of one-step self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for distal malignant biliary obstruction by comparing with two-step SEMS placement. METHODS: We retrospectively compared early complications, bilirubin level decreasing rate, and period of hospitalization between 40 patients with one-step SEMS and 52 patients with two-step SEMS. We also evaluated the complications in patients with two-step SEMS by classifying them into first drainage (ERBD or ENBD) and second drainage (SEMS). RESULTS: The total incidence of early complications was significantly higher in patients with one-step SEMS than the second drainage of two-step SEMS (42.5% [17/40] vs. 13.5% [7/52]; P = 0.004). However, there was no significant difference in the early complications between one-step SEMS and two-step SEMS (total of first and second drainage) (42.5% [17/40] vs. 36.5% [19/52]; P = 0.561). The period required to reach the bilirubin level (<3 mg/dL) after initial drainage was significantly shorter in one-step SEMS than in two-step SEMS (5.7 vs. 10.1 days; P = 0.025). Similar results were observed in the period of hospitalization for patients without chemotherapy (22.2 vs. 37.3 days; P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: One-step SEMS placement is the alternative option of drainage method for distal malignant biliary obstruction.