ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Endoscopic management of concomitant biliary and duodenal malignant obstruction: Impact of the timing of drainage for one
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal endoscopic drainage strategy for concomitant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study (ENDO-GOBO).Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for jaundice: Response to Vanella et al.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2025Article
- The Role of Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound in Management of Malignant Double Obstruction (Biliary and Gastric Outlet): A Comprehensive Review with Clinical Scenarios.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Management of Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Comprehensive Review on the Old, the Classic and the Innovative Approaches.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Will Endoscopic-Ultrasound-Guided Choledocoduodenostomy with Electrocautery-Enhanced Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent Placement Replace Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography When Treating Distal Malignant Biliary Obstructions?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Review
- Combined endoscopic mAnagement of BiliaRy and gastrIc OutLET obstruction (CABRIOLET Study): A multicenter retrospective analysis.DEN open · 2023Article
- The formation process and mechanism of gastrointestinal anastomosis after retrieval anchor-assisted endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy: a preclinical study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Endoscopic Double Stenting for the Management of Combined Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesConcomitant biliary and duodenal malignant obstruction are a severe condition mainly managed by duodenal and biliary stenting, which can be performed simultaneously (SAMETIME) or in two distinct procedures (TWO-TIMES). We conducted a single-center retrospective study to evaluate the feasibility of a SAMETIME procedure and the impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-hepaticogastrostomy in double malignant obstructions. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom January 1, 2011, to January 1, 2018, patients with concomitant malignant bilioduodenal obstruction treated endoscopically were included. The primary endpoint was hospitalization duration. The secondary endpoints were bilioduodenal reintervention rates, adverse event rates, and overall survival. Patients were divided into groups for statistical analysis: (i) divided according to the timing of biliary drainage: SAMETIME vs. TWO-TIMES group, (ii) divided based on the biliary drainage method: EUS-HG group underwent hepaticogastrostomy, while DUODENAL ACCESS group underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), percutaneous transhepatic drainage (PCTD) or EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy (EUS-CD).
resultsThirty-one patients were included (19 women, median age = 71 years). Stenosis was mainly related to pancreatic cancer (17 patients, 54.8%). Sixteen patients were in the SAMETIME group, and 15 were in the TWO-TIMES group. Biliary drainage was performed by EUS-HG in 11 (35.%) patients, PCTD in 11 (35.%), ERCP in 8 (25.8%) and choledoduodenostomy in 1. Thirty patients died during follow-up. The median survival was 77 days (9% confidence interval [37-140]). The mean hospitalization duration was lower in the SAMETIME group: 7.5 vs. 12.6 days, P = 0.04. SAMETIME group patients tended to have a lower complication than TWO-TIMES (26.7% vs. 56.3%, P = 0.10). The EUS-HG group tended to have a lower complication rate (5% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.07) and less biliary endoscopic revision (30% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.37) than DUODENAL ACCESS.
conclusionsSAMETIME drainage is associated with a lower hospital stay without increased morbidity. EUS-HG could provide better access because it did not exhibit a higher complication rate and showed a tendency toward better patency and fewer complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.