ClinicalTrials.Veeva

Menu

EUS - Guided Choledocho-duodenostomy Versus ERCP With Covered Metallic Stents in Patients With Unresectable Malignant Distal Common Bile Duct Strictures (DRAMBO)

The Chinese University of Hong Kong logo

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Status and phase

Completed
Phase 3
Phase 2

Conditions

Malignant Biliary Obstruction

Treatments

Procedure: EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy
Procedure: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with covered metallic stent

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT03000855
CRE-2016.193-T

Details and patient eligibility

About

EUS - guided choledocho-duodenostomy (ECDS) is an established option for bile duct drainage in unresectable malignant distal CBD strictures when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails. However, how primary ECDS compares with ERCP with covered self-expanding metallic stents (CSEMS) in unresectable malignant distal CBD strictures is uncertain.

The aim of the current study is to compare primary ECDS versus ERCP with CSEMS in unresectable malignant distal CBD strictures. We hypothesis that ECDS is associated with a higher 1-year stent patency rate.

Full description

Malignant biliary obstruction is a common sequela of pancreatic cancers or distal bile duct cancers, and its development can hinder the use of chemotherapy, decrease patient quality of life and decrease survival. Malignant biliary obstruction is traditionally palliated with ERCP with metallic stent insertion. However, these stents are prone to obstruction due to tumour ingrowth. In addition, ERCP may not always be possible due to tumour obstruction and percutaneous biliary drainage may be required.

Recently, ECDS has been described as an alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage in patients with failed ERCP. The procedure is also associated with potential advantages as compared to conventional ERCP. In particular, the risk of tumour ingrowth into the stent placed after ECDS is low and stent patency rates may be better than ERCP. Thus, the aim of the current study is to compare primary ECDS versus ERCP with CSEMS in unresectable malignant distal CBD strictures.

Enrollment

77 estimated patients

Sex

All

Ages

18+ years old

Volunteers

No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

  • Age ≥ 18 years old with informed consent
  • Histologically (preferred) or radiologically confirmed distal malignant bile duct tumors
  • Inoperability by staging, comorbidities or patient wishes
  • Distal tumors 2cm away from the portal hilum
  • Bilirubin > 50umol/L at diagnosis

Exclusion criteria

  • Multiple hepatic metastases with significant blockage of one or more liver segments (if no segment blockage, metastasis is not an exclusion criteria)
  • Presence of main portal vein thrombosis
  • Prior SEMS placement
  • Intraductal papillary mucinous carcinomas
  • Prior Billroth II or roux-en Y reconstruction
  • History of bleeding disorder or use of anticoagulation
  • Child's B/C cirrhosis
  • Pregnancy
  • Performance status ECOG ≥3 (confined to bed / chair > 50% waking hours)
  • Presence of other malignancy
  • Life expectancy < 3months

Trial design

Primary purpose

Treatment

Allocation

Randomized

Interventional model

Parallel Assignment

Masking

None (Open label)

77 participants in 2 patient groups

ECDS
Active Comparator group
Description:
EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy
Treatment:
Procedure: EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy
ERCP with CSEMS
Active Comparator group
Description:
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with covered metallic stent
Treatment:
Procedure: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with covered metallic stent

Trial contacts and locations

6

Loading...

Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov

Clinical trials

Find clinical trialsTrials by location
© Copyright 2026 Veeva Systems