Temporary placement of a covered duodenal stent can avoid riskier anterograde biliary drainage when ERCP for obstructive jaundice fails due to duodenal invasion
- 269 Downloads
Duodenal stenosis is one of the most common causes of failed ERCP for obstructive jaundice. Alternative approaches include anterograde biliary drainage, with higher morbidity. We report in this study the efficacy and safety of temporary placement of a covered duodenal self-expandable metal stent (cSEMS) in order to access the papilla and achieve secondary retrograde biliary drainage in patients with obstructive jaundice and failed ERCP due to concomitant duodenal stenosis.
From June 2006 to March 2014, a total of 26 consecutive patients presenting obstructive jaundice without severe sepsis with failed ERCP due to duodenal invasion were enrolled. A temporary 7-day duodenal cSEMS was placed during the failed ERCP, and a second ERCP was attempted at day 7 after duodenal stent removal.
Duodenal cSEMS placement and retrieval were technically successful in all cases. Access to the papilla at day 7 was possible in 25 cases (96 %, 95 % CI 80–99 %). Secondary successful ERCP was achieved in 19 cases (76 %, 95 % CI 55–91 %, i.e., 73 %, 95 % CI 73–86 %, in an intention-to-treat analysis). Mean bilirubin level was 102 ± 90 µmol/L at baseline rising to 164 ± 121 µmol/L at day 7. There were 6 stent migrations and no adverse events recorded between the two ERCPs.
When ERCP for obstructive jaundice fails due to duodenal invasion, temporary cSEMS placement offers a safe and effective way to achieve successful secondary ERCP while avoiding riskier endoscopic ultrasound or percutaneous transhepatic anterograde biliary drainage.
KeywordsDuodenal covered SEMS Duodenal stenosis Failed ERCP Gastric outlet obstruction EUS-guided biliary drainage
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Felix Goutorbe, Olivier Rouquette, Aurélien Mulliez, Julien Scanzi, Marion Goutte, Michel Dapoigny, Armand Abergel, Laurent Poincloux have no conflicts of interest to declare.
- 6.Wang K, Zhu J, Xing L, Wang Y, Jin Z, Li Z (2016) Assessment of efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 83(6):1218–1227Google Scholar
- 8.ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Fukami N, Anderson MA, Khan K, Harrison ME, Appalaneni V, Ben-Menachem T, Decker GA, Fanelli RD, Fisher L, Ikenberry SO, Jain R, Jue TL, Krinsky ML, Maple JT, Sharaf RN, Dominitz JA (2011) The role of endoscopy in gastroduodenal obstruction and gastroparesis. Gastrointest Endosc 74(1):13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Tanaka A, Takada T, Kawarada Y, Nimura Y, Yoshida M, Miura F, Hirota M, Wada K, Mayumi T, Gomi H, Solomkin JS, Strasberg SM, Pitt HA, Belghiti J, de Santibanes E, Padbury R, Chen MF, Belli G, Ker CG, Hilvano SC, Fan ST, Liau KH (2007) Antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis: Tokyo guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 14(1):59–67CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.Manta R, Conigliaro R, Mangiafico S, Forti E, Bertani H, Frazzoni M, Galloro G, Mutignani M, Zullo A (2015) A multimodal, one-session endoscopic approach for management of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Surg Endosc 21:1–6Google Scholar
- 15.Hamada T, Isayama H, Nakai Y, Kogura H, Yamamoto N, Kawakubo K, Takahara N, Uchino R, Mizuno S, Sasaki T, Togawa O, Matsubara S, Ito Y, Hirano K, Tsujino T, Tada M, Koike K (2014) Transmural biliary drainage can be an alternative to transpapillary drainage in patients with an indwelling duodenal stent. Dig Dis Sci 59(8):1931–1938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar