EUS-guided gastroenterostomy

A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques

Yen I. Chen, Rastislav Kunda, Andrew C. Storm, Hanaa Dakour Aridi, Christopher C. Thompson, Jose Nieto, Theodore James, Shayan Irani, Majidah Bukhari, Olaya Brewer Gutierrez, Amol Agarwal, Lea Fayad, Robert Moran, Nuha Alammar, Omid Sanaei, Marcia Canto, Vikesh Singh, Todd H. Baron, Mouen Khashab

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 74 patients (44.6% women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2% and 33.8% of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2% of the direct and 90.9% of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3% for the direct technique and 90.9% for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8% with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions: EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Gastroenterostomy
Gastric Outlet Obstruction
Multicenter Studies
Length of Stay
Retrospective Studies
Diet
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy : A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. / Chen, Yen I.; Kunda, Rastislav; Storm, Andrew C.; Aridi, Hanaa Dakour; Thompson, Christopher C.; Nieto, Jose; James, Theodore; Irani, Shayan; Bukhari, Majidah; Gutierrez, Olaya Brewer; Agarwal, Amol; Fayad, Lea; Moran, Robert; Alammar, Nuha; Sanaei, Omid; Canto, Marcia; Singh, Vikesh; Baron, Todd H.; Khashab, Mouen.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chen, YI, Kunda, R, Storm, AC, Aridi, HD, Thompson, CC, Nieto, J, James, T, Irani, S, Bukhari, M, Gutierrez, OB, Agarwal, A, Fayad, L, Moran, R, Alammar, N, Sanaei, O, Canto, M, Singh, V, Baron, TH & Khashab, M 2018, 'EUS-guided gastroenterostomy: A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques', Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.030
Chen, Yen I. ; Kunda, Rastislav ; Storm, Andrew C. ; Aridi, Hanaa Dakour ; Thompson, Christopher C. ; Nieto, Jose ; James, Theodore ; Irani, Shayan ; Bukhari, Majidah ; Gutierrez, Olaya Brewer ; Agarwal, Amol ; Fayad, Lea ; Moran, Robert ; Alammar, Nuha ; Sanaei, Omid ; Canto, Marcia ; Singh, Vikesh ; Baron, Todd H. ; Khashab, Mouen. / EUS-guided gastroenterostomy : A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2018.
@article{4b5925673b40443984ac1c69f5e0cc1b,
title = "EUS-guided gastroenterostomy: A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques",
abstract = "Background: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 74 patients (44.6{\%} women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2{\%} and 33.8{\%} of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2{\%} of the direct and 90.9{\%} of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3{\%} for the direct technique and 90.9{\%} for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8{\%} with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions: EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.",
author = "Chen, {Yen I.} and Rastislav Kunda and Storm, {Andrew C.} and Aridi, {Hanaa Dakour} and Thompson, {Christopher C.} and Jose Nieto and Theodore James and Shayan Irani and Majidah Bukhari and Gutierrez, {Olaya Brewer} and Amol Agarwal and Lea Fayad and Robert Moran and Nuha Alammar and Omid Sanaei and Marcia Canto and Vikesh Singh and Baron, {Todd H.} and Mouen Khashab",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.030",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - EUS-guided gastroenterostomy

T2 - A multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques

AU - Chen, Yen I.

AU - Kunda, Rastislav

AU - Storm, Andrew C.

AU - Aridi, Hanaa Dakour

AU - Thompson, Christopher C.

AU - Nieto, Jose

AU - James, Theodore

AU - Irani, Shayan

AU - Bukhari, Majidah

AU - Gutierrez, Olaya Brewer

AU - Agarwal, Amol

AU - Fayad, Lea

AU - Moran, Robert

AU - Alammar, Nuha

AU - Sanaei, Omid

AU - Canto, Marcia

AU - Singh, Vikesh

AU - Baron, Todd H.

AU - Khashab, Mouen

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 74 patients (44.6% women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2% and 33.8% of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2% of the direct and 90.9% of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3% for the direct technique and 90.9% for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8% with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions: EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.

AB - Background: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 74 patients (44.6% women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2% and 33.8% of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2% of the direct and 90.9% of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3% for the direct technique and 90.9% for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8% with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions: EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041524957&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041524957&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.030

DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.030

M3 - Article

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

ER -