Background and Purpose: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage remains a painful procedure in many cases despite the routine use of large amounts of intravenous sedation. We present a feasibility study of thoracic paravertebral blocks in an effort to reduce pain during and following the procedure and reduce requirements for intravenous sedation. Methods: Ten consecutive patients undergoing biliary drainage procedures received fluoroscopically guided paravertebral blocks and then had supplemental intravenous sedation as required to maintain patient comfort. Levels T8-T9 and T9-T10 on the right were targeted with 10-20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine. Sedation requirements and pain levels were recorded. Results: Ten biliary drainage procedures in 8 patients were performed for malignancy in 8 cases and for stones in 2. The mean midazolam use was 1.13 mg IV, and the mean fentanyl requirement was 60.0 μg IV in the block patients. Two episodes of hypotension, which responded promptly to volume replacement, may have been related to the block. No serious complications were encountered. The mean pain score when traversing the chest wall, liver capsule, and upon entering the bile ducts was 0.1 on a scale of 0 to 10, with 1 patient reporting a pain level of 1 and 9 reporting 0. The mean peak pain score, encountered when manipulating at the common bile duct level or when addressing stones there, was 5.4 and ranged from 0 to 10. Conclusions: Thoracic paravertebral block with intravenous sedation supplementation appears to be a feasible method of pain control during biliary interventions.

Abstract The expression intensities of cytokeratins and tight junction proteins were determined on re-epithelization. Experimental blister wound healing was studied in patients with diabetes mellitus and in patients with obstructive jaundice. Suction blisters were induced on healthy volunteers, and the healing blisters were biopsied at different time points. Cytokeratin expression and the tight junction proteins ZO-1 and occludin were studied immunohistochemically. Blisters were induced on 17 patients with diabetes and 11 control subjects, and the healing process was followed indirectly by measuring water evaporation and blood flow in the wounds. Microvascular reactivity in the diabetic patients was also studied by using non-immunologic contact irritants. Wound healing, skin collagen synthesis and serum levels of procollagen propeptides were studied in 24 patients with obstructive jaundice caused by neoplastic pancreaticobiliary obstruction and in 17 control patients with the corresponding condition without jaundice. Cytokeratin expression was altered in healing epidermis. In the suprabasal layer, K10 was replaced by K14 and, most likely, by K16. K18 keratin, which is not present in normal epidermis, was found in the basal and suprabasal layers. Thus, there was a shift towards lower molecular weight cytokeratins, which is a reflection of immaturity, and probably towards motility. The tight junction proteins ZO-1 and occludin were expressed in the migrating epidermal sheet, where they apparently form an early barrier. Enhanced expression was seen in the hyperproliferative zone of the wound edge. The diabetic patients showed slower restoration of the epidermal barrier and a weaker initial inflammatory response. Obstructive jaundice and its resolution had no effect on healing. Skin collagen synthesis was decreased in jaundiced patients, and it increased slightly after drainage. Serum type III collagen propeptide levels were elevated in patients with biliary obstruction and dropped after drainage. The elevated levels may be related to the increased synthesis due to fibrosis. As a conclusion, diabetes mellitus impairs epidermal wound healing, while obstructive jaundice does not.

Introdução: os tumores biliopancreáticos geralmente são diagnosticados num estágio avançado sem condições de ressecção cirúrgica. A drenagem biliar por colangiopancreatografia retrógrada endoscópica (CPRE) é o padrão ouro no tratamento paliativo desses pacientes. Entretanto, em alguns casos a CPRE pode falhar. A drenagem biliar guiada por ultrassom endoscópico (DB-USE) surgiu como uma alternativa nesses casos de falha da CPRE. Os dois métodos principais para a DB-USE são a coledocoduodenostomia (CDS) e a hepaticogastrostomia (HGS). Porém, não existe um consenso sobre a melhor das duas técnicas. Portanto, realizamos uma revisão sistemática e metanálise para avaliar esses dois principais métodos de DB-USE. Métodos: uma revisão sistemática foi conduzida utilizando-se as bases de dados eletrônicas Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus e LILACS. Foram selecionados estudos comparando a CDS com a HGS em pacientes com obstrução biliar maligna com falha na CPRE. Os riscos de vieses foram avaliados pela escala de Jadad para os ensaios clínicos randomizados e pela Newcastle Ottawa Scale para os estudos de coorte. Os dados dos estudos foram extraídos segundo os seguintes desfechos: sucesso técnico, sucesso clínico, eventos adversos, sobrevida e tempo do procedimento. A análise estatística foi realizada utilizando-se os softwares RevMan 5 e Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Resultados: Foram selecionados 10 estudos, sendo dois ensaios clínicos randomizados, dois estudos prospectivos e seis estudos retrospectivos. Um total de 434 pacientes foram incluídos na metanálise: 208 submetidos a drenagem biliar via HGS e os 226 restantes submetidos a CDS. O sucesso técnico para a CDS-USE e HGS-USE foi de 94,1% e 93,7%, respectivamente, não apresentando significância estatística (OR = 0,96, IC 95% = 0,39, 2.33). O sucesso clínico foi de 88,5% na CDS-USE e 84,5% na HGS-USE. Não foi observada diferença nos dois grupos (OR = 0,76, IC 95% = 0,42, 1.35). Em relação aos eventos adversos, também não foi identificada diferença estatística (OR = 0,97, IC 95% = 0,60, 1.56). A diferença entre as médias do tempo de procedimento foi de -2,69 (-4,44, -0,95). Portanto, a CDS-USE foi dois minutos mais rápido. Em relação à sobrevida após o procedimento, a diferença entre as médias foi de 39,5 (-9,75, 88,93). Porém, essa análise foi limitada devido a alta heterogeneidade (I2=97%). Conclusão: A CDS-USE e a HGS-USE apresentam equivalentes eficácia e segurança. Ambas as técnicas estão associadas a uma alta taxa de sucesso técnico e clínico. A escolha da técnica deve ser baseada na experiência do endoscopista e também pela anatomia do paciente. Novos ensaios clínicos randomizados são necessários para comparar os dois procedimentos / Background and Aims: Biliopancreatic tumors are usually diagnosed at an advanced stage without conditions of surgical resection. Biliary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard in the palliative treatment of these patients. However, in some cases ERCP may fail. Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative in these cases of ERCP failure. The two main methods for EUS-BD are choledochoduodenostomy (CDS-EUS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS-EUS). However, there is no consensus if one approach is better than the other. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate these two main EUS-BD methods. Methods: a systematic review was conducted using databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus and LILACS. We selected studies comparing CDS and HGS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction with ERCP failure. Risks of bias were assessed by the Jadad scale for randomized clinical trials and by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. The data from the studies were extracted according to the following outcomes: technical success, clinical success, adverse events, survival and procedure time. Statistical analysis was performed using the software RevMan 5 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Results: among the ten studies included in meta-analysis two were randomized clinical trials, RCT, two prospective and six retrospective. A total of 434 patients were included in the meta-analysis: 208 underwent biliary drainage via HGS-USE and the remaining 226 submitted to CDS-USE. The technical success for CDS-USE and HGS-USE was 94.1% and 93.7%, respectively, without statistical significance (OR = 0.96, IC 95% = 0.39, 2.33). Clinical success was 88.5% in CDS-USE and 84.5% in HGS-USE. No difference was observed in the two groups (OR = 0.76, IC 95% = 0.42, 1.35). In relation to adverse events, no statistical difference was identified (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.60, 1.56). Pooled difference in means was -2.69 (-4.44, -0.95). Therefore CDS was about two minutes faster. Regarding the survival after the procedure, pooled difference in means was 39.5 (-9.75, 88.93). Therefore, this analysis was limited by considerable heterogeneity (I2=97%). Conclusion: EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal efficacy and safety and are both associated with very high technical and clinical success. The choice of approach may be selected based on endoscopist\'s expertise and patient anatomy. Further prospective clinical trials are required to further compare the two procedures

Introdução: os tumores biliopancreáticos geralmente são diagnosticados num estágio avançado sem condições de ressecção cirúrgica. A drenagem biliar por colangiopancreatografia retrógrada endoscópica (CPRE) é o padrão ouro no tratamento paliativo desses pacientes. Entretanto, em alguns casos a CPRE pode falhar. A drenagem biliar guiada por ultrassom endoscópico (DB-USE) surgiu como uma alternativa nesses casos de falha da CPRE. Os dois métodos principais para a DB-USE são a coledocoduodenostomia (CDS) e a hepaticogastrostomia (HGS). Porém, não existe um consenso sobre a melhor das duas técnicas. Portanto, realizamos uma revisão sistemática e metanálise para avaliar esses dois principais métodos de DB-USE. Métodos: uma revisão sistemática foi conduzida utilizando-se as bases de dados eletrônicas Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus e LILACS. Foram selecionados estudos comparando a CDS com a HGS em pacientes com obstrução biliar maligna com falha na CPRE. Os riscos de vieses foram avaliados pela escala de Jadad para os ensaios clínicos randomizados e pela Newcastle Ottawa Scale para os estudos de coorte. Os dados dos estudos foram extraídos segundo os seguintes desfechos: sucesso técnico, sucesso clínico, eventos adversos, sobrevida e tempo do procedimento. A análise estatística foi realizada utilizando-se os softwares RevMan 5 e Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Resultados: Foram selecionados 10 estudos, sendo dois ensaios clínicos randomizados, dois estudos prospectivos e seis estudos retrospectivos. Um total de 434 pacientes foram incluídos na metanálise: 208 submetidos a drenagem biliar via HGS e os 226 restantes submetidos a CDS. O sucesso técnico para a CDS-USE e HGS-USE foi de 94,1% e 93,7%, respectivamente, não apresentando significância estatística (OR = 0,96, IC 95% = 0,39, 2.33). O sucesso clínico foi de 88,5% na CDS-USE e 84,5% na HGS-USE. Não foi observada diferença nos dois grupos (OR = 0,76, IC 95% = 0,42, 1.35). Em relação aos eventos adversos, também não foi identificada diferença estatística (OR = 0,97, IC 95% = 0,60, 1.56). A diferença entre as médias do tempo de procedimento foi de -2,69 (-4,44, -0,95). Portanto, a CDS-USE foi dois minutos mais rápido. Em relação à sobrevida após o procedimento, a diferença entre as médias foi de 39,5 (-9,75, 88,93). Porém, essa análise foi limitada devido a alta heterogeneidade (I2=97%). Conclusão: A CDS-USE e a HGS-USE apresentam equivalentes eficácia e segurança. Ambas as técnicas estão associadas a uma alta taxa de sucesso técnico e clínico. A escolha da técnica deve ser baseada na experiência do endoscopista e também pela anatomia do paciente. Novos ensaios clínicos randomizados são necessários para comparar os dois procedimentos / Background and Aims: Biliopancreatic tumors are usually diagnosed at an advanced stage without conditions of surgical resection. Biliary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard in the palliative treatment of these patients. However, in some cases ERCP may fail. Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative in these cases of ERCP failure. The two main methods for EUS-BD are choledochoduodenostomy (CDS-EUS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS-EUS). However, there is no consensus if one approach is better than the other. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate these two main EUS-BD methods. Methods: a systematic review was conducted using databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus and LILACS. We selected studies comparing CDS and HGS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction with ERCP failure. Risks of bias were assessed by the Jadad scale for randomized clinical trials and by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. The data from the studies were extracted according to the following outcomes: technical success, clinical success, adverse events, survival and procedure time. Statistical analysis was performed using the software RevMan 5 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Results: among the ten studies included in meta-analysis two were randomized clinical trials, RCT, two prospective and six retrospective. A total of 434 patients were included in the meta-analysis: 208 underwent biliary drainage via HGS-USE and the remaining 226 submitted to CDS-USE. The technical success for CDS-USE and HGS-USE was 94.1% and 93.7%, respectively, without statistical significance (OR = 0.96, IC 95% = 0.39, 2.33). Clinical success was 88.5% in CDS-USE and 84.5% in HGS-USE. No difference was observed in the two groups (OR = 0.76, IC 95% = 0.42, 1.35). In relation to adverse events, no statistical difference was identified (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.60, 1.56). Pooled difference in means was -2.69 (-4.44, -0.95). Therefore CDS was about two minutes faster. Regarding the survival after the procedure, pooled difference in means was 39.5 (-9.75, 88.93). Therefore, this analysis was limited by considerable heterogeneity (I2=97%). Conclusion: EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal efficacy and safety and are both associated with very high technical and clinical success. The choice of approach may be selected based on endoscopist\'s expertise and patient anatomy. Further prospective clinical trials are required to further compare the two procedures

Le cholangiocarcinome (CC) est une tumeur maligne au pronostic péjoratif dont le traitement repose sur la résection chirurgicale. Il représente 3 % de l’ensemble des cancers digestifs et il est la deuxième tumeur primitive du foie, en fréquence, derrière le carcinome hépatocellulaire. L’âge moyen est de 70 ans avec une prédominance masculine. On distingue actuellement les cholangiocarcinomes intra et extra-hépatiques. La survie est inférieure à 5% à 5 ans tous stades confondues. 60 à 70 % sont des tumeurs de la convergence des canaux biliaires appelées également tumeurs de Klatskin.Le but de ce travail était de répondre aux interrogations persistantes concernant le cholangiocarcinome péri-hilaire (CCPH) en appliquant différentes méthodes statistiques sur différentes bases de données et revue de la littérature.Les trois axes principaux de ce travail s’articulent selon la temporalité de prise en charge, du diagnostic aux suites post-opératoires en passant par la mise en condition préopératoire.Le premier axe repose sur une base de données locale (registre de cancer digestif du Calvados). Les résultats montrent que le CCPH constitue seulement un tiers des cholangiocarcinomes dans la population générale, que son taux d’incidence est stable avec néanmoins une diminution d’incidence, bien que non-significative, chez les femmes ayant un CCPH et que le sexe féminin est un facteur pronostic négatif pour la survie à 5 ans. Le deuxième axe concernait la prise en charge préopératoire des patients, notamment l’optimisation préopératoire du foie restant par le drainage biliaire. Ce travail repose sur deux méta-analyses. Il a permis de mettre en évidence la supériorité de la voie radiologique sur la voie endoscopique concernant les complications liées à la procédure mais en revanche, l’absence de différence significative sur la morbi-mortalité post-résection hépatique, la survie à 5 ans, la survie sans récidive et le taux de dissémination liée à la procédure quand les procédures sont étudiées en intention de traiter. Nos résultats suggèrent qu’un mauvais choix de voie d’abord pour réaliser le drainage biliaire conduit à des échecs répétés qui influencent la récidive tumorale et donc la survie. Le troisième axe s’intéressait aux facteurs pronostiques de morbi-mortalité immédiates post-résection hépatique à partir d’une base de données Européenne (base de l’association Française de chirurgie). Les résultats montrent que la surface corporelle ≥ 1.82 m², l’hyperbilirubinémie > 50 µmol/l et la résection hépatique droite sont des facteurs prédictifs indépendants influençant la mortalité post-opératoire à 30 jours. / Cholangiocarcinoma (CC) is a malignant tumor with a poor prognosis. Its treatment is based on surgical resection. It accounts for 3% of all digestive cancers and is the second primary tumor of the liver, in frequency, after hepatocellular carcinoma. The average age is 70 years old with male predominance. At present intra and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas are distinguished. Survival rate is less than 5% at 5 years in all stages. 60 to 70% are tumors of the biliary convergence also called Klatskin tumors.The aim of this work was to answer persistent questions about peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC) by applying different statistical methods on different databases and review of the literature.The three main axes of this work are articulated according to the temporality of management, from the diagnosis to the postoperative follow-up, going through the preoperative setting.The first axis is based on a local database (registry of digestive cancer of Calvados). The results show that PHCC accounts for only one third of cholangiocarcinomas in the general population, that its incidence rate is stable with a decrease in incidence, although not significant, in women having PHCC and that female gender is a negative prognostic factor for 5-year survival. The second axis concerned the preoperative management of patients, including preoperative optimization of the remaining liver by biliary drainage. This work is based on two Meta-analyzes. It made it possible to highlight the superiority of the radiological way in the endoscopic way concerning the complications related to the procedure but on the other hand, the absence of significant difference on the morbi-mortality post hepatic resection, the survival at 5 years, the recurrence free survival and the rate of dissemination related to the procedure when the procedures are studied in intent to treat. Our results suggest that a poor choice of pathway for achieving biliary drainage leads to repeated failures that influence tumor recurrence and thus survival. The third axis was concerned with the prognostic factors of immediate morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection from a European database (base of the French association of surgery). The results show that body surface area ≥ 1.82 m², hyperbilirubinemia > 50 μmol / l and right hepatic resection are independent predictors influencing post-operative mortality at 30 days.