Comparative efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as first-line palliation in malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) is a challenging clinical condition commonly managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative, especially in complex cases where ERCP fails or is deemed risky. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of EUS-BD vs. ERCP in the palliation of MDBO.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, following PRISMA guidelines. Three databases were searched up to December 2023, including MEDLINE/PubMed, OVID and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for studies comparing EUS-BD with ERCP. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success rates, while secondary outcomes included procedural times, hospital stay duration, 30-day mortality, reintervention rates, and adverse events such as pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Seven studies involving 1245 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that EUS-BD had a technical success rate of 92%, compared to 85% for ERCP. Clinical success rates were similar for both EUS-BD and ERCP, at approximately 89%. EUS-BD was associated with a significantly lower incidence of pancreatitis (2% vs. 10% for ERCP).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD offers a viable and potentially superior alternative to ERCP for the primary palliation of MDBO, particularly in terms of technical success and a lower risk of pancreatitis. These findings support the adoption of EUS-BD in clinical settings equipped to perform this technique, though future research should focus on long-term outcomes and further economic analysis to solidify these recommendations.