Performance and safety of percutaneous cholangioscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Percutaneous cholangioscopy (PerC) offers an alternative for patients with an inaccessible biliary tree. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of this technique. Methods: A search in Medline, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed for studies assessing PerC up to October 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as successful stone identification or stricture workup. Secondary outcomes included therapeutic success (stone extraction, stenting) and complication rate. A subgroup analysis compared previous-generation and modern cholangioscopes. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model and the results were reported as percentages with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Fourteen studies (682 patients) were eligible for analysis. The rate of diagnostic success was 98.7% (95%CI 97.6-99.8%; I2=31.19%) and therapeutic success was 88.6% (95%CI 82.8-94.3%; I2=74.92%). Adverse events were recorded in 17.1% (95%CI 10.7-23.5%; I2=77.56%), of which 15.9% (95%CI 9.8-21.9%; I2=75.98%) were minor and 0.6% (95%CI 0.1-1.2%; I2=0%) major. The Spyglass system showed null heterogeneity for all outcomes; compared with older-generation endoscopes it offered comparable diagnostic success, but yielded significantly superior therapeutic success (96.1%, 95%CI 90-100%; I2=0% vs. 86.4%, 95%CI 79.2-93.6%; I2=81.41%; P=0.02]. Conclusion: PerC, especially using currently available cholangioscopes, is associated with high diagnostic and therapeutic success.

Success rates of fixation techniques on prevention of esophageal stent migration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal stenting is an important intervention for managing malignant and benign dysphagia, with stent migration representing a common drawback. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to assess the benefit of stent fixation over nonfixation. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until January 2023 for comparative studies evaluating the migration rates of esophageal stents with versus without (control) fixation. The primary outcome was migration rate. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rate. A subgroup analysis stratified the results based on different fixation techniques: suturing, over-the-scope (OTS) clipping, and through-the-scope (TTS) clipping. Meta-analysis was based on a random effects model and the results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 %CIs. RESULTS: 10 studies (1014 patients) were included. The rate of stent migration was significantly lower after fixation (OR 0.20, 95 %CI 0.11-0.37; I2  = 59 %, P = 0.01). The adverse event rate was similar between fixation and control groups (OR 0.65, 95 %CI 0.28-1.52; I2  = 55 %, P = 0.06). In the subgroup analysis, all fixation techniques remained superior to nonfixation of stents (suturing OR 0.23, 95 %CI 0.10-0.53; OTS clips OR 0.31, 95 %CI 0.17-0.58; TTS clips OR 0.10, 95 %CI 0.03-0.38); however, only the OTS and TTS clip groups achieved nonsignificant heterogeneity (I2  = 0 %, P = 0.67 and P = 0.73, respectively). No difference between techniques was recorded for migration rates. CONCLUSION: Esophageal stent fixation was associated with significantly lower migration rates compared with nonfixation of stents, regardless of fixation technique and stenting indication.

PERcutaneous transhepatic CHOLangioscopy using a new single-operator short cholangioscope (PERCHOL): European feasibility study.

OBJECTIVES: A new short device for percutaneous endoscopic cholangioscopy was recently developed. However, feasibility and safety has not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess clinical success, technical success, and adverse events (AEs). METHODS: This observational multicenter retrospective study included all patients who underwent percutaneous cholangioscopy using a short cholangioscope between 2020 and 2022. The clinical success, defined as the complete duct clearance or obtaining at least one cholangioscopy-guided biopsy, was assessed. The histopathological accuracy, technical success, and the AE rate were also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (60 ± 15 years, 45.1% male) were included. The majority of patients had altered anatomy (n = 40, 78.4%), and biliary stones (n = 34, 66.7%) was the commonest indication. The technique was predominantly wire-guided (n = 44, 86.3%) through a percutaneous sheath (n = 36, 70.6%) following a median interval of 8.5 days from percutaneous drainage. Cholangioscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy was performed in 29 cases (56.9%), combined with a retrieval basket in eight cases (27.6%). The clinical success was 96.6%, requiring a median of one session (range 1-3). Seventeen patients (33.3%) underwent cholangioscopy-guided biopsies. There were four (7.8%) cholangioscopy-related AEs (cholangitis and peritonitis). Overall, the technical success and AE rates were 100% and 19.6%, respectively, in a median follow-up of 7 months. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous endoscopic cholangioscopy with a new short device is effective and safe, requiring a low number of sessions to achieve duct clearance or accurate histopathological diagnosis.

Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography-guided versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided technique for pancreatic duct cannulation in patients with pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Stenosis of the pancreaticojejunostomy is a well-known long-term complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Traditionally, the endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided intervention has emerged as an alternative, but the success rate and adverse event rate of both treatment modalities are poorly known. We aimed to compare the outcome data of both interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search using the Pubmed/Medline and Embase databases in order to summarize the available data regarding efficacy and complications of ERP- and EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage and compare these outcome data using uniform outcome measures in a multilevel logistic model. RESULTS : 13 studies were included, involving 77 patients who underwent ERP-guided drainage, 145 who underwent EUS-guided drainage, and 12 patients who underwent both modalities. An EUS-guided approach was significantly superior to an ERP-guided approach with regard to pancreatic duct opacification (87 % vs. 30 %; P < 0.001), cannulation success (79 % vs. 26 %; P < 0.001), and stent placement (72 % vs. 20 %; P < 0.001). An EUS-guided approach also appeared superior with regard to clinical outcomes such a pain resolution. The adverse event rate between the two treatment modalities could not be compared due to insufficient data. All included studies were found to be of low quality. CONCLUSION: Based on limited available data, EUS-guided PD intervention appears superior to ERP-guided PD intervention.