PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Journal of Digestive Endoscopy 2025; 16(01): 029-036
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1806742
Research Article

Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy Using a 22G Needle Combined with a Double-Guidewire Technique

Toru Kaneko
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Mitsuhiro Kida
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Takahiro Kurosu
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Gen Kitahara
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Shiori Koyama
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Tomohiro Betto
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
Chika Kusano
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan
› Institutsangaben Funding None declared.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objectives Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is an increasingly used alternative treatment for malignant biliary obstructions. However, improvements to this approach are warranted. Recently, the use of a 22G puncture needle and a 0.018-inch guidewire (GW), as well as the double-GW technique (DGT), have been introduced and adopted by our institution. We retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of EUS-HGS, combined with DGT, using a 22G needle.

Patients and Methods This study included 34 of 54 patients who underwent EUS-HGS, which was performed using a 22G puncture needle combined with DGT at Kitasato University Medical Center Hospital from October 2021 to March 2024. We retrospectively examined patients' backgrounds, the technical success rate (defined as the successful insertion of a stent from the stomach into the intended bile duct), clinical success rate (defined as a decrease in total bilirubin levels to either the normal range or to at least 50% of the prior value within 2 weeks), procedure time (defined as the time from endoscope insertion to stent deployment), incidence of complications, and changes in the angle between the puncture axis and bile duct axis resulting from the use of DGT.

Endpoints and Data Analysis The primary endpoint was the technical success rate of EUS-HGS using a 22G needle combined with a DGT. Secondary endpoints included the clinical success rate, procedure time, GW angle at the puncture site before and after DGT, and incidence of complications. Descriptive statistics were performed.

Results The technical and clinical success rates were 100 and 97.1%, respectively. The average procedure time was 16 minutes. The angle between the puncture and bile duct axis was 145.6 degrees before the DGT, which only involved a 0.018-inch GW; the angle increased to 161.1 degrees after the DGT, bringing the puncture and bile duct axis closer to alignment. The incidence of complications was 2.9%.

Conclusion EUS-HGS with a 22G needle in conjunction with the DGT has a high procedural success rate and low incidence of complications. These two components complement each other and contribute to the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the procedure, even in challenging situations.

Keywords

endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy - obstructive jaundice - punctures

Ethical Approval

The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Kitasato University Medical Centre (IRB approval number: 2024006). All participants provided written informed consent before the procedure.


Data Availability

The data presented in this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.


Authors' Contributions

M.K.: Supervision, writing–review, and editing; T.K.: Resources; G.K.: Resources; S.K.: Resources; T.B.: Resources; C.K.: Supervision; T.K.: Conceptualization, data curation, investigation, formal analysis, project administration, validation, visualization, and writing–original draft.


Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
28. März 2025

© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Moss AC, Morris E, Mac Mathuna P. Palliative biliary stents for obstructing pancreatic carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 2006 (02) CD004200
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Inamdar S, Slattery E, Bhalla R, Sejpal DV, Trindade AJ. Comparison of adverse events for endoscopic vs percutaneous biliary drainage in the treatment of malignant biliary tract obstruction in an inpatient national cohort. JAMA Oncol 2016; 2 (01) 112-117
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Mukai S, Itoi T, Baron TH. et al. Indications and techniques of biliary drainage for acute cholangitis in updated Tokyo Guidelines 2018. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2017; 24 (10) 537-549
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Wang K, Zhu J, Xing L, Wang Y, Jin Z, Li Z. Assessment of efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83 (06) 1218-1227
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Sharaiha RZ, Khan MA, Kamal F. et al. Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage in comparison with percutaneous biliary drainage when ERCP fails: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85 (05) 904-914
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Paik WH, Lee TH, Park DH. et al. EUS-guided biliary drainage versus ERCP for the primary palliation of malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113 (07) 987-997
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Park JK, Woo YS, Noh DH. et al. Efficacy of EUS-guided and ERCP-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction: prospective randomized controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88 (02) 277-282
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Park DH, Jang JW, Lee SS, Seo DW, Lee SK, Kim MH. EUS-guided biliary drainage with transluminal stenting after failed ERCP: predictors of adverse events and long-term results. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74 (06) 1276-1284
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Kawakubo K, Isayama H, Kato H. et al. Multicenter retrospective study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction in Japan. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2014; 21 (05) 328-334
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Isayama H, Nakai Y, Itoi T. et al. Clinical practice guidelines for safe performance of endoscopic ultrasound/ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage: 2018. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2019; 26 (07) 249-269
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Gupta K, Perez-Miranda M, Kahaleh M. et al; InEBD STUDY GROUP. Endoscopic ultrasound-assisted bile duct access and drainage: multicenter, long-term analysis of approach, outcomes, and complications of a technique in evolution. J Clin Gastroenterol 2014; 48 (01) 80-87
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Ogura T, Higuchi K. Technical tips for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22 (15) 3945-3951
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Matsubara S, Nakagawa K, Suda K, Otsuka T, Oka M, Nagoshi S. Practical tips for safe and successful endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy: a state-of-the-art technical review. J Clin Med 2022; 11 (06) 1591
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kanno Y, Ito K, Sakai T, Okano H. Novel combination of a 0.018-inch guidewire, dedicated thin dilator, and 22-gauge needle for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy. VideoGIE 2020; 5 (08) 355-358
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hara K, Okuno N, Haba S. et al. How to perform EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy easier and safer. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2020; 27 (08) 563-564
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Ogura T, Ueno S, Okuda A. et al. Expanding indications for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy for patients with insufficient dilatation of the intrahepatic bile duct using a 22G needle combined with a novel 0.018-inch guidewire (with video). Dig Endosc 2022; 34 (01) 222-227
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Shiomi H, Masuda A, Kodama Y. Novel approach for successful endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy using a double-guidewire technique. Dig Endosc 2019; 31 (02) e50-e51
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Nakai Y, Oyama H, Kanai S. et al. Double guidewire technique using an uneven double lumen catheter for endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions. Dig Dis Sci 2021; 66 (05) 1540-1547
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Ishiwatari H, Satoh T, Sato J, Kaneko J, Matsubayashi H, Ono H. Double-guidewire technique facilitates endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for hilar biliary obstruction. Endoscopy 2019; 51 (11) E321-E322
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Fujii Y, Kato H, Himei H. et al. Double guidewire technique stabilization procedure for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy involving modifying the guidewire angle at the insertion site. Surg Endosc 2022; 36 (12) 8981-8991
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71 (03) 446-454
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Ogura T, Okuda A, Ueno S. et al. Prospective comparison study between 19-gauge needle with. 025-inch guidewire and 22-gauge needle with novel. 018-inch guidewire during EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96 (02) 262-268.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Vila JJ, Pérez-Miranda M, Vazquez-Sequeiros E. et al. Initial experience with EUS-guided cholangiopancreatography for biliary and pancreatic duct drainage: a Spanish national survey. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76 (06) 1133-1141
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Ohno A, Kaku T, Fujimori N. Balloon guidewire technique during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy. Endosc Ultrasound 2022; 11 (04) 330-331
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Kawakami H, Kubota Y, Makiyama H, Sato S, Ban T. Uneven double-lumen cannula for rescue guidewire technique in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy. Endoscopy 2017; 49 (10) E264-E265
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Ishiwatari H, Satoh T, Sato J. et al. Bile aspiration during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy is associated with lower risk of postprocedural adverse events: a retrospective single-center study. Surg Endosc 2021; 35 (12) 6836-6845
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Yane K, Yoshida M, Imagawa T. et al. Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transhepatic biliary drainage with a 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration needle and 0.018-inch guidewire in the procedure's induction phase. DEN Open 2023; 4 (01) e297
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar