Feasibility and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in inexperienced centers: a multicenter study in southwest Japan
Takehiko Koga,Yusuke Ishida,Shunpei Hashigo,Yuzo Shimokawa,Hirofumi Harima,Kazuhisa Okamoto,Akihisa Ohno,Tsukasa Miyagahara,Toshihiro Fujita,Satoshi Fukuchi,Kosuke Takahashi,Hiroki Taguchi,Norimasa Araki,Yuichiro Ohtsuka,Toshiyuki Uekitani,Kengo Tsuneyoshi,Takumi Akiyama,Noriko Ishigaki,Toru Maruo,Hirokazu Saito,Ryo Ihara,Akihiro Yamasuji,Shinji Oe,Motohiro Yoshinari,Ryota Sagami,Nao Fujimori,Yoshio Fukuda,Eisuke Ozawa,Kenichi Jikuya,Hiroki Shinohara,Manabu Sen-Yo,Toshiharu Ueki,Naoaki Tsuchiya,Takanori Kitaguchi,Keisuke Matsumoto,Makoto Fukuyama,Fumihito Hirai
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2024.09.014
2024-09-13
Abstract:Background and aims: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has shown promising procedural outcomes in high-volume centers. Although inferior procedural outcomes were reported in inexperienced centers during the early days of EUS-BD, the current outcomes are unknown. This study aimed to clarify the feasibility and safety of EUS-BD in centers that recently introduced EUS-BD. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted at 22 centers that introduced EUS-BD between 2017 and 2022. A maximum of 20 initial EUS-BD cases at each center were evaluated. The clinical outcomes and experience of 84 endoscopists who performed these procedures were examined. Primary outcomes were the rate of technical success and adverse events (AEs), whereas secondary outcomes were risk factors associated with technical failure and procedure-related AEs. Results: Two hundred fifty-five patients were enrolled. The technical success rate was 91.4% (233/255). Among 22 technical failure cases, guidewire manipulation failure was the most common cause (n = 12) followed by tract dilation failure (n = 5). The AE rate was 10.2% (26/255). Multivariate analysis identified a puncture target diameter of <5 mm (odds ratio, 3.719; 95% CI, 1.415-9.776; P = .008) and moderate ascites extending to the liver surface (odds ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.195-8.653; P = .021) as independent risk factors for technical failure and procedure-related AEs, respectively. Endoscopists' procedural experience was not a risk factor for technical failure or procedure-related AEs. Conclusions: The feasibility and safety of EUS-BD were maintained during the induction phase at inexperienced centers. These data will be helpful to better understand the current status of EUS-BD. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000053615.).