• Users Online:521
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

EUS-guided biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction: An international survey to identify barriers of technology implementation


1 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
2 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
3 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St-Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
4 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Alberta Hospital, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
5 Division of Gastroenterology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

Correspondence Address:
Yen-I Chen,
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Glen Site 1001 Decarie Blvd., Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1
Canada
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/EUS-D-21-00137

Background and Objectives: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a promising alternative to ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Despite accumulating data, however, its application in clinical practice has been impeded by undefined barriers. This study aims to evaluate the practice of EUS-BD and its barriers. Methods: An online survey was generated using Google Forms. Six gastroenterology/endoscopy associations were contacted between July 2019 and November 2019. Survey questions measured participant characteristics, EUS-BD in different clinical scenarios, and potential barriers. The primary outcome was the uptake of EUS-BD as a first-line modality, without previous ERCP attempts, in patients with MDBO. Results: Overall, 115 respondents completed the survey (2.9% response rate). Respondents were from North America (39.2%), Asia (28.6%), Europe (20%), and other jurisdictions (12.2%). Regarding the uptake of EUS-BD as first-line treatment for MDBO, only 10.5% of respondents would consider EUS-BD as a first-line modality regularly. The main concerns were the lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and limited access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. On multivariable analysis, lack of access to EUS-BD expertise was an independent predictor against the use of EUS-BD, odds ratio 0.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.04–0.65). In salvage situations following failed ERCP, most favored EUS-BD (40.9%) over percutaneous drainage (21.7%) in unresectable cancer. In borderline resectable or locally advanced disease, however, most favored the percutaneous approach due to fear of EUS-BD complicating future surgery. Conclusions: EUS-BD has not reached widespread clinical adoption. Identified barriers include lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and lack of access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. Fear of complicating future surgery was also identified as a barrier in potentially resectable disease.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Palmieri V
    -  Barkun A
    -  Forbes N
    -  Martel M
    -  Lam E
    -  Telford J
    -  Sandha G
    -  Paquin S
    -  Sahai A
    -  Chen YI
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed440    
    PDF Downloaded18    

Recommend this journal