Objective: The purpose of this article is to compare the technical success and guidance of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with nondilated and dilated bile duct systems using different techniques to supplement the conventional approach.
Materials and methods: Between 2006 and 2008, 71 patients (mean age, 66.6 years) underwent PTBD with 97 interventions. According to sonographic evaluation of bile duct morphology, patients were divided into two groups: 50 patients with dilated and 21 patients with nondilated bile ducts. In a retrospective analysis, both groups were compared for technical success, fluoroscopy time, complications, and medical indications. The use of interventional guidance (deviations from the standard protocol) in patients with nondilated bile ducts was recorded.
Results: The technical success rate was 90% in patients with dilated bile ducts versus 81% in patients with nondilated ducts, with no significant difference (p = 0.36). The greater complexity of the intervention in patients with nondilated bile ducts resulted in longer fluoroscopy times (p = 0.04). Complication rates were not different between the two groups. The main indication for PTBD was relief of a compressed biliary system in patients with dilated ducts and postoperative management of complications or prevention of tumor-associated bile duct obstruction in patients with nondilated ducts. T-drainage, additional CT-guided puncture, and temporary gallbladder drainage were performed in 16 of 21 interventions for patients with nondilated bile ducts, resulting in a 100% success rate, versus a success rate of 60% in the five PTBDs of nondilated ducts performed in the conventional manner.
Conclusion: T-drainage, additional CT-guided puncture, and temporary gallbladder drainage improve the technical success of PTBD when used in patients with nondilated bile ducts. With these measures, technical success and complication rates in patients with nondilated ducts are comparable to those for PTBD of dilated bile ducts.