ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Comparison of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and percutaneous drainage for distal biliary obstruction: A multicenter cohort study.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Pooled it
- Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transenteric ERCP in patients with benign and malignant diseases and inaccessible biliary system.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided choledochoduodenostomy vs. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for jaundice in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Retrospective, multicenter study (GALLBLADEUS Study).Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2025Article
- Reply to: Letter to Editor Entitled "Endoscopy's Evolving Role in Locally Advanced and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer".Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Using the Rendezvous Technique Through Choledochoduodenostomy for Malignant Biliary Obstruction.ACG case reports journal · 2024Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy With Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent Through Duodenal Stent, a Success Case, and a Salvage Case.ACG case reports journal · 2024Article
- Review
- Review
- EUS-guided choledochoantrostomy as an alternative for biliary decompression in malignant distal biliary obstruction with duodenal invasion.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2023Article
- Clinical application and follow-up of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided interventions.Annals of medicine · 2023Review
- Endoscopic palliation of malignant biliary obstruction.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Review
- Risk factors for stent dysfunction during long-term follow-up after EUS-guided biliary drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents: A prospective study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) are alternate therapies to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement for biliary decompression. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the technical and clinical success of PTBD to EUS-CD in patients with distal biliary obstruction. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), need for reintervention, and survival. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study from three different centers was performed. Cox regression was used to compare time to reintervention and survival and logistic regression to compare technical and clinical success and AE rates. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Results: A total of 86 patients (58 PTBD and 28 EUS-CD) were included. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and cause of biliary obstruction, with malignancy being the most common etiology (80.2%). EUS-CD utilized lumen-apposing metal stents in 15 patients and self-expandable metal biliary stents in 13 patients. Technical success was similar been EUS-CD (100%) and PTBD (96.6%; P = 0.3). EUS-CD was associated with higher clinical success compared to PTBD (84.6% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.04). There was a trend toward lower rates of AEs with EUS-CD 14.3% versus PTBD 29.3%, odds ratio: 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12-1.33, P = 0.14). The need for reintervention was significantly lower among patients who underwent EUS-CD (10.7%) compared to PTBD (77.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.24; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis of only patients with MBO demonstrated similar rate of reintervention between the groups in individuals who survived 50 days or less after the biliary decompression. However, reintervention rates were lower for EUS-CD in those with longer survival. Conclusion: EUS-CD is a technically and clinically highly successful procedure with a trend toward lower AEs compared to PTBD. EUS-CD minimizes the need for reintervention, which may enhance end-of-life quality in patients with MBO and expected survival longer than 50 days.
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.