Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy vs. antegrade metal stent placement keeping an access route in patients with malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) with EUS-guided antegrade metal stent placement (AGMS). The purpose of this study was to compare times to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) in patients who underwent HGS using metal stents (MS) and those who underwent AGMS keeping access routes with plastic stents (AGMS-AR).

METHODS

This study retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent HGS or AGMS between September 2016 and December 2022. TRBO, overall survival (OS), and adverse event (AE) rates were compared in the two groups. The risk factors for RBO were determined using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

This study included 32 patients in the HGS group and 30 in the AGMS-AR group. Technical success rate was significantly higher in the HGS than in the AGMS-AR group (100 vs. 80%; P = 0.009). The technical success rate without tract dilation was significantly higher in the AGMS-AR than in the HGS group (83 vs. 38%; P < 0.001). RBO rates were significantly higher in the HGS than in the AGMS-AR group (53 vs. 17%; P = 0.024), whereas AE rates did not differ significantly. TRBO differed significantly in the HGS and AGMS-AR groups (159 days vs. not reached, P = 0.011), whereas OS did not differ significantly. Multivariable analysis revealed that HGS was an independent risk factor for RBO (hazard ratio, 6.48, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

TRBO was significantly longer in patients who underwent AGMS with PS than HGS. AGMS with PS may be effective after the failure of ERCP in patients with malignant biliary obstruction.