Aims In recently published comparative studies, it is reported that percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is less successful, causes more adverse events, and needs more re-interventions than endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) in patients with malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. Could an improved technique of PTBD produce better results to use this technique for further comparative studies with EUSBD? Methods In our tertiary referral hospital, 116 prospectively documented, and retrospectively analyzed PTBDs with ultrasound guided ductal puncture were performed. In 16 of 30 PTBDs with metal stent implantation in malignant diseases, metal stent was inserted as a one-step procedure by endoscopic luminal guidance in the first session. Results Fifteen of 16 (94%) or 14/16 (88%) of PTBDs with primary metal stent implantation were technically or clinically successful. Mainly the left liver was used as access route for PTBD. Procedure time was 68.1 minutes (25–118), fluoroscopic time: 18.6 minutes (3–46), and patient radiation exposure: 5957 μGy/m2 (471–17,569). In 2/16 (12.5%) patients, adverse events (1 × mild and 1 × moderate grade of severity) were documented. One re-intervention was necessary (0.1/patient) in the observation time of 6 months. The mean overall survival time was 163.2 (7–864) days after PTBD. Conclusions PTBD with ultrasound-guided ductal puncture and primary metal implantation by endoscopic luminal guidance in patients with malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction showed good technical and clinical success and low adverse event and reintervention rates in our retrospective cohort study. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03541590.

Objectives Epinephrine injection is the therapy of first choice in post sphincterotomy bleeding (PSB), but may not be efficient in all cases and can cause postprocedural myocardial infarction. Plastic stent insertion (PSI) may be a better treatment. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare epinephrine injection with PSI with respect to efficacy and safety. Methods Clinical success, number of reinterventions and hospital stays after therapy, postprocedural myocardial infarction, bilirubin increase, and pancreatitis as well as factors influencing PSB were analyzed. Results Seventy-nine PSBs in 5798 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticographies (ERCPs) from August 2002 through October 2018 were treated by epinephrine injection, PSI or both (n = 34, 30, 15). Clinical success of PSB therapy showed no difference: 33/34 (97%), 30/30 (100%), 14/15 (93%). Reinterventions were more frequent (n = 30 versus n = 1; P ≤ 0.0001) and hospital stay was longer [median: 3 (2–10) versus 2 (1–3) days; P = 0.0357] in patients who received PSI (versus epinephrine injection). Postprocedural adverse events were very rare: bilirubin increase (1/2/0) and pancreatitis (0/2/1). Intraprocedural episodes of hypertension (≥180 mmHg) were documented in 45–54%. Conclusions Epinephrine injection is better than PSI in PSB. PSI may be an adequate treatment in patients with otherwise indicated stent insertion. Intraprocedural episodes of hypertension may be a risk factor for PSB.