Background and Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative in cases of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Two types of EUS-BD methods for achieving biliary drainage when ERCP fails are choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) or hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). 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 2 main EUS-BD methods. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane database, LILACS from inception through April 8, 2017, using the following search terms in various combinations: biliary drainage, biliary stent, transluminal biliary drainage, choledochoduodenostomy, hepaticogastrostomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage. We selected studies comparing CDS and HGS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction with ERCP failure. Pooled odds ratio (OR) were calculated for technical success, clinical success, and adverse events and difference of means calculated for duration of procedure and survival after procedure. Results: A total of 10 studies with 434 patients were included in the meta-analysis: 208 underwent biliary drainage via HGS and the remaining 226 via CDS. The technical success for CDS and HGS was 94.1% and 93.7%, respectively, pooled OR=0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.39-2.33, I ²=0%]. Clinical success was 88.5% in CDS and 84.5% in HGS, pooled OR=0.76 (95% CI=0.42-1.35, I ²=17%). There was no difference for adverse events OR=0.97 (95% CI=0.60-1.56), I ²=37%. CDS was about 2 minutes faster with a pooled difference in means of was −2.69 (95% CI=−4.44 to −0.95). Conclusion: EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS have equal efficacy and safety, and are both associated with a very high technical and clinical success. The choice of approach may be selected based on patient anatomy.

Background. Clinical demand for liver transplant steadily grows while organs offer has reached a plateau years ago. To expand the donor liver pool, various options have been considered including acceptance of suboptimal donors and steatotic grafts, with a risk of poorer outcomes. The latter risk and its relation to the grade of liver graft steatosis have been studied in this prospective clinical study. Methods. One hundred eighteen consecutive liver transplantation (115 patients) performed between May 2002 and March 2008 were prospectively analyzed. According to the grade of steatosis on a 2 hr postreperfusion biopsy, four groups were considered: absence (<5%) (n=34), mild (<30%) (n=40), moderate (30%–60%) (n=23), or severe steatosis (≥60%) (n=21). Donors and recipients demographic data, and patients and grafts survival rates were compared among the four groups. Results. Eighty-four (71%) grafts presented some degree of steatosis (macrosteatosis: 19.5%, microsteatosis: 47%, mix type: 33.5%). Patient and graft survival were significant lower in the “severe steatosis” group, as a whole. Grafts with less than 30% predominant macro-, or microsteatosis also had poorer outcomes with lower patient and graft survival rates. Conclusion. Steatotic liver grafts were used on a large scale (71%) in this clinical series. The analysis confirms that using grafts with moderate (>30%) and severe steatosis (>60%) have a negative impact on outcomes. The authors conclude that using these grafts allow a significant increase in organ offer that counterbalances the negative outcome for patients who are not offered a transplant, and this supports the need for further clinical research.

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) may be useful in attenuating the hepatic ischemia reperfusion (IR) syndrome by means of improving cell resistance to anoxia and reoxygenation and preventing cell death. Since there are insufficient data available regarding the chronology of preconditioning effects, we investigated the role of IPC, to test the hypothesis that liver protection would occur during the early and intermediate phases of the reperfusion period. Wistar rats (n = 72) were randomly assigned into six experimental groups, 12 animals each. A 40-min ischemia to the left lateral and median liver lobes was induced by selective hepatic pedicle clamping followed by 30 min or 240 min of reperfusion (IR30 and IR240). IPC groups (IPC30 and IPC240) underwent a 10 min of ischemia followed by 10 min of reperfusion preceding the definitive 40-min ischemic period. Sham-operated animals were followed for 30 and 240 min. Hepatic enzymes and histological evaluation were performed after the reperfusion period. Hepatic ischemia–reperfusion (IR30 and IR240) induced marked increases in liver enzymes levels after 30 min and particularly after 240 min. IPC effectively attenuated those enzymatic increases. Microvesicular steatosis was observed after 30 min, but not 240 min, of reperfusion in both IPC and IR livers. Necrosis was detected in 66.7% of IR240 and only in 8.3% of IPC240. Both hepatocyte and sinusoidal apoptosis were markedly attenuated by IPC. We conclude that IPC provided protection against hepatic ischemia reperfusion injury in early and intermediate phases of the reperfusion period, reducing hepatic enzymatic leakage and ameliorating hepatic apoptosis and necrosis.

This study tests the hypothesis that local or remote ischemic preconditioning may protect the intestinal mucosa against ischemia and reperfusion injuries resulting from temporary supraceliac aortic clamping. Twenty-eight Wistar rats were divided into four groups: the sham surgery group, the supraceliac aortic occlusion group, the local ischemic preconditioning prior to supraceliac aortic occlusion group, and the remote ischemic preconditioning prior to supraceliac aortic occlusion group. Tissue samples from the small bowel were used for quantitative morphometric analysis of mucosal injury, and blood samples were collected for laboratory analyses. Supraceliac aortic occlusion decreased intestinal mucosal length by reducing villous height and elevated serum lactic dehydrogenase and lactate levels. Both local and remote ischemic preconditioning mitigated these histopathological and laboratory changes. Both local and remote ischemic preconditioning protect intestinal mucosa against ischemia and reperfusion injury following supraceliac aortic clamping.