Nonsurgical biliary drainage in cancer

  • David S. Zimmon
  • Arthur R. Clemett
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 18)


The rapid evolution of nonsurgical techniques for drainage of the biliary tree first by the percutaneous route and more recently by the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has raised important issues and questions. We now have three competing techniques for the diagnosis and management of patients with actual or incipient bile duct obstruction due to cancer. What is the role of each technique? In what way do they compliment or compete with each other? Can an algorythm for their use be developed? Can we balance the risk versus the benefits of these various techniques?


Bile Duct Pancreatic Duct Biliary Drainage Hepatic Duct Biliary Tree 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Shaldon S, Barber KM, Young WB: Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography: A modified technic. Gastroenterology 42: 371–379, 1962.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nagai N, Toki F, Oi I, et al.: Continuous pancreatocholedochal catheterization. Gastrointest Endose 23: 78–81, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cotton PB, Burney PCJ, Mason RR: Transnasal bile duct catheterization after endoscopic sphincterotomy. Gut 20: 285–287, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zimmon DS: New uses of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the management of biliary and pancreatic disease. In: Progress in Gastroenterology. Grune and Stratton, New York. CH23, pp. 447–503, 1983.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buckwalter JA, Lawton RL, Tidrich RT: Bypass operations for neoplastic biliary tract obstruction. Am J Surg 109: 100–106, 1965.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nakayama T, Ikeda A, Okuda K: Percutaneous transhepatic drainage of the biliary tract: Technique and results in 104 cases. Gastroenterology 74: 554–559, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pitt HA, Cameron JL, Postier RG, et al.: Factors affecting mortality in biliary tract surgery. Am J Surg 141: 66–72, 1981.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Denning DS, Ellison EC, Carey LC: Preoperative percutaneous transhepatic biliary decompression lowers operative morbidity in patients with obstructive jaundice. Am J Surg 141:61–65, 1981.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hazards of biliary surgery. (Editorial). Br Med J 282: 2077–2078, 1981.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beall MS, Dyer GA, Stephenson HE, Jr: Disappointments in the management of patients with malignancy of pancreas, duodenum, and common bile duct. Arch Surg 101: 461, 1970.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaques PF, Mandell VS, Delany DJ, Nath PH: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage: Advantages of the left-lobe subxiphoid approach. Radiology 145: 534–536, 1982.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoevels J, Nilsson U: Intrahepatic vascular lesions following nonsurgical percutaneous transhepatic bile duct intubation. Gastrointest Radiol 5: 127–135, 1980.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pollock TW, Ring FR, Oleaga JA, et al.: Percutaneous decompression of benign and malignancy biliary obstruction. Arch Surg 114: 148–151, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burcharth F: Nonsurgical drainage of the biliary tract. Seminars in Liver Disease 2: 75–86, 1982.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zimmon DS, Clemett AR: Endoscopic stents and drains in the management of pancreatic and bile duct obstruction. Surg Clinics of North Am 62: 837–844, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Osnes M: Endoscopic choledochoduodenostomy for common bile duct obstruction. Lancet 1: 1059, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Safrany L, Cotton PB: Endoscopic management of choledocholithiasis. Surg Clinics of North Am 62: 825–836, 1982.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Belohlavek D, Kock H, Rösch W, et al.: 5 Years experience in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Endoscopy 8:115–118, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kessler RE, Falkenstein DB, Clemett AR, et al.: Indications, clinical value and complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Surg Gynec Obstet 142: 865–870, 1976.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bismuth H, Malt RA: Current concepts in cancer: Carcinoma of the biliary tract. NEJM 301: 704–705, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hermann RE, Cooperman AM: Current concepts in cancer: Cancer of the pancreas. NEJM 301: 482–484, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zimmon DS, Falkenstein DB, Riccobono C, et al.: Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Analysis of 300 consecutive cases. Gastroenterology 69: 303–309, 1975.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kreck MJ, Baiint JA: ‘Skinny Needle’ cholangiography. Gastroenterology 78: 598–604, 1980.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mueller PR, VanSonnenberg E, Simeone JF: Fine needle transhepatic cholangiography. Ann Intern Med 97: 567–572, 1982.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kline TS, Hunter HS: Needle aspiration biopsy: A critical appraisal eight years and 3,267 specimens later. JAMA 239: 36–39, 1978.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ihre T, Pyk E, Raaschou-Nielsen T, et al.: Percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy during endoscopic retrograde choangio-pancreatography. Scand J Gastro 13: 657–662, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Boston 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • David S. Zimmon
  • Arthur R. Clemett

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations