CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06620328MED-BDUpdated Jan 13, 2026

Safety and Efficacy of Mechanical Versus Electrocautery Dilator for EUS-guided Biliary Drainage (MED-BD)

An interventional study of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage in Biliary Obstruction, sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital. Recruiting at 1 site in Taiwan. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-01-13.

Sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jul 2025; still recruiting 1 year 3 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
64
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to investigate the likelihood of post-dilation bleeding using mechanical or electrocautery dilation. We hypothesized that the risk of bleeding is lower in the mechanical group.

Read the detailed description
  1. Study background In recent years, with the advancement of endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been increasingly applied in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP). According to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines1, in patients with malignant obstruction of the distal bile duct, if ERCP drainage fails, EUS-guided biliary drainage is superior to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). In patients with malignant obstruction of the proximal bile duct combined with left-sided bile duct dilatation, EUS-guided biliary drainage can also be considered.

    The direct transmural technique is the most common method for EUS-guided biliary drainage.2,3 Under endoscopic ultrasound guidance, the dilated bile duct is observed from the stomach or duodenum. A fine needle is then used for duct puncture, and a guidewire is advanced into the duct followed by tract dilation to create an artificial fistula. Finally, a plastic or metal stent is placed to achieve drainage. Common complications of EUS-guided drainage procedures include bleeding, intestinal perforation, bile leakage, and stent migration, with tract dilation being the most common step leading to complications.4,5 The two main methods of tract dilation are electrocautery dilation and mechanical dilation. Currently, there are only retrospective studies comparing the success rates, complications, and short- and long-term outcomes between these two methods.6 However, no any randomized controlled trial has investigated the safety and efficacy of the two traction dilation method on EUS-BD. Therefore, this study will attempt to clarify the differences in bleeding, other complications, success rates of dilation, and drainage success rates between these two dilation methods through randomized allocation.

  2. Study Design Multi-center randomized clinical trial (included National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu branch, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, Shin Kong Wu Ho Su Memorial Hospital, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, China Medical University Hospital, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, and Taitung Mackay Memorial Hospital) will enroll 64 patients and the study period is 12 months.

    Randomization will be done by opening sealed opaque envelopes containing computer generated random sequences in blocks of 4.

    Patients will be randomly assigned to electrocautery dilation arm vs mechanical dilation arm on 1:1 basis.

  3. Subjects Consecutive patients aged more than 18 years old indicated for EUS-guided biliary drainage were included.

    Inclusion criteria : (1) Failed ERCP (2) The papilla is inaccessible owing to a surgically altered anatomy or gastric outlet obstruction (3) Contraindications for PTCD such as ascites and possibility of self-tube removal Exclusion criteria : (1) Patients younger than 18 years old (2) Cancer infiltration of the gastric/duodenal wall within the planned puncture route (3) Patients with uncorrectable coagulopathy (4) Patients with unmanageable ascites (5) Patients with serious comorbidities that prohibited endoscopic management (6) Patients with pregnancy (7) Patients who cannot or refuse to provide informed consent

  4. Study intervention Skilled endosonographers performed EUS-BD with patients under conscious sedation by intravenous medication. All patients were given intravenous antibiotics prophylactically. A therapeutic curved linear array echoendoscope is positioned in the stomach with carbon dioxide insufflation. Standard 19G fine needles are used to puncture the dilated left intrahepatic bile duct or commo bile duct. Bile juice aspiration with 20ml syringe was performed to confirm intraductal puncture. After contrast medium injection, an insulated guidewire (0.025 inch VisiGlide2; Olympus Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) is advanced antegradely.

    Dilation of the needle tract is initially performed with a diathermic sheath (6Fr Cyst-Gastro set; Endoflex, Voerde, Germany) or an ultra-tapered mechanical dilator (7Fr ES Dilator; Zeon Medical Co., Tokyo, Japan) according to randomization result. If needed, additional dilation can be attempted with dilating balloon. Finally, the dedicated plastic stent or partially covered self-expandable metallic stents (PCSEMS) is transmurally placed.

  5. Measure outcomes

Primary outcome:

- Bleeding: hematemesis and/or melena or hemoglobin drop over 2g/dL, needed blood transfusion, endoscopic hemostasis, radiological intervention or surgery

Secondary outcomes:

  • Tract dilation success: tract dilation was regarded as successful when the. maximum diameter portion of the first dilator into the bile duct.
  • Final procedure success: a successful deployment of a stent in the intended location
  • Procedural duration: the time elapsed between puncture of the intrahepatic duct and completion of deployment of stent
  • Clinical success: a decrease in bilirubin within 30 days to \< 75 % of levels before EUS-BD
  • Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO): cholangitis and jaundice accompanied by biliary dilation on imaging examinations
  • Time to RBO (TRBO): the time from EUS-BD to the date of RBO occurrence
  • Adverse events other than bleeding: pancreatitis, cholangitis, peritonitis, and perforation, in accordance with the American Society for GI Endoscopy lexicon7
  • Length of hospital stay after procedure
  • Overall survival
02

Conditions studied

  • Biliary Obstruction

Keywords

  • Endoscopic ultrasound
  • Biliary drainage
  • Mechanical dilator
  • Electrocautery dilator
  • Interventional EUS
03

In context

Lead sponsor

National Taiwan University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 2,563 studies on the registry; 569 are open to participants now.

Of its 11 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (18%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Failed ERCP
  • The papilla is inaccessible owing to a surgically altered anatomy or gastric outlet obstruction
  • Contraindications for PTCD such as ascites and possibility of self-tube removal

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients younger than 18 years old
  • Cancer infiltration of the gastric/duodenal wall within the planned puncture route
  • Patients with uncorrectable coagulopathy
  • Patients with unmanageable ascites
  • Patients with serious comorbidities that prohibited endoscopic management
  • Patients with pregnancy
  • Patients who cannot or refuse to provide informed consent
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
64 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Mechanical dilator

    Dilation of the needle tract is initially performed with an ultra-tapered mechanical dilator (7Fr ES Dilator; Zeon Medical Co., Tokyo, Japan).

    Procedure: endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage

  • Active comparator
    Electrocautery dilator

    Dilation of the needle tract is initially performed with a diathermic sheath (6Fr Cyst-Gastro set; Endoflex, Voerde, Germany).

    Procedure: endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage

Interventions

  • Procedureendoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage

    Skilled endosonographers performed EUS-BD with patients under conscious sedation by intravenous medication. All patients were given intravenous antibiotics prophylactically. A therapeutic curved linear array echoendoscope is positioned in the stomach with carbon dioxide insufflation. Standard 19G fine needles are used to puncture the dilated left intrahepatic bile duct or commo bile duct. Bile juice aspiration with 20ml syringe was performed to confirm intraductal puncture. After contrast medium injection, an insulated guidewire (0.025 inch VisiGlide2; Olympus Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) is advanced antegradely. Dilation of the needle tract is initially performed with a diathermic sheath (6Fr Cyst-Gastro set; Endoflex, Voerde, Germany) or an ultra-tapered mechanical dilator (7Fr ES Dilator; Zeon Medical Co., Tokyo, Japan) according to randomization result. If needed, additional dilation can be attempted with dilating balloon. Finally, the dedicated plastic stent or partially cover

    Also known as: EUS-BD

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Bleeding

    hematemesis and/or melena or hemoglobin drop over 2g/dL, needed blood transfusion, endoscopic hemostasis, radiological intervention or surgery

    Time frame: From randomization to four weeks after the procedure

Secondary outcomes

  1. Tract dilation success

    tract dilation was regarded as successful when the maximum diameter portion of the first dilator into the bile duct.

    Time frame: From randomization to successful tract dilation using the first device (success), to using other dilation devices (fail) or to procedure termination (fail)

  2. Final procedure success

    a successful deployment of a stent in the intended location

    Time frame: at the end of the procedure

  3. Procedural duration

    the time elapsed between puncture of the intrahepatic duct and completion of deployment of stent

    Time frame: between puncture of the intrahepatic duct and completion of deployment of stent

  4. Clinical success

    a decrease in bilirubin within 30 days to \&lt; 75 % of levels before EUS-BD

    Time frame: From enrollment to 30 days after procedure

  5. Time to Recurrent biliary obstruction

    the time from EUS-BD to the date of RBO occurrence

    Time frame: From the day of technically successful biliary drainage to the day of recurrent obstruction or to study completion an average of 1 year, whichever comes first

  6. Overall survival

    The length of time from randomization to study completion that patients are still alive.

    Time frame: From date of randomization until the date of death from any cause or study completion, whichever came first, assessed up to 12 months

  7. Length of hospital stay after procedure

    The number of days patients stay in the hospital

    Time frame: From date of randomization until the date of discharge or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 12 months

  8. Adverse events other than bleeding

    pancreatitis, cholangitis, peritonitis, and perforation, in accordance with the American Society for GI Endoscopy lexicon

    Time frame: From the day of randomization to the date of death or through study completion, an average of 1 year

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • National Taiwan University Hospital
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 13, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06620328
Lead sponsor
National Taiwan University Hospital
Collaborators
National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, China Medical University Hospital, Chung Shan Medical University, Taitung Mackay Memorial Hospital, National Cheng-Kung University Hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 1, 2024
Start date
Jul 3, 2025
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Jan 13, 2026

Study contacts

Yu-Ting Kuo
Contact
sfstruck@gmail.com
+886972652398
Hung-Yao Lin
Contact
+886972654673
Hsiu-Po Wang
study director · National Taiwan University Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion