Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Biliary drainage prior to pancreatoduodenectomy with endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy versus conventional ERCP: Propensity score-matched study and surgeon survey

  • Jeska A Fritzsche
  • , Mike J P de Jong
  • , Bert A Bonsing
  • , Olivier Busch
  • , Freek Daams
  • , Wouter J M Derksen
  • , Lydi van Driel
  • , Sebastiaan Festen
  • , Erwin-Jan M van Geenen
  • , Frederik J H Hoogwater
  • , Akin Inderson
  • , Sjoerd D Kuiken
  • , Mike S L Liem
  • , Daan J Lips
  • , Maarten W Nijkamp
  • , Hjalmar Van Santvoort
  • , Peter D Siersema
  • , Martijn W J Stommel
  • , Niels G Venneman
  • , Robert C Verdonk
  • Frank P Vleggaar, Roeland F de Wilde, Marc G Besselink, Roy L J van Wanrooij, Rogier P Voermans

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background Preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage may lead to complications (16%-24%), potentially hampering surgical exploration. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) may reduce drainage-related complications; however, in the absence of surgeon-reported outcomes, it is unknown whether EUS-CDS may hamper surgical exploration. This study assessed the impact of preoperative EUS-CDS on pancreatoduodenectomy. Method Consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy after preoperative biliary drainage were included in all eight centers performing EUS-CDS in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (Jan 2020-Dec 2022). The primary outcome was major postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included bile leak grade B/C, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C, and overall postoperative complications. A propensity score-matching (1:3) analysis was performed. Surgeons performing pancreatoduodenectomy after EUS-CDS completed a survey on surgical difficulty. Results 937 patients with pancreatoduodenectomy after preoperative biliary drainage were included (42 EUS-CDS, 895 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]). Major postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (19.0%) in the EUS-CDS group and 292 (32.6%) in the ERCP group (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95%CI 0.23-1.07). No significant differences were observed in overall complications (RR 0.95; 95%CI 0.51-1.76), bile leak (RR 1.25; 95%CI 0.31-4.98), or POPF (RR 0.62; 95%CI 0.25-1.56). Results were similar after matching. The survey was completed for 29 pancreatoduodenectomies; surgery was not (13, 45%), slightly (9, 31%), clearly (5,17%), and severely (2, 7%) more complex because of EUS-CDS. Conclusion This early experience suggests that preoperative biliary drainage with EUS-CDS does not increase the rate of complications after pancreatoduodenectomy and only infrequently hampers surgical exploration.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)719-729
Number of pages11
JournalEndoscopy
Volume57
Issue number7
Early online date20 Feb 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 May 2025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Biliary drainage prior to pancreatoduodenectomy with endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy versus conventional ERCP: Propensity score-matched study and surgeon survey'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this