Risk factors for infection after endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of specific types of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections (with video)

Endoscopic transgastric fenestration versus percutaneous drainage for management of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections adjacent to gastric wall (with video)

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous drainage (PCD) and endoscopic approaches have largely replaced surgical drainage as the initial approach for (peri) pancreatic fluid collections (PFC)s, while complications associated with endoscopic stent implantation are common.

AIM

To introduce a novel endoscopic therapy named endoscopic transgastric fenestration (ETGF), which involves resection of tissue by endoscopic accessory between gastric and PFCs without stent implantation, and to evaluate its efficacy and safety compared with PCD for the management of PFCs adjacent to the gastric wall.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with PFCs adjacent to the gastric wall and who subsequently received ETGF or PCD were restrospectively enrolled. Indications for intervention were consistent with related guidelines. We analyzed patients baseline characteristics, technical and clinical success rate, recurrence and reintervention rate, procedure-related complications and adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventy-two eligible patients were retrospectively identified (ETGF = 34, PCD = 38) from October 2017 to May 2021. Patients in the ETGF group had a significantly higher clinical success rate than those in the PCD group (97.1 vs 76.3%, P = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences regarding recurrence, reintervention and incidence of complication between the two groups. While long-term catheter drainage was very common in the PCD group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with PCD, ETGF has a higher clinical success rate in the management of PFCs adjacent to the gastric wall. ETGF is an alternative effective strategy for the treatment of PFCs adjacent to the gastric wall.

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-Associated Infections: Update on an Emerging Issue

Over 17.7 million gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures are performed annually, contributing to 68% of all endoscopic procedures in the United States. Usually, endoscopic procedures are low risk, but adverse events may occur, including cardiopulmonary complications, bleeding, perforation, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and infection. Infections after the GI endoscopies most commonly result from the patient's endogenous gut flora. Although many studies have reported infection after GI endoscopic procedures, a true estimate of the incidence rate of post-endoscopy infection is lacking. In addition, the infection profile and causative organisms have evolved over time. In recent times, multi-drug-resistant microorganisms have emerged as a cause of outbreaks of endoscope-associated infections (EAI). In addition, lapses in endoscope reprocessing have been reported, with some but not all outbreaks in recent times. This systematic review summarizes the demographical, clinical, and management data of EAI events reported in the literature. A total of 117 articles were included in the systematic review, with the majority reported from North America and Western Europe. The composite infection rate was calculated to be 0.2% following GI endoscopic procedures, 0.8% following ERCP, 0.123% following non-ERCP upper GI endoscopic procedures, and 0.073% following lower GI endoscopic procedures. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common culprit organism, followed by other Enterobacteriaceae groups of organisms and Gram-positive cocci. We have also elaborated different prevention methods such as antimicrobial prophylaxis, adequate sterilization methods for reprocessing endoscopes, periodic surveillance, and current evidence supporting their utilization. Finally, we discuss disposable endoscopes, which could be an alternative to reprocessing to minimize the chances of EAIs with their effects on the environmental and financial situation.

Endoscopic Transmural Drainage and Necrosectomy in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Review

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis occurs in 10%–20% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) which is one of the most important acute abdominal diseases that require hospital admission. Pancreatic necrosis is also associated with high mortality and morbidity. In the past 20 years, the treatment of pancreatic necrosis has shifted from open necrosectomy to minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic interventions. With the development of endoscopic techniques, the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic interventions have improved, but there exist several unresolved problems. Currently, there is no unified standard approach for endoscopic treatment of pancreatic necrosis that takes into account local expertise, anatomical features of necrosis, patients’ preferences, and comorbidity profile. We reviewed the current status of endoscopic therapy for acute necrotizing pancreatitis, focusing on the new endoscopic drainage technique and necrosectomy protocol.

A Remnant Choledochal Cyst after Choledochal Cyst Excision Treated with a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent: A Case Report

A lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a saddle-shaped stent with large flanges at both ends, thereby preventing stent migration and helping with approximation of the adjacent structures. We report the case of a 25-year-old female with remnant choledochal cyst which was successfully treated with LAMS after initial treatment failure with a plastic stent. Although complete excision of the cyst is the definite treatment of choledochal cysts, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided cystoduodenostomy can be considered in cases wherein surgery is not feasible and dysplasia is not present. LAMS may be preferred to plastic stents for effective resolution of remnant choledochal cyst and prevention of ascending infection.

Complications of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and their management

The development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage techniques and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has markedly reduced the complication rate of endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic collections and made these procedures safer and more effective. Despite its improved safety profile, various types of complications, some even life-threatening, can occur after EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. Stent maldeployment/migration, bleeding, gastrointestinal perforation, and air embolism are important complications of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic collections. Delayed complications weeks after the procedure, such as bleeding and buried LAMS due to the presence of prolonged indwelling transmural stents, have also been described. Careful patient selection, with proper assessment of the size, solid necrotic content and location of the collection, as well as an in-depth understanding of various risk factors that predict complications, are important for a safer and more effective endoscopic transmural drainage. For a better clinical outcome, it is important for the endoscopist to know about various complications of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic collections, as well as their appropriate management strategies.

A novel self-expanding biflanged metal stent vs tubular metal stent for EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst: A retrospective, cohort study

Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with metal stents is generally preferred over plastic stents, its superiority among different types of metal stents has not yet been well studied. We conducted this study to compare clinical outcomes and complications of a novel self-expanding biflanged metal stent (BFMS) and a traditional-shaped tubular metal stent (TMS) in treating pancreatic pseudocyst (PPC).This was a retrospective analysis on consecutive patients with PPC underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage with either TMS or BFMS in a single tertiary center with expertise in management of complex biliary and pancreatic problems. The technical and functional success rate, reintervention, complications, and recurrence rate were evaluated.From September 2013 to January 2018, 125 patients (66.4% male, median age 47 years) underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage for PPC. Among them, 49 used TMS and 76 used BFMS. All patients met the inclusion criteria that cyst diameter was >6 cm or the distance between cyst and stomach wall was shorter than 1 cm. There was no difference in technical success (98% vs 97.4%, P = 1.0) or functional success rate (87.8% vs 92.1%, P = .54) using 2 types of metal stents. However, more procedure related complications occurred in TMS than in BFMS group. TMS group had a much higher migration rate than BFMS group (14.6% vs 0, P = .001), even though there was no significant difference in bleeding, infection, or death rate between 2 groups. With similar clinical outcomes, TMS group required more additional plastic stent placement than BFMS group for better drainage.TMS and BFMS placement can both be considered as methods of endoscopic transmural PPC drainage with equal efficacy, whereas BFMS could be preferred for fewer complications or less need of additional plastic stent placement.