The Comparison of Endoscopic Biliary Drainage in Malignant Hilar Obstruction by Cholangiocarcinoma: Bilateral Metal Stents versus Multiple Plastic Stents
- Author:
Jun Young KIM
1
;
Sang-geul LEE
;
Danbee KANG
;
Dong Kyu LEE
;
Joo Kyung PARK
;
Kyu Taek LEE
;
Jong Kyun LEE
;
Kwang Hyuck LEE
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Gut and Liver 2021;15(6):922-929
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background/Aims:For the management of hilar malignant biliary obstruction (HMBO), endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) is preferred over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) because of its convenience. However, there is no established guideline for malignant hilar obstruction that requires multiple stenting. In this study, we compared the efficacy of bilateral metal stents (BMS) versus multiple plastic stents (MPS).
Methods:In this retrospective study, we analyzed 102 patients who underwent EBD with either BMS or MPS due to HMBO caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma between 1996 and 2018 at Samsung Medical Center. We compared the successful drainage rates, cholangitis events, overall complications, mortality, and conversion rates to PTBD between the two groups.
Results:The successful drainage rates in the BMS group and the MPS group were 71.4% (25/35) and 65.6% (44/67), respectively, with no significant difference. The MPS group had a higher cholangitis risk (hazard ratio [HR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 3.58) and higher 6-month mortality (HR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.26 to 6.71) than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in overall complications or the conversion rate to PTBD between the groups.
Conclusions:In patients with malignant HMBO, the BMS group showed better outcomes in terms of the cholangitis rate and 6-month mortality than the MPS group. Therefore, if possible, bilateral metal stenting is recommended for HMBO caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
