A comparison of clinical outcomes and cost utility among laparoscopy, enteroscopy, and temporary gastric access-assisted ERCP in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy

TEMPORARY REMOVAL: American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders: summary and recommendations

The publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

Approaches to Pancreaticobiliary Endoscopy in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Anatomy

The increasing prevalence of bariatric surgery, particularly Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, has necessitated innovative approaches for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) due to the altered anatomy. Laparoscopy-assisted ERCP offers high success rates but leads to extended hospital stays and an increased risk of adverse events. Enteroscopy-assisted ERCP encounters technical challenges, resulting in lower success rates. A novel technique, endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP, employs a lumen-apposing metal stent to create a fistula connecting the gastric pouch to the excluded stomach, enabling ERCP and other endoscopic procedures. Common adverse events include perforation, stent migration, bleeding, and fistula persistence.

Primary anastomosis closure after endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric intervention

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric intervention (EDGI) is a technique that creates an anastomosis between the gastric pouch or jejunum to the excluded stomach in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy to allow access to the pancreaticobiliary system. Thus far, management of anastomosis closure at the time of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) removal has varied widely. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of primary closure at the time of LAMS removal using a through-the-scope (TTS) tack-based suture system.  Patients and methods This was a two-center retrospective study of RYGB patients who underwent single-stage EDGI using a 20-mm LAMS and subsequent primary anastomosis closure with the X-tack system at the time of stent removal. Patient demographics, procedure details, clinical outcomes, and imaging findings are reported. Results Nineteen patients (median age 63 years, 84% female) underwent single-stage EDGI with a median follow-up of 31.5 months. Adverse events occurred in two patients (11%) who had abdominal pain requiring hospitalization. The median LAMS dwell time was 32 days (range 16-86). All patients (100%) who underwent follow-up studies after LAMS removal had confirmed anastomosis closure (n = 18). Most patients had documented weight loss at the time of LAMS removal and at last follow-up (68%, n = 13). Conclusions Single-stage EDGI is an effective approach to managing RYGB patients with pancreaticobiliary pathology. Thus far, endoscopic TTS tack-based suturing appears to have a high success rate in anastomosis closure after LAMS removal and should be considered as a primary method for preventing chronic fistulae.

Comparing EUS-directed Transgastric ERCP (EDGE) Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted ERCP Versus Enteroscopic ERCP: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Management of choledocholithiasis in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery is challenging. This study aims to compare technical success rates, adverse events, and procedural time between 3 current approaches: endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (EDGE), enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP), and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP).

METHODS

A systematic search of 5 databases was conducted. Direct and network meta-analyses were performed to compare interventions using the random effects model. A significance threshold of P < 0.05 was applied.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included. On direct meta-analysis, technical success rates were comparable between EDGE and LA-ERCP (odds ratio: 0.768, CI: 0.196-3.006, P = 0.704, I2 = 14.13%). However, EDGE and LA-ERCP showed significantly higher success rates than E-ERCP. No significant differences in adverse events were found between EDGE versus LA-ERCP, EDGE versus E-ERCP, and LA-ERCP versus E-ERCP on direct meta-analysis. In terms of procedural time, EDGE was significantly shorter than E-ERCP [mean difference (MD): -31 minutes, 95% CI: -40.748 to -21.217, P < 0.001, I2 = 19.89%), and E-ERCP was shorter than LA-ERCP (MD: -44.567 minutes, 95% CI: -76.018 to -13.116, P = 0.005, I2 = 0%). EDGE also demonstrated a significant time advantage over LA-ERCP (MD: -78.145 minutes, 95% CI: -104.882 to -51.407, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%). All findings were consistent with network meta-analysis on random effects model. The heterogeneity of the model was low.

CONCLUSIONS

EDGE and LA-ERCP showed superior technical success rates compared with E-ERCP. Adverse events did not significantly differ among the three approaches. Furthermore, EDGE demonstrated the shortest procedural duration. We recommend considering EDGE as a first-choice procedure.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The altered anatomy in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) makes conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) a technically challenging procedure. EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) are alternative modalities used with comparable efficacy and adverse events in such patients. We conducted a meta-analysis comparing EDGE and LA-ERCP to assess the efficacy and safety in patients with RYGB. We conducted a comprehensive literature search from inception to July 7, 2022, on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases using the core concepts of EDGE and LA-ERCP. We excluded case reports, case series (<10 patients), and review articles. Relative risk (RR) was calculated when comparing dichotomous variables, whereas mean difference was calculated for continuous outcomes. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and P values (<0.05 considered significant) were also generated. The search strategy yielded a total of 55 articles. We finalized 4 studies with total 192 patients (75 EDGE and 117 LA-ERCP). The rates of technical success were not significantly different for LA-ERCP and EDGE (RR, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.939-1.051; P = 0.830, I 2 = 0%) Similarly, no difference in adverse events was noted between the 2 groups (RR, 1.216; 95% CI, 0.561-2.634; P = 0.620, I 2 = 10.67%). Shorter procedure time was noted for EDGE compared with the LA-ERCP group (mean difference, 91.53 min; 95% CI, 69.911-113.157 min; P < 0.001, I 2 = 8.32%). EDGE and LA-ERCP are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety. In addition, EDGE has overall lower procedural time. Our study suggests that EDGE should be considered as a first-line therapy if expertise available.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) approach for patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a comparative study between four ERCP techniques with proposed management algorithm

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is technically challenging in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to altered anatomy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the procedural and clinical outcomes of 4 different ERCP techniques in RYGB patients.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral center in the United States.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study including patients with RYGB anatomy who underwent an ERCP between January 2015 and September 2020. We compared procedural success and adverse events (AEs) rates of balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE), gastrostomy-assisted ERCP (GAE), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE), and rendezvous guidewire-assisted ERCP (RGA).

RESULTS

Seventy-eight RYGB patients underwent a total of 132 ERCPs. The mean age was 60 ± 11.8 years, with female predominance (85.7%). The ERCP procedures performed were BAE (n = 64; 48.5%), GAE (n = 18; 13.7%), EDGE (n = 25; 18.9%), and RGA (n = 25; 18.9%), with overall procedure success rates of 64.1%, 100%, 89.5%, and 91.7%, respectively. All approaches were superior to BAE (GAE versus BAE, P = .003; EDGE versus BAE, P = .034; RGA versus BAE, P = .011). The overall AE rates were 10.9%, 11.1%, 15.8 %, and 25.0%, respectively. There was no statistical difference in AEs. There were also no differences in bleeding, post-ERCP pancreatitis, and perforation rates between the 4 approaches.

CONCLUSION

Procedure success was similar between GAE, RGA, and EDGE, but superior to BAE. AE rates were similar between approaches.

Safety and efficacy of LA-ERCP procedure following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Rapid weight loss following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) translates to an increased need for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) intervention. Laparoscopically Assisted Transgastric ERCP (LA-ERCP) has emerged to address the issue of accessing the excluded stomach. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LA-ERCP procedure following RYGB.

METHODS

The Cochrane, EMBASE, SCOPUS, MEDLINE, Daily and Epub databases were searched from inception to May 2022 using the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies reported participants older than 18 years who underwent the LA-ERCP procedure, following RYGB, and outcomes of patients.

RESULTS

27 unique studies met the inclusion criteria with 1283 patients undergoing 1303 LA-ERCP procedures. 81.9% of the patients were female and the mean age was 52.18 ± 13.38 years. The rate of concurrent cholecystectomy was 33.6%. 90.9% of procedures were undertaken for a biliary indication. The mean time between RYGB and LA-ERCP was 89.19 months. The most common intervention performed during the LA-ERCP was a sphincterotomy (94.3%). Mean total operative time was 130.48 min. Mean hospital length of stay was 2.697 days. Technical success was 95.3%, while clinical success was 93.8%. 294 complications were recorded with a 20.6% complication rate. The most frequent complications encountered were pancreatitis (6.8%), infection (6.1%), bleeding (3.4%), and perforation (2.5%). Rate of conversion to open laparotomy was 7%.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis presents preliminary evidence to suggest the safety and efficacy of LA-ERCP procedure following RYGB. Further investigations are warranted to evaluate the long-term efficacy of this procedure using studies with long-term patient follow-up.

Performance and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The introduction of motorized spiral enteroscopy (mSE) into clinical practice holds diagnostic and therapeutic potential for small-bowel investigations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the performance of this modality in diagnosing and treating small-bowel lesions.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were performed through September 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as the identification of a lesion relative to the indication. Secondary outcomes were successful therapeutic manipulation, total enteroscopy rate (examination from the duodenojejunal flexion to the cecum), technical success (passage from the ligament of Treitz or ileocecal valve for anterograde and retrograde approach, respectively), and adverse event rates. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and the results are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2022, 9 studies (959 patients; 42% women; mean age >45 years; 474 patients [49.4%] investigated for mid-GI bleeding/anemia) were considered eligible and included in analysis. The diagnostic success rate of mSE was 78% (95% CI, 72-84; I2 = 78.3%). Considering secondary outcomes, total enteroscopy was attempted in 460 cases and completed with a rate of 51% (95% CI, 30-72; I2 = 96.2%), whereas therapeutic interventions were successful in 98% of cases (95% CI, 96-100; I2 = 79.8%) where attempted. Technical success rates were 96% (95% CI, 94-97; I2 = 1.5%) for anterograde and 97% (95% CI, 94-100; I2 = 38.6%) for retrograde approaches, respectively. Finally, the incidence of adverse events was 17% (95% CI, 13-21; I2 = 65.1%), albeit most were minor adverse events (16%; 95% CI, 11-20; I2 = 67.2%) versus major adverse events (1%; 95% CI, 0-1; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

mSE provides high rates of diagnostic and therapeutic success with a low prevalence of severe adverse events.

Efficacy & safety of EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy: a systematic review & meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy, laparoscopic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LA-ERCP) and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) have been utilized to achieve pancreaticobiliary access. Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) has recently emerged as an alternate and efficient approach. As data regarding EDGE continues to evolve, concerns about safety and efficacy remain, limiting wide adoptability. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of EDGE and compare it to the current standard of care.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of major databases (inception to Nov 2022) identified published studies on EDGE. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and heterogeneity (I²). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized difference in means (SMD) were utilized for head-to-head comparison analysis between EDGE vs. LA-ERCP and EDGE vs. E-ERCP. Primary outcomes assessed pooled EDGE safety (adverse events) and efficacy (technical/clinical success). Secondary outcomes assessed efficacy and safety profiles via a comparative analysis of EDGE vs. LA-ERCP and EDGE vs. E-ERCP.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (470 patients) were included. EDGE pooled technical success (TS) rate was 96% (95% CI 92-97.6, I² = 0), and clinical success was 91% (85-95, I² = 0). Pooled rate of all adverse events with EDGE was 17% (14-24.6, I² = 32%). On sub-group analysis, these included failure of fistula closure 17% (10-25.5, I² = 48%), stent migration 7% (4-12, I² = 51%), bleeding 5% (3.2-7.9, I² = 0), post-EDGE weight gain 4% (2-9, I² = 0), perforation 4% (2.1-5.8, I² = 0), and post-ERCP pancreatitis 2% (1-5, I² = 0). EDGE TS was comparable to LA-ERCP (97% vs. 98%; RR, 1.00; CI, 0.85-1.17, p = 0.95) and E-ERCP (100% vs. 66%; RR, 1.26; CI, 0.99-1.6, p = 0.06). No statistical difference was noted in adverse events between EDGE and LA-ERCP (13% vs. 17.6%; RR, 0.61; CI, 0.28-1.35, p = 0.52) and E-ERCP (9.6% vs. 16%; RR, 0.61; CI, 0.28-1.35, p = 0.22). EDGE procedure time and hospital stay were shorter than LA-ERCP and E-ERCP (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows that EDGE is safe and efficacious to the current standard of care. Further head-to-head comparative trials are needed to validate our findings.

Comparison between Enteroscopy-, Laparoscopy- and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography in Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in surgically altered anatomy (SAA), can be challenging and the optimal technique selection remains debatable. Most common foregut interventions resulting to this burden consist of Billroth II gastrectomy, Whipple surgery and Roux-en-Y anastomoses, including gastric by-pass. This systematic review, with meta-analysis, aimed to compare the rates of successful enteroscope-assisted (EA)-, endosonography-directed transgastric- (EDGE), and laparoscopy-assisted (LA)-ERCP. Methods: A systematic research (Medline) was performed for relative studies, through January 2022. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as approaching the ampulla site. Secondary outcomes included the desired duct cannulation, successful therapeutic manipulations, and complication rates. We performed meta-analyses of pooled data, and subgroup analysis considering the EA-ERCP subtypes (spiral-, double and single balloon-enteroscope). Pooled rates are reported as percentages with 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CIs). Results: Seventy-six studies were included (3569 procedures). Regarding primary outcome, EA-ERCP was the least effective [87.3% (95%CI: 85.3–89.4); I2: 91.0%], whereas EDGE and LA-ERCP succeeded in 97.9% (95%CI: 96.4–99.4; I2: 0%) and 99.1% (95%CI: 98.6–99.7; I2: 0%), respectively. Similarly, duct cannulation and therapeutic success rates were 74.7% (95%CI: 71.3–78.0; I2: 86.9%) and 69.1% (95%CI: 65.3–72.9; I2: 91.8%) after EA-ERCP, 98% (95%CI: 96.5–99.6; I2: 0%) and 97.9% (95%CI: 96.3–99.4) after EDGE, and 98.6% (95%CI: 97.9–99.2; I2: 0%) and 98.5% (95%CI: 97.8–99.2; I2: 0%) after LA-ERCP, respectively. The noticed high heterogeneity in EA-ERCP results probably reflects the larger number of included studies, the different enteroscopy modalities and the variety of surgical interventions. Comparisons revealed the superiority of LA-ERCP and EDGE over EA-ERCP (p ≤ 0.001) for all success-related outcomes, though LA-ERCP and EDGE were comparable (p ≥ 0.43). ERCP with spiral-enteroscope was inferior to balloon-enteroscope, while the type of the balloon-enteroscope did not affect the results. Most adverse events were recorded after LA-ERCP [15.1% (95%CI: 9.40–20.8); I2: 87.1%], and EDGE [13.1% (95%CI: 7.50–18.8); I2: 48.2%], significantly differing from EA-ERCP [5.7% (95%CI: 4.50–6.80); p ≤ 0.04; I2: 64.2%]. Conclusions: LA-ERCP and EDGE were associated with higher technical, cannulation, and therapeutic success compared to EA-ERCP, though accompanied with more adverse events.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-Directed Transgastric ERCP in Patients With Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a therapeutic procedure for skilled endoscopists that can be even more challenging in some situations, including patients' post-Roux-en-y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) surgery. There is still no consensus on whether laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) is the most appropriate, safe, and feasible approach in patients with this type of post-surgical anatomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine both approaches' feasibility, efficacy, and safety in this situation. We searched for electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Lilacs, Google Scholar, and Central Cochrane) to identify studies comparing LA-ERCP versus EDGE. Outcomes measured included technical success, adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs, length of stay (LOS), and procedural time. Descriptive data related to the EDGE procedure was also extracted. The risk of bias and the quality of evidence of the enrolled studies were assessed. Five studies, totalizing 268 patients (176 LA-ERCP and 92 EDGE), were included. There was no statistical difference in technical success and AEs between groups; however, the LOS and procedural times were shorter for the EDGE group. High rates of fistula closure and no weight regain were observed in EDGE. Both methods are feasible and safe techniques to perform ERCP in patients with RYGB anatomy, with comparable technical success and adverse events rate. However, EDGE is associated with shorter LOS and procedural time.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Directed Transgastric ERCP (EDGE) Utilization of Trends Among Interventional Endoscopists

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) has become standard-of-care therapy at many centers for pancreaticobiliary disease in patients with Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the opinions and practices of endoscopists who perform EDGE.

METHODS

A 22-question utilization of EDGE survey was sent to 36 advanced endoscopists at tertiary care centers in the United States. The two-section survey included questions regarding advanced endoscopy volume and training at the respective facilities, and questions on specific details of EDGE utilization.

RESULTS

Among 36 interventional endoscopists (IE) surveyed, 14 (39%) reported performing > 1000 ERCPs annually. Thirty (83%) offered EDGE as an option for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients with previous cholecystectomy. Other options offered included: 19 (53%) offered Laparoscopy-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP), 7 (19%) offered Single-Balloon ERCP (SBE), and 10 (28%) offered percutaneous drainage (PTC). Twenty (56%) IE performed 10 or less EDGE procedures, while 16 (44%) performed 11 or more. Single-session EDGE was performed by 7 (19%) IE, while 15 (42%) performed dual session, and 13 (36%) performed both. 19 (53%) actively closed fistulas while 17 (47%) let them close spontaneously. Thirty one (86%) reported a technical success rate of 91% to 100%. The most frequently reported immediate adverse event post-procedurally was abdominal pain, reported by 17 IE (47%). Weight gain was reported by 2 IE (6%).

CONCLUSION

EDGE continues to gain in popularity as an option for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients requiring pancreaticobiliary interventions, with 24/36 IE (67%) believing that it should be the new standard. In addition, most report a low frequency of post-procedural weight gain.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT05041608.

Analysis of the Management of Cholelithiasis in Bariatric Surgery Patients: a Single-Center Experience

PURPOSE

Cholelithiasis is an issue in bariatric surgery patients. The incidence of cholelithiasis is increased in morbidly obese patients. After bariatric surgery, the management maybe sometimes challenging. There is no consensus about how to deal with cholelithiasis prior to bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from our prospectively collected bariatric surgery database. Primary bariatric procedures from 2009 to 2020 were included. Prevalence of cholelithiasis and its management prior to bariatric surgery and the incidence and management of postoperative biliary events were analyzed.

RESULTS

Over 1445 patients analyzed, preoperatively cholelithiasis was found in 153 (10.58%), and 68 out of them (44.44%) were symptomatic. Seventy-six patients had a concomitant cholecystectomy. In those cases, the bariatric procedure did not show increased operative time, length of stay, morbidity, or mortality compared to the rest of primary bariatric procedures. Twelve patients (15.58%) with previous cholelithiasis and no concomitant cholecystectomy presented any kind of biliary event and required cholecystectomy. De novo cholelithiasis rate requiring cholecystectomy was 3.86%. Postoperative biliary events both in de novo and persistent cholelithiasis population did not show any difference between the type of surgery, weight loss, and other characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Cholelithiasis was present in 10.58% of our primary bariatric surgery population. Concomitant cholecystectomy was safe in our series. Non-surgical management of asymptomatic cholelithiasis did not lead to a higher risk of postoperative biliary events. The global postoperative cholecystectomy rate was equivalent to the general population.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To update on recent advances in interventional endoscopic ultrasound (INVEUS) techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of linear echoendoscopes with larger instrument channels and the combined development of new tools and devices have enabled various new applications of minimally invasive endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal interventions of the pancreas, biliary system and peri-gastrointestinal structures. In this review, EUS-guided interventions are discussed and evaluated: drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, access and drainage of bile ducts, gallbladder and pancreatic duct, treatment of gastrointestinal haemorrhage, coeliac plexus block and coeliac plexus neurolysis, fiducial placement, solid and cystic tumour ablation, drug delivery and brachytherapy, gastroenterostomy, angiotherapy and other EUS-guided applications. The EUS-guided interventions are classified based on the available evidence as established or experimental, standardized or nonstandardized procedures in common or rare diseases with well or little known complications and their established or nonestablished treatment.

SUMMARY

Some EUS-guided interventions have sparse published evidence with only single-centre studies, case series or individual case reports, others like drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections have become widely accepted practice. INVEUS has been accepted as an alternative to several surgical approaches, EUS-guided techniques result in faster recovery times, shorter hospital stay and lower costs.