EUS-guided rendezvous technique (EUS-RV) is an effective salvage technique for failed biliary cannulation during ERCP. However, it is still difficult to achieve cannulation in some cases, especially using the intrahepatic bile duct (IHBD) approach, which requires complicated guidewire manipulation. EUS-hybrid rendezvous technique (HRV) has been applied as a salvage technique for difficult guidewire placement during EUS-RV with IHBD approach. The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-HRV using a retrospective study. Database analysis revealed 29 patients who underwent EUS-RV for difficult biliary cannulation. Among them, 8 patients underwent EUS-HRV as a salvage technique for difficult guidewire placement during EUS-RV with the IHBD approach. In EUS-HRV, a 6-French dilator was advanced into the biliary system for better guidewire manipulation. After successful guidewire placement, the EUS scope was exchanged for a duodenoscope, keeping the guidewire and dilator in place. The EUS-placed guidewire was retrieved through the duodenoscope, followed by cannulation over the guidewire. The dilator remained at the fistula until completion of the procedure. The analysis showed that the guidewire placement and the subsequent scope exchange and deep biliary cannulation after the retrieval of the EUS-placed guidewire were successfully conducted for all 8 patients. Mild pancreatitis was recognized as an adverse event in 1 patient. The overall success rate of EUS-RV combined with EUS-HRV was improved up to 90% (26/29). Our results suggested that EUS-HRV can be an effective and safe salvage technique in cases wherein guidewire placement is difficult during EUS-RV with IHBD approach.

Endoscopic management of biliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy can be challenging because the altered anatomy makes it difficult to insert an endoscope into the biliary orifice. Even if insertion is feasible, the worse maneuverability of the endoscope and the restriction in available devices and techniques could complicate the procedure. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound‐guided antegrade intervention (EUS‐AG) has been reported as a useful management method for biliary diseases, especially in patients with surgically altered anatomy. In EUS‐AG, the biliary disease is managed in an antegrade fashion through a temporal fistula created under EUS guidance between the intrahepatic biliary duct and upper intestine. In this article, we reviewed the current status of EUS‐AG for each biliary diseases, malignant biliary obstruction, bile duct stones, and benign biliary stricture in patients with surgically altered anatomy.

Background Benign choledochojejunal anastomotic stricture (CJS) is a common complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy and choledochojejunostomy. CJS is generally treated with balloon dilation, using balloon endoscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (BE-ERCP); however, its long- and short-term outcomes have not been fully evaluated. Therefore, we evaluated the treatment outcomes of balloon dilation with BE-ERCP for CJS. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 40 patients who had undergone balloon dilation with BE-ERCP for CJS between January 2009 and December 2022. The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success, and adverse event rates of balloon dilation using BE-ERCP for CJS. The secondary outcomes were long-term treatment outcomes for CJS recurrence, and evaluation of risk factors for recurrence. Result Technical and clinical success rates were 93% (37/40) and 100% (37/37), respectively. CJS recurrence occurred in 32% (20/37). No procedure-related adverse events were observed. The significant risk factors of CJS after balloon dilation were its early occurrence after surgery (unit hazard ratio [HR] for month, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76–0.99; p-value = 0.04) and residual waist during balloon dilation (HR, 5.46; 95% CI, 1.18–25.1; p-value = 0.03). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of time from surgery to balloon dilation revealed an area under the curve of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65–0.94) and the cut-off value was 13.2 months. Conclusion Treatment of CJS with balloon dilation was effective, although CJS recurrence occurred in one-third of the patients. The risk factors for recurrence were early occurrence of CJS after surgery and remaining waist circumference during balloon dilation.

BackgroundEndoscopic ultrasound‐guided antegrade treatment (EUS‐AG) and balloon endoscopy‐assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (BE‐ERCP) have emerged as useful procedures for managing bile duct stones (BDS) in patients with surgically altered anatomy. However, the comparison between these two procedures has not been well studied.The aim of our study was to compare the clinical outcomes of EUS‐AG and BE‐ERCP for managing BDS in patients with surgically altered anatomy.MethodsThe database was retrospectively evaluated at two tertiary care centers to identify patients with surgically altered anatomy who underwent either EUS‐AG or BE‐ERCP for BDS. Clinical outcomes were compared between the procedures. The success rate of each procedure was evaluated in three steps: endoscopic approach, biliary access, and stone extraction.ResultsAmong the 119 identified patients, 23 had EUS‐AG, and 96 had BE‐ERCP. The overall technical success rates of EUS‐AG and BE‐ERCP were 65.2% (15/23) and 69.8% (67/96), respectively (P = .80). The comparison of each step between the procedures EUS‐AG versus BE‐ERCP was as follows: endoscopic approach, 100% (23/23) versus 88.5% (85/96) (P = .11); biliary access, 73.9% (17/23) versus 80.0% (68/85) (P = .57); stone extraction, 88.2% (15/17) versus 98.5% (67/68) (P = .10). The overall adverse event rate was 17.4% (4/23) versus 7.3% (7/96) (P = .22).ConclusionsBoth EUS‐AG and BE‐ERCP are effective and relatively safe procedures in the management of BDS in patients with surgically altered anatomy. The challenging steps of each procedure might be different, which could help decide which one to use to manage BDS in patients with surgically altered anatomy.

No abstract