Interventional Treatment of Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Is It Time to Change the Paradigm?

Abstract

Introduction. Biliary obstruction is a common manifestation of biliopancreatic malignancies, and its relief is an essential part of the treatment algorithm. Currently, there are three techniques to manage malignant biliary obstruction—endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). ERCP has been adopted as a first-line treatment modality but EUS-BD is gradually emerging as a viable alternative. The aim of the current article is to assess the clinical outcomes of the three nonsurgical biliary drainage procedures. Materials and methods. A total of 102 consecutive patients with unresectable biliopancreatic malignancy inducing biliary obstruction and subjected to palliative treatment by means of ERCP, EUS-BD, or PTBD were retrospectively included in the study. Results. No difference in clinical and technical success of the procedures was found: ERCP—97.2% technical; 88.9% clinical; PTBD—94.4% technical, 72.2% clinical; EUS-BD—90% technical; 83.3% clinical. Adverse events (AEs) and reinterventions were significantly more common in PTBD (38.9% and 52.8%) and ERCP (27.9% and 25%) compared to EUS-BD (10% and 3.3%). Total duration of hospital stay and number of hospitalizations were lower in the EUS-BD compared to PTBD and ERCP groups. Conclusions. In the presence of adequate expertise, EUS-BD may be superior to PTBD and ERCP in achieving and sustaining biliary drainage in the setting of unresectable malignancy.