Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review

Abstract

BACKGROUND Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography is a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure that involves inserting a needle into the biliary tree, followed by the immediate insertion of a catheter. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a novel technique that allows BD by echoendoscopy and fluoroscopy using a stent from the biliary tree to the gastrointestinal tract. AIM To compare the technical aspects and outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD) and EUS-BD. METHODS Different databases, including PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses to obtain studies comparing PTBD and EUS-BD. RESULTS Among the six studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, PTBD patients underwent significantly more reinterventions (4.9 vs 1.3), experienced more postprocedural pain (4.1 vs 1.9), and experienced more late adverse events (53.8% vs 6.6%) than EUS-BD patients. There was a significant reduction in the total bilirubin levels in both the groups (16.4-3.3 μmol/L and 17.2-3.8 μmol/L for EUSBD and PTBD, respectively; P = 0.002) at the 7-d follow-up. There were no significant differences observed in the complication rates between PTBD and EUSBD (3.3 vs 3.8). PTBD was associated with a higher adverse event rate than EUSBD in all the procedures, including reinterventions (80.4% vs 15.7%, respectively) and a higher index procedure (39.2% vs 18.2%, respectively). CONCLUSION The findings of this systematic review revealed that EUS-BD is linked with a higher rate of effective BD and a more manageable procedure-related adverse event profile than PTBD. These findings highlight the evidence for successful EUS-BD implementation.