Surgical bypass, the traditional approach for managing gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), is effective but associated with increased morbidity and short-term complications. Enteral self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide a safe, effective, and minimally invasive alternative to surgical bypass, though they carry an increased risk of re-interventions due to stent blockage. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) is a recently developed, novel minimally invasive procedure that serves as an alternative to enteral SEMS placement.

We performed an electronic search in PubMed and included all the types of articles on EUS-GJ written in English language till February 2025. This review discusses both the technical details and outcomes of EUS-GJ.

EUS-GJ involves creating an anastomosis between the stomach and the small intestine using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS). There are three basic techniques for performing EUS-GJ: the direct technique, the balloon-assisted technique, and the EPASS (EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass) technique. Among these, the free-hand direct approach is the most widely used due to its shorter procedure time and comparable technical outcomes to the other two techniques. Stent misdeployment is the most dreaded complication of EUS-GJ; however, fortunately, the majority of misdeployments can be successfully managed through rescue endoscopic methods.

Malignant double obstruction, defined as the simultaneous presence of biliary and gastric outlet obstruction, represents a challenging clinical scenario. Previous retrospective experiences have demonstrated shorter dysfunction-free survival (DyFS) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) versus EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) in this setting, but no prospective evidence is available.

Twenty consecutive patients with malignant double obstruction, treated with EUS-gastroenterostomy (and EUS-guided biliary drainage, following a previously failed ERCP, were enrolled in a prospective observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04813055) comparing EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS. Efficacy and safety were evaluated, with Biliary Dysfunctions as the primary outcome and DyFS using Kaplan-Meier estimates as a primary measure.

Twenty patients (75% with pancreatic cancer, 50% with metastatic disease) with EUS-gastroenterostomy were included (seven EUS-CDS and 13 EUS-HGS). No significant difference was detected at baseline. Technical success was 100% in both groups. EUS-CDS compared to EUS-HGS showed similar clinical success (100% vs. 92.3%, p = 0.5), a higher rate of post-procedural adverse events (42.9% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.067, mostly related to severe/fatal cholangitis in the EUS-CDS group) and a higher rate of biliary dysfunctions during follow-up (71.4% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.002).DyFS was significantly shorter in the EUS-CDS group (39 [15-62] vs. 268 [192-344] days, p = 0.0023), with a 30-days DyFS probability of 57.1% vs. 100% (hazard ratio = 7.8 [1.4-44.2]).

In this prospective comparison of patients with malignant double obstruction undergoing EUS-gastroenterostomy, treating jaundice with EUS-CDS versus EUS-HGS resulted in a reduced probability of survival without biliary events and an increased risk of biliary dysfunctions (number needed to harm = 1.8), with detection of severe/fatal cholangitis.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions have revolutionized the management of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), providing minimally invasive alternatives with improved outcomes. These procedures have significantly reduced the need for high-risk surgical interventions or percutaneous alternatives and have provided effective palliative care for patients with advanced gastrointestinal and bilio-pancreatic malignancies. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) techniques, including hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), and antegrade stenting (EUS-AS), offer high technical and clinical success rates, with a good safety profile particularly when Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not feasible. EUS-HGS, which allows biliary drainage by trans-gastric route, is primarily used for proximal stenosis or in case of surgically altered anatomy; EUS-CDS with Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for distal MBO (dMBO), EUS-AS as an alternative of EUS-HGS in the bridge-to-surgery scenario or when retrograde access is not possible and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with LAMS in case of dMBO with cystic duct patent without dilation of common bile duct (CDB). EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has already established its role as an effective alternative to surgical GE and enteral self-expandable metal stent, providing relief from GOO with fewer complications and faster recovery times. However, we do not yet have strong evidence on how to combine the different EUS-guided drainage techniques with EUS-GE in the setting of double obstruction. This comprehensive review aims to synthesize growing evidence on this topic by randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series not only to summarize the efficacy, safety, and technical aspects of these procedures but also to propose a treatment algorithm based essentially on the anatomy and stage of the neoplasm to guide clinical decision-making, incorporating the principles of personalized medicine. This review also highlights the transformative impact of EUS-guided interventions on the treatment landscape for MBO and GOO. These techniques offer safer and more effective options than traditional approaches, with the potential for widespread clinical adoption. Further research is needed to refine these procedures, expand their applications, and improve patient care and quality of life.

Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.

The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.

The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by I 2 statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; I 2 = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; I 2 = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; I 2 = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; I 2 = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; I 2 = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; I 2 = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; I 2 = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.

We report the first case of lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) use in malignant stricture of the duodenal apex to treat gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) and to facilitate endoscopic retrograde management of synchronous malignant biliary obstruction due to pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. This technique may be an effective alternative and a simpler approach than current methodology to this endoscopically challenging condition.

Endoscopic management of gastric outlet obstruction includes balloon dilation, enteral stenting, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) to relieve mechanical blockage and reestablish per oral intake. Based on the degree of obstruction, patients may experience debilitating symptoms that can quickly lead to malnutrition and delays in chemotherapy. Compared with surgery, minimally invasive endoscopic options can provide similar clinical outcomes with fewer adverse events, faster resumption of oral feeding, and shorter hospitalizations. EUS-GE with a lumen-apposing metal stent has revolutionized treatment, especially in individuals who are not ideal surgical candidates. This article aims to describe endoscopic treatment options and future considerations.

Progression of pancreatic adenocarcinoma can result in disease complications such as biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction. The recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have transformed EUS from a purely diagnostic technology to a therapeutic modality, particularly with the development of lumen-apposing metal stents. In terms of biliary drainage, EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy offer safe and effective techniques when conventional transpapillary stent placement via ERCP fails or is not possible. If these modalities are not feasible, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage offers yet another salvage technique when the cystic duct is non-involved by the cancer. Lastly, EUS-guided gastroenterostomy allows for an effective bypass treatment for cases of gastric outlet obstruction that enables patients to resume eating within several days. Future randomized studies comparing these techniques to current standard-of-care options are warranted to firmly establish therapeutic EUS procedures within the treatment algorithm for this challenging disease.

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a clinical syndrome traditionally managed by surgical gastrojejunostomy or enteral stenting. The surgical approach is burdened with a high rate of adverse events (AEs), while enteral stenting has a limited long-term clinical effectiveness, with the need for repeat procedures. The availability of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has resulted a shift in the treatment paradigm of GOO. Indeed, endoscopists are now able to create a stable anastomosis between the stomach and small bowel under endosonographic guidance. EUS-guided gastro-enteroanastomosis (EUS-GE) has the theoretical advantage of a durable luminal patency resulting from stent placement away from the site of obstruction, free from surgical-related AEs. This approach could be especially valuable in terminally ill patients with a limited life expectancy. The present paper reviews procedural techniques and clinical outcomes of EUS-GE in the context of both malignant and benign GOOs.

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

Gastric outlet and biliary obstruction are common manifestations of GI malignancies and some benign diseases for which standard treatment would be surgical gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy (ie, "double bypass"). Therapeutic EUS has allowed for the creation of an EUS-guided double bypass. However, same-session double EUS-guided bypass has only been described in small proof-of-concept series and lacks a comparison with surgical double bypass.

A retrospective multicenter analysis was performed of all consecutive same-session double EUS-guided bypass procedures performed in 5 academic centers. Surgical comparators were extracted from these centers' databases from the same time interval. Efficacy, safety, hospital stay, nutrition and chemotherapy resumption, long-term patency, and survival were compared.

Of 154 identified patients, 53 (34.4%) received treatment with EUS and 101 (65.6%) with surgery. At baseline, patients undergoing EUS exhibited higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores and a higher median Charlson Comorbidity Index (9.0 [interquartile range {IQR}, 7.0-10.0] vs 7.0 [IQR, 5.0-9.0], P < .001). Technical success (96.2% vs 100%, P = .117) and clinical success rates (90.6% vs 82.2%, P = .234) were similar when comparing EUS and surgery. Overall (11.3% vs 34.7%, P = .002) and severe adverse events (3.8% vs 19.8%, P = .007) occurred more frequently in the surgical group. In the EUS group, median time to oral intake (0 days [IQR, 0-1] vs 6 days [IQR, 3-7], P < .001) and hospital stay (4.0 days [IQR, 3-9] vs 13 days [IQR, 9-22], P < .001) were significantly shorter.

Despite being used in a patient population with more comorbidities, same-session double EUS-guided bypass achieved similar technical and clinical success and was associated with fewer overall and severe adverse events when compared with surgical gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy.

The treatments for cancer palliation in patients with concomitant malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) are still under investigation due to the lack of evidence available in the medical literature. We performed a systematic search and critical review to investigate efficacy and safety among patients with MBO and MGOO undergoing both endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and MGOO endoscopic treatment.

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. EUS-BD included both transduodenal and transgastric techniques. Treatment of MGOO included duodenal stenting or EUS-GEA (gastroenteroanastomosis). Outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing double treatment in the same session or within one week.

11 studies were included in the systematic review for a total number of 337 patients, 150 of whom had concurrent MBO and MGOO treatment, fulfilling the time criteria. MGOO was treated by duodenal stenting (self-expandable metal stents) in 10 studies, and in one study by EUS-GEA. EUS-BD had a mean technical success of 96.4% (CI 95%, 92.18-98.99) and a mean clinical success of 84.96% (CI 95%, 67.99-96.26). The average frequency of AEs for EUS-BD was 28.73% (CI 95%, 9.12-48.33). Clinical success for duodenal stenting was 90% vs. 100% for EUS-GEA.

EUS-BD could become the preferred drainage in the case of double endoscopic treatment of concomitant MBO and MGOO in the near future, with the promising EUS-GEA becoming a valid option for MGOO treatment in these patients.

Combined biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) represent a challenging clinical scenario despite developments in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as GOO might impair EUS-guided biliary drainage. Little is known about the effectiveness of different therapeutic combinations used to treat double obstruction, especially regarding stent patency.

All consecutive patients with double obstruction treated between 2016 and 2021 in three tertiary academic centres were eligible for inclusion. Five combinations involving enteral stenting (ES), EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), and transpapillary biliary stenting (TPS) were evaluated for dysfunction during follow-up, either as proportions or dysfunction-free survival (DFS) using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

Ninety-three patients were included (male 46%; age 67 [interquartile range 60-76] years; pancreatic cancer 73%, metastatic 57%), resulting in 103 procedure combinations. Different combinations showed significantly different overall dysfunction rates (p = 0.009), ranging from the null rate of EUS-GE+HG to the 18% rate of EUS-GE+TPS, 31% of EUS-GE+EUS-CD, 53% of ES+TPS and 83% of ES+EUS-CDS. Sub-analyses restricted to biliary dysfunction confirmed these trends. A multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression of DFS, a stenosis distal to the papilla (HR 3.2 [1.5-6.9]) and ES+EUS-CDS (HR 5.6 [2-15.7]) independently predicted dysfunction.

Despite a lack of statistical power per combination, this study introduces new associations beyond the increased risk of GOO recurrence with ES versus EUS-GE. EUS-CDS showed reduced effectiveness and frequent dysfunction in the context of GOO, especially when combined with ES. EUS-GE+HGS or EUS-GE+TPS in this setting might result in superior patency. These results suggest that a prospective evaluation of the optimal endoscopic approach to malignant double obstruction is needed.