Comparative outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided lumen-apposing mental stents drainage for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis: Case series and meta-analysis

Safety and efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents and double-pigtail plastic stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with walled-off necrosis (WON) are still challenging to treat safely and effectively. Recently, double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS), bi-flanged metallic stents (BFMS), and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have been employed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS-guided) drainage. However, there is little solid evidence to support the effectiveness and safety of using stents. This study aims to compare the outcomes of the LAMS and the PS.

METHOD

Till July 2022, a thorough database search was done, and studies that met the criteria were chosen. By using the RevMan software, the technical and clinical success and other secondary outcomes were calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed between the LAMS and the BFMS.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (two randomized controlled trials and thirteen observational) with 687 patients receiving metal stents and 771 patients receiving plastic stents were selected for final analysis. There was no significant risk of bias or publication bias. The odds ratios (OR) for technical and clinical success were 0.36 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.08, 1.52) and 2.26 (95%CI 1.62, 3.15), respectively. The OR for overall adverse events was 0.74 (95% CI 0.41, 1.34). In subgroup analysis, the LAMS and the BFMS showed the same outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Compared to DPS, LAMS had better clinical outcomes and fewer side effects when treating patients with WON.

Acute pancreatitis: A review of diagnosis, severity prediction and prognosis assessment from imaging technology, scoring system and artificial intelligence

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a potentially life-threatening inflammatory disease of the pancreas, with clinical management determined by the severity of the disease. Diagnosis, severity prediction, and prognosis assessment of AP typically involve the use of imaging technologies, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound, and scoring systems, including Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, and Bedside Index for Severity in AP scores. Computed tomography is considered the gold standard imaging modality for AP due to its high sensitivity and specificity, while magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound can provide additional information on biliary obstruction and vascular complications. Scoring systems utilize clinical and laboratory parameters to classify AP patients into mild, moderate, or severe categories, guiding treatment decisions, such as intensive care unit admission, early enteral feeding, and antibiotic use. Despite the central role of imaging technologies and scoring systems in AP management, these methods have limitations in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, practicality and economics. Recent advancements of artificial intelligence (AI) provide new opportunities to enhance their performance by analyzing vast amounts of clinical and imaging data. AI algorithms can analyze large amounts of clinical and imaging data, identify scoring system patterns, and predict the clinical course of disease. AI-based models have shown promising results in predicting the severity and mortality of AP, but further validation and standardization are required before widespread clinical application. In addition, understanding the correlation between these three technologies will aid in developing new methods that can accurately, sensitively, and specifically be used in the diagnosis, severity prediction, and prognosis assessment of AP through complementary advantages.

Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management

BACKGROUND

The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainages has marked a turning point in the field of interventional ultrasound and it is gathering worldwide diffusion in different clinical settings. Nevertheless, the procedure may conceal unexpected pitfalls. LAMS misdeployment is the most frequent cause of technical failure and it can be considered a procedure-related adverse event when it hampers the conclusion of the planned procedure or results in significant clinical consequences. Stent misdeployment can be managed successfully by endoscopic rescue maneuvers to allow the completion of the procedure. To date, no standardized indication is available to guide an appropriate rescue strategy depending on the type of procedure or of misdeployment.

AIM

To evaluate the incidence of LAMS misdeployment during EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and pancreatic fluid collections drainage (EUS-PFC) and to describe the endoscopic rescue strategies adopted under the circumstance.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on PubMed by searching for studies published up to October 2022. The search was carried out using the exploded medical subject heading terms “lumen apposing metal stent”, “LAMS”, “endoscopic ultrasound” and “choledochoduodenostomy” or “gallbladder” or “pancreatic fluid collections”. We included in the review on-label EUS-guided procedures namely EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC. Only those publications reporting EUS-guided LAMS positioning were considered. The studies reporting a technical success rate of 100% and other procedure-related adverse events were considered to calculate the overall rate of LAMS misdeployment, while studies not reporting the causes of technical failure were excluded. Case reports were considered only for the extraction of data regarding the issues of misdeployment and rescue techniques. The following data were collected from each study: Author, year of publication, study design, study population, clinical indication, technical success, reported number of misdeployment, stent type and size, flange misdeployed and type of rescue strategy.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rate of EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC was 93.7%, 96.1%, and 98.1% respectively. Significant rates of LAMS misdeployment have been reported for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC drainage, respectively 5.8%, 3.4%, and 2.0%. Endoscopic rescue treatment was feasible in 86.8%, 80%, and 96.8% of cases. Non endoscopic rescue strategies were required only in 10.3%, 16% and 3.2% for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. The endoscopic rescue techniques described were over-the-wire deployment of a new stent through the created fistula tract in 44.1%, 8% and 64.5% and stent-in-stent in 23.5%, 60%, and 12.9%, respectively for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. Further therapeutic option were endoscopic rendezvous in 11.8% of EUS-CDS and repeated procedure of EUS-guided drainage in 16.1% of EUS-PFC.

CONCLUSION

LAMS misdeployment is a relatively common adverse event in EUS-guided drainages. There is no consensus on the best rescue approach in these cases and the choice is often made by the endoscopist relying upon the clinical scenario, anatomical characteristics, and local expertise. In this review, we investigated the misdeployment of LAMS for each of the on-label indications focusing on the rescue therapies used, with the aim of providing useful data for endoscopists and to improve patient outcomes.

Microbial Spectra and Clinical Outcomes from Endoscopically Drained Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Descriptive Cohort Study

Pancreatic pseudocyst (PC) and walled-off necrosis (WON) are dreaded complications of acute pancreatitis. Standard therapy consists of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural placement of stents to expedite resolution through internal drainage of fluids or necrotic material. Either double pigtail plastic stents (DPPS) or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), or a combination of both, are available for this purpose. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of different stent types on infection rates in addition to clinical outcome measures such as periprocedural adverse events. We conducted a retrospective study comprising 77 patients who had undergone endoscopic drainage for PC or WON in a pancreatitis tertiary referral center. Analysis revealed that both bacterial and fungal infections occurred more frequently in patients treated with LAMS with or without DPPS compared to DPPS only. The use of antibiotics and antimycotics followed the same pattern. Furthermore, a prolonged length of hospital stay and a higher likelihood of transfer to an intermediate care unit were observed in patients with LAMS with or without DPPS. These differences were eliminated if only WON patients were analyzed. Our data imply that the clinical course is primarily influenced by the complexity of the pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) itself rather than the stent type. Prospective large-scale cohort studies are mandatory to underpin these findings.