Increased Incidence of Pseudoaneurysm Bleeding With Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents Compared to Double-Pigtail Plastic Stents in Patients With Peripancreatic Fluid Collections

Standardized approach to removal of lumen apposing metal stents following endoscopic necrosectomy: one size does not fit all

Background

Walled-off necrosis (WON) is a sequela of acute necrotizing pancreatitis preferentially managed with lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS). Adverse events including buried stent syndrome and bleeding have been associated with a longer duration of LAMS placement.

Objectives

We attempt to examine our outcomes of a standardized approach to LAMS dwell time and hypothesize that LAMS removal based on imaging characteristics and patient symptoms improves outcomes.

Design

From November 2015 to May 2022, a prospectively maintained database on patients with symptomatic WON undergoing endoscopic drainage with LAMS was retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.

Methods

Patient characteristics, procedure details, and outcomes were recorded. Imaging was performed at 1, 3, and 6 weeks after LAMS placement and 1 week after each necrosectomy. Imaging findings and patient symptoms were used to determine the need for repeat necrosectomy. The timing of LAMS removal was guided by adequate endoscopic necrosectomy and resolution of the patient's symptoms. Subgroups were identified based on the duration of LAMS placement (less than 4 weeks and more than 4 weeks). Independent t-tests (continuous variables) and Fisher's exact tests (categorical outcomes) were used to analyze the two groups.

Results

In all, 104 patients underwent endoscopic necrosectomy during the study period. Of the two subgroups identified based on LAMS dwell time, 70 patients had a LAMS duration greater than 4 weeks and 34 patients had a LAMS duration less than 4 weeks. Collections with >50% necrosis were more commonly seen in patients with longer LAMS dwell time (<4 weeks (12%) vs >4 weeks (33%), p = 0.031). The median number of necrosectomies was fewer in the early LAMS removal group compared to the late LAMS removal cohort (p = 0.03). Clinical outcomes including technical success, clinical success, delayed adverse events, and 6-month mortality were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

A patient-specific customized approach to endoscopic drainage of WON improves outcomes. Patients with extensive necrosis may require a longer LAMS dwell time to achieve adequate debridement and clinical resolution. An increased risk of bleeding or adverse events related to prolonged duration of LAMS placement was not observed in our study. Future larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.

Safety and efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) has variable outcomes according to the type of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) used. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available data.Online databases, including EMBASE, PubMed, and SCOPUS, were searched from inception to 30 January 2024. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and the need for endoscopic necrosectomy. Pooled estimates stratified by the type of stent (Axios, Nagi, or Spaxus), severity of bleeding, and type of PFC were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 values.37 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled outcomes (95%CIs) for PFC drainage using the Axios, Nagi, and Spaxus stents, respectively, were: technical success 97.7% (96.4%-98.8%), 96.9% (94.6%-98.5%), 98.2% (94.4%-99.9%); clinical success 90.9% (88.7%-92.8%), 88.5% (79.9%-95.0%), 93.5% (91.0%-95.6%); total AEs 20.4% (16.6%-24.6%), 17.1% (8.3%-28.3%), 7.6% (3.6%-13.0); migration 4.2% (2.9%-5.7%), 7.8% (4.1%-12.4%), 0.9% (0.1%-2.8%); overall bleeding 7.0% (4.9%-9.5%), 4.4% (2.2%-7.4%), 1.8% (0.8%-3.3%); and endoscopic necrosectomy 54.5% (38.9%-69.7%), 16.0% (11.4%-21.3%), 19.9% (6.6%-38.1%). In terms of severity, moderate-severe bleeding was most common with all three stents. AEs were higher in patients with walled-off necrosis compared with pseudocysts. Substantial-to-considerable heterogeneity (I 2 >60%) was present for total AEs for all of the stents.Our study shows good technical and clinical success rates with all three LAMSs for EUS-guided PFC drainage. Total AEs and bleeding were highest with the Axios stent and lowest with the Spaxus. Stent migration was highest with the Nagi stent and lowest with the Spaxus.

EUS-guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections Using Lumen Apposing Metal Stents With or Without Coaxial Plastic Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Co-axial plastic double pigtail stents (DPSs) are commonly placed through lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to decrease the risk of adverse events. In this meta-analysis, we have compared the outcomes of LAMS plus co-axial DPS versus LAMS alone in patients with PFCs.

METHODS

We reviewed several databases to identify the studies that compared outcomes of LAMS with DPS to LAMS without DPS in the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were overall adverse events, clinical success and individual adverse events such as stent (LAMS) migration, stent occlusion, bleeding, and infection. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the analysis of outcomes. We used a random effects model to analyze the data. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic.

RESULTS

We included 10 studies with 685 patients. Rate of overall adverse events was significantly lower in the LAMS+DPS group compared with LAMS alone, RR (95% CI) 0.58 (0.40, 0.87). There was no significant difference in the rate of clinical success between groups, RR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.94, 1.13). We found no significant difference in rate of stent occlusion between groups. Rate of infection was significantly lower in LAMS+DPS group, RR (95% CI) 0.46 (0.24, 0.85). There was no significant difference in rate of bleeding and stent (LAMS) migration between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of co-axial DPS to LAMS decreases the risk of adverse events in patients with PFCs and should be considered in all patients with PFCs.

Updates on therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided therapeutic interventions have been developed for the management of benign and malignant pancreaticobiliary and gastrointestinal luminal pathology. Recent high-quality evidence is increasingly validating these interventions and positioning them within evidence-based therapeutic algorithms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Here we review therapeutic EUS-guided interventions including pancreatic fluid collection drainage, gastroenterostomy, biliary drainage, pancreatic duct drainage and gallbladder drainage. The most up-to-date high-quality evidence supporting these interventions is presented including comparative data with other conventional treatment options. Newer emerging interventions such as tumor ablation are also reviewed. Current controversies and future avenues for research are discussed. The key role of EUS-guided interventions in managing pancreaticobiliary pathology in patients with a surgically altered anatomy is highlighted.

SUMMARY

Multiple EUS therapeutic interventions have evolved from experimental or rescue options to now well established first- and second-line interventions over other endoscopic, percutaneous and surgical alternatives with the support of high-quality data. Further research is needed to better optimize patient selection and guide long term postintervention follow-up.

The impact of pancreatic endotherapy on quality of life in chronic pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pancreatic endotherapy (PET) offers a treatment option for adverse events of chronic pancreatitis (CP) such as pancreatic duct (PD) strictures, stones, and pseudocysts. Previous studies have primarily focused on how PET affects pain, so the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of PET on quality of life.

METHODS

This single-center prospective study assessed quality of life before the initiation of endotherapy using a validated CP-specific quality of life instrument. Quality of life, pain levels, and opiate use were also measured at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months' follow-up. PET modalities included therapeutic PD stent placement, PD stone lithotripsy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pseudocyst drainage, and celiac plexus block (EUS-CPB). A repeated-measures mixed effects model was used to compare pre- and post-PET changes in quality of life at each follow-up point.

RESULTS

A total of 120 subjects with CP (mean age 52.3 years, 58.3% female) were included in this study. PET modalities consisted primarily of therapeutic PD stenting (49.2%), EUS-CPB (32.5%), and PD stone lithotripsy (16.7%). Significant improvements in quality of life scores were seen at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after PET completion, with the greatest improvement seen at 6 months (mean increase of 15.5 points). Significant improvements in pain levels were seen at 1 and 6 months, but not at 12 months. Decrease in opiate use was seen at all follow-up points.

CONCLUSIONS

PET is associated with improvement in quality of life up to 1 year after treatment, but pain improvement was seen only to 6 months, reflecting the complexity of pain management in this difficult patient population. Further studies are needed to predict responders to endotherapy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage for mediastinal abscess: first report of bridge to surgery for esophageal cancer

Perforated esophageal cancer rarely results in the formation of mediastinal abscess. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided abscess drainage (AD) has increasingly been used in the management of abscesses in locations that are difficult to treat percutaneously. We describe a case of EUS-AD for mediastinal abscess due to perforating esophageal cancer and successful bridge to surgery. A 71-year-old man with suspected esophageal issues was referred to our hospital. Computed tomography showed an esophageal cancer perforating the mediastinum, forming a mediastinal abscess. EUS-AD was planned before curative resection, because there was little improvement in inflammatory response with antimicrobial therapy. The mediastinal abscess cavity was confirmed on EUS and punctured using a 19-G needle, and then, a 0.025-inch guidewire was placed in the abscess cavity. The fistula was dilated with a 7-Fr dilator and a 6-Fr, single-pigtail nasobiliary tube was placed in the abscess cavity. One month later, clinical signs had improved and curative surgery was performed. Postoperative adjuvant therapy was administered using fluorouracil/cisplatin therapy. As of 2 years postoperatively, the patient remains free of recurrence.

Timing of lumen-apposing metal stents removal in pancreatic fluid collections: Could we go beyond?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are the mainstay treatment for pancreatic fluid collections (PFC). A 4-weeks interval for LAMS removal has been suggested to avoid adverse events (AEs). Primary aim is to evaluate the AEs rate in patients with LAMS removal <4 and >4 weeks from placement and possible associated factors.

METHODS

Retrospective study on patients underwent EUS-guided drainage of PFC with LAMS at two Italian centers between January 2017 and November 2023. PFC and LAMS features were collected. AEs were defined as bleeding, obstruction and buried LAMS.

RESULTS

108 patients were enrolled (62.9 % males; mean age 61 ± 14 years old). In 38 % PFC was in pancreatic head. In 64.8 % of patients LAMS ≥15 mm was used. Mean time of LAMS indwelling was 71 ± 87 days and in 73.1 % of patients the LAMS was removed after 4 weeks. AE occurred in 8.3 % of patients and the most common (77.8 %) was bleeding. There was no association between LAMS indwelling >4 weeks (8/9 vs 65/93 p = 0.44) and the rate of AE. A comparable mean time of LAMS persistence (108 ± 96 vs 67 ± 86 p = 0.18) between patients with and without AE was observed. PFC in the head (7/9 vs 33/93 p = 0.02) and LAMS ≥15 mm (9/9 vs 58/93 p = 0.03) were associated with a higher rate of AE.

CONCLUSION

When needed, LAMS removal >4 weeks appears to be as safe as LAMS removal within 4 weeks. LAMS ≥15 mm and Head location were associated with higher rate of AE and thus should arouse more caution.

Necrosectomy and its timing in relation to clinical outcomes of EUS-guided treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided transmural drainage with on-demand endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) is increasingly used to manage walled-off necrosis (WON). It has not been fully elucidated how EN and its timing are correlated with treatment outcomes compared with the drainage-based approach.

METHODS

Within a multi-institutional cohort of 423 patients with pancreatic fluid collections, including 227 patients with WON, 153 patients were identified who received the step-up treatment after the initial EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic WON; this included 102 EN patients and 51 non-EN (drainage) patients. Using the competing-risks multivariable proportional hazards regression model with adjustment for potential confounders, we calculated subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) for clinical treatment success (WON resolution) according to use of EN and its timing.

RESULTS

Compared with drainage alone, the EN-based treatment was associated with a shorter time to clinical success with a multivariable SHR of 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.46). Despite a higher risk of procedure-related bleeding in the EN group, there were no differences in the rates of severe adverse events (7.8% vs 5.9% in the EN and non-EN groups, respectively) or mortality (6.9% vs 9.8%). In the EN-treated patients, the timing of EN was not statistically significantly associated with the time to clinical success (Ptrend = .34).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of symptomatic WON, the use of EN in addition to drainage procedures was associated with earlier disease resolution. Further research is desired to determine the optimal timing of initiating EN considering a risk-benefit balance and cost-effectiveness.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Stent Types for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is required in select cases including infected or symptomatic collections. In this network meta-analysis, we have compared lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS), and double-pigtail stents (DPS) to identify the most useful stent type in the management of PFCs.

METHODS

We reviewed several databases to identify studies that compared DPS or FCSEMS with LAMS and the ones which compared DPS with FCSEMS for the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success, adverse events, technical success, recurrence of PFCs, and procedure duration. Random effects model and frequentist approach were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We included 28 studies with 2974 patients. Rate of clinical success was significantly lower with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.32, 0.59). Rate of recurrence was higher with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 2.06 (1.19, 3.57). We found no significant difference in rate of adverse events between groups. Rate of technical success was higher for FCSEMS compared to LAMS. Procedure duration was significantly shorter for LAMS compared to DPS and FCSEMS. Based on frequentist approach, LAMS was found to be superior to DPS and FCSEMS in achieving higher clinical success, lower rate of adverse events and recurrence, and shorter procedure time.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis demonstrates the superiority of LAMS over DPS and FCSEMS in the management of PFCs in achieving a higher clinical success, shorter procedure time, and lower rate of recurrence. Some of the analyses are not adequately powered to make firm conclusions, and future large multicenter RCTs are required to further evaluate this issue.

WONDER-02: plastic stent vs. lumen-apposing metal stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts-study protocol for a multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal drainage has become a first-line treatment modality for symptomatic pancreatic pseudocysts. Despite the increasing popularity of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs), plastic stents may resolve non-necrotic fluid collections effectively with lower costs and no LAMS-specific adverse events. To date, there has been a paucity of data on the appropriate stent type in this setting. This trial aims to assess the non-inferiority of plastic stents to a LAMS for the initial EUS-guided drainage of pseudocysts.

METHODS

The WONDER-02 trial is a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, which will enrol pancreatic pseudocyst patients requiring EUS-guided treatment in 26 centres in Japan. This trial plans to enrol 80 patients who will be randomised at a 1:1 ratio to receive either plastic stents or a LAMS (40 patients per arm). In the plastic stent group, EUS-guided drainage will be performed using two 7-Fr double pigtail stents. In the LAMS group, the treatment will be performed in the same way except for LAMS use. The step-up treatment will be performed via endoscopic and/or percutaneous procedures at the trial investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint is clinical success, which is defined as a decrease in a pseudocyst size to ≤ 2 cm and an improvement in inflammatory indicators (i.e. body temperature, white blood cell count, and serum C-reactive protein). Secondary endpoints include technical success, adverse events including mortality, pseudocyst recurrence, and medical costs.

DISCUSSION

The WONDER-02 trial will investigate the efficacy and safety of plastic stents compared to a LAMS in EUS-guided treatment of symptomatic pancreatic pseudocysts with a particular focus on the non-inferior efficacy of plastic stents. The findings will help establish a new treatment algorithm for this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06133023 registered on 9 November 2023. UMIN000052647 registered on 30 October 2023. jRCT1032230444 registered on 7 November 2023.

Endoscopic Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are commonly encountered complications of acute and chronic pancreatitis. With the advancement of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) techniques and devices, EUS-directed transmural drainage of symptomatic or infected PFCs has become the standard of care. Traditionally, plastic stents have been used for drainage, although lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are now favored by most endoscopists due to ease of use and reduced procedure time. While safety has been repeatedly demonstrated, follow-up care for these patients is critical as delayed adverse events of indwelling drains are known to occur.

Consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis from a Chinese multiple disciplinary team expert panel

Objective

To prepare a set of practice guidelines to standardize the entire process, from diagnosis to treatment and follow-up, for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis.

Methods

Thirty-six experts in the fields of digestive endoscopy, pancreatic surgery, interventional radiology, and others presented their opinions via discussions in online conferences by referring to the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes principles and then reviewed the evidence and statements using the Delphi method to reach a consensus. The consensus of >80% was finally achieved for the items.

Results

The experts discussed and reached a consensus on 29 statements including 10 categories: (1) definition and classification, (2) imaging and endoscopic diagnosis, (3) therapeutic implications, (4) surgical therapy, (5) percutaneous catheter drainage, (6) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, (7) EUS-guided drainage, (8) stent selection for EUS-guided drainage, (9) complication related to stents for cyst drainage, and (10) drug treatment and follow-up.

Conclusion

This consensus based on the clinical experience of experts in various fields and international evidence-based medicine further standardizes the multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment processes for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis.

Equivalent efficacy and safety of plastic stents and lumen-apposing metal stents in the treatment of peripancreatic fluid collections: a prospective cohort study

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage using double pigtail plastic stents (DPPS) has been routine for the treatment of peripancreatic fluid collections (PFC). Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have since their introduction been the preferred choice; however, their superiority has not been proven. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of DPPS and LAMS.

Methods

This was a single-center, prospective study that included consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided drainage between January 2010 and December 2020. The primary endpoints were technical success, clinical success and adverse event rate, while the secondary endpoints included symptomatic relief, length of hospital stay, and need for adjunct drainage. A subgroup analysis of walled-off necrosis (WON) was performed.

Results

A total of 89 patients (median age 56 years) underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage (DPPS: n=53; LAMS: n=36) because of a pseudocyst (n=37) or a WON (n=52). Both DPPS and LAMS had a 100% technical success rate and a comparable adverse event rate (4% vs. 6%, P=0.24). An equivalent efficacy was recorded for the drainage of PFC comparing DPPS and LAMS, and no significant statistical difference was recorded in clinical success (DPPS 60% vs. LAMS 61%, P=0.94) or the need for reintervention (DPPS 11% vs. LAMS 13%, P=0.72).

Conclusions

In this large, prospective study of EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, LAMS and DPPS showed equivalent safety, technical success, clinical success and hospital stay. Both techniques were associated with a comparable need for complementary necrosectomy.

Risk factors for adverse outcomes at various phases of endoscopic ultrasound-guided treatment of pancreatic fluid collections: Data from a multi-institutional consortium

OBJECTIVES

No comprehensive study has examined short- and long-term adverse outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided treatment of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) including walled-off necrosis (WON) and pseudocysts.

METHODS

In a multi-institutional cohort of 357 patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of PFCs (228 with WON and 129 with pseudocysts), we examined PFC type-specific risk factors for procedure-related adverse events (AEs), clinical failure, and recurrence. Odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using the logistic and Cox regression models, respectively, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Adverse events were observed predominantly in WON, and risk factors were WON extension to the pelvis (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.00-6.19) and endoscopic necrosectomy (OR 5.15; 95% CI 1.61-16.5). Risk factors for clinical failure in WON treatment included higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR for ≥3 vs. ≤2, 2.58; 95% CI 1.05-6.35), extension to the pelvis (OR 3.63; 95% CI 1.57-8.43), nonuse of a lumen-apposing metal stent (OR 2.88; 95% CI 1.10-7.54), and percutaneous drainage (OR 3.73; 95% CI 1.27-10.9). Patients with pseudocysts extending to the paracolic gutter and the need for more than two endoscopic/percutaneous procedures had ORs for clinical failure of 5.28 (95% CI 1.10-25.3) and 5.52 (95% CI 1.61-18.9), respectively. Pseudocysts requiring the multigateway approach were associated with a high risk of recurrence (HR 4.00; 95% CI 1.11-11.6).

CONCLUSION

The adverse outcomes at various phases of EUS-guided PFC treatment may be predictable based on clinical parameters. Further research is warranted to optimize treatment strategies for high-risk patients.

Plastic pigtail vs lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of walled-off necrosis (PROMETHEUS study): an open-label, multicenter randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have displaced double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) as the standard treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON),β but evidence for exclusively using LAMS is limited. We aimed to assess whether the theoretical benefit of LAMS was superior to DPS.

METHODS

This multicenter, open-label, randomized trial was carried out in 9 tertiary hospitals. Between June 2017, and Oct 2020, we screened 99 patients with symptomatic WON, of whom 64 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the DPS group (n = 31) or the LAMS group (n = 33). The primary outcome was short-term (4-weeks) clinical success determined by the reduction of collection. Secondary endpoints included long-term clinical success, hospitalization, procedure duration, recurrence, safety, and costs. Analyses were by intention-to-treat.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, NCT03100578.

RESULTS

A similar clinical success rate in the short term (RR, 1.41; 95% CI 0.88-2.25; p = 0.218) and in the long term (RR, 1.2; 95% CI 0.92-1.58; p = 0.291) was observed between both groups. Procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LAMS group (35 vs. 45-min, p = 0.003). The hospital admission after the index procedure (median difference, - 10 [95% CI - 17.5, - 1]; p = 0.077) and global hospitalization (median difference - 4 [95% CI - 33, 25.51]; p = 0.82) were similar between both groups. Reported stent-related adverse events were similar for the two groups (36 vs.45% in LAMS vs. DPS), except for de novo fever, which was significantly 26% lower in LAMS (RR, 0.26 [0.08-0.83], p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical superiority of LAMS over DPS for WON therapy was not proved, with similar clinical success, hospital stay and similar safety profile between both groups, yet a significant reduction in procedure time was observed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03100578.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections and bleeding risk: a propensity matched study

INTRODUCTION

 Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) using the Hot-Axios device has recently been associated with a significant risk of bleeding. This adverse event (AE) seems to occur less frequently with the use of a different device, the Spaxus stent. The aim of the current study was to compare the rates of bleeding between the two stents.

METHODS

 Patients admitted for treatment of PFCs by EUS plus lumen-apposing metal stent in 18 endoscopy referral centers between 10 July 2019 and 28 February 2022 were identified and their outcomes compared using a propensity-matching analysis.

RESULTS

 363 patients were evaluated. After a 1-to-1 propensity score match, 264 patients were selected (132 per group). The technical and clinical success rates were comparable between the two groups. Significantly more bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred in the Hot-Axios group than in the Spaxus group (6.8% vs. 1.5%; P = 0.03); stent type was a significant predictor of bleeding in both univariate and multivariate regression analyses (P = 0.03 and 0.04, respectively). Bleeding necessitating arterial embolization did not however differ significantly between the two groups (3.0% vs. 0%; P = 0.12). In addition, the Hot-Axios was associated with a significantly higher rate of overall AEs compared with the Spaxus stent (9.8% vs. 3.0%; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

 Our study showed that, in patients with PFCs, bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred significantly more frequently with use of the Hot-Axios stent than with the Spaxus stent, although this was not the case for bleeding requiring embolization.

Risk of recurrence with or without plastic stent after EUS-guided treatment of peripancreatic fluid collections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims Recent advances in endoscopic transmural treatment have improved the clinical outcomes of patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, there is still a debate about the preventive effect of long-term placement of a transmural plastic stent (PS) on recurrence after successful endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided treatment of PFCs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate PFC recurrence rates with and without a transmural PS after EUS-guided treatment. Patients and methods A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database was conducted to identify clinical studies comparing outcomes with and without transmural PS published until September 2022. Data on PFC recurrence and adverse events (AEs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Results Nine studies including 380 patients with long-term transmural PS and 289 patients without PS were identified. The rate of PFC recurrence was significantly lower in patients with transmural PS (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.08-0.65], P = 0.005). In a subgroup analysis limited to studies focusing on patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome, which has been reported to be a risk factor for PFC recurrence, the OR was numerically lower than that for the entire cohort (OR = 0.14, 95% CI [0.04-0.46]). The rate of AEs was significantly higher with long-term transmural PS (OR = 14.77, 95% CI [4.21-51.83]). Conclusions In this meta-analysis, long-term PS placement reduced the risk of PFC recurrence. Given the potential AEs of indwelling PS, further research is required to evaluate the overall benefits of long-term PS placement.

EUS-guided interventional therapies for pancreatic diseases

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an integrated diagnostic technique merging endoscope and ultrasound to examine the digestive system. EUS has emerged as a primary diagnostic method for pancreatic diseases due to its distinctive benefits. Over the past four decades, EUS has undergone a transformation, shifting its role from primarily diagnostic to increasingly therapeutic. Additionally, in recent years, EUS has emerged as an increasingly prominent adjunctive or alternative approach to conventional surgical interventions. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of current technological approaches in the treatment of pancreatic diseases. The dynamic interplay with diverse therapeutic approaches has reinvigorated EUS and shaped its trajectory in the management of pancreatic diseases.

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.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Walled-off Necrosis Drainage

Walled-off necrosis is a well-recognized complication of necrotizing pancreatitis that can cause sepsis, luminal or ductal obstruction, or persistent unwellness requiring multidisciplinary care. Recent data suggest that minimally invasive endoscopic treatment strategies are preferred over more invasive surgical approaches. Although endoscopic transmural drainage with or without necrosectomy is the primary approach for patients requiring an intervention, for collections not amenable to endoscopic approach, percutaneous drain placement followed by video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement or laparoscopic cystogastrostomy with internal debridement are other alternatives. More studies are required to optimize post-procedure care to shorten the length of stay and minimize resource utilization.

Inverse association of hospital volume with in-hospital mortality rate of patients receiving EUS-guided interventions for pancreatic fluid collections

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided interventions currently serve as first-line treatment for symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) but require high-level expertise and multidisciplinary care. Hospital caseload has not been fully examined in relation to clinical outcomes of patients with endoscopically managed PFCs.

METHODS

Using the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database (a Japanese nationwide inpatient database), we identified 4053 patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of PFCs at 486 hospitals between 2010 and 2020 and examined an association of hospital volume (average annual number of cases at a hospital) with in-hospital mortality. Associations with bleeding, length of stay, and total costs were examined as secondary analyses. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted with adjustment for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The hospital volume was inversely associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality (Ptrend < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for in-hospital mortality comparing the extreme quintiles of hospital volume was .17 (95% confidence interval, .09-.33). A restricted cubic spline analysis yielded no statistically significant evidence on the nonlinear relationship (Pnonlinearity = .19). The types of stents (plastic vs lumen-apposing metal stent) seemed to have no effect modification on the volume-mortality relationship (Pinteraction = .58). Higher hospital volume was also associated with lower risk of bleeding, shorter length of stay, and lower medical costs of inpatient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher hospital volume was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality of patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of PFCs. A further investigation is warranted to justify the volume-based selective referral of the patients.

Endoscopic Ultrasound in Pancreatology: Focus on Inflammatory Diseases and Interventions

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a main tool in pancreatology for both diagnosis and therapy. It allows minimally invasive differentiation of various diseases, with a minimal degree of inflammation or anatomic variations. EUS also enables interventional direct access to the pancreatic parenchyma and the retroperitoneal space, the pancreatic duct, the pancreatic masses, cysts, vascular structures for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.

Summary

This review aimed to summarize the new developments of EUS in the field of pancreatology, with special interest on inflammation and interventions. EUS enables way to perform pseudocyst drainage, necrosectomy, transenteral drainage and transenteric access of the main pancreatic duct, or the direct visualization or therapy of vascular structures adjacent to the pancreas.

Key Messages

EUS has a deep impact on pancreatology, and the development of new diagnostic and interventional approaches to the retroperitoneal space and the pancreas has increased in the last years exponentially, allowing minimal invasive diagnostics and therapy and avoiding surgery and percutaneous therapy.

Endoscopic ultrasound drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: do we know enough about the best approach?

Pancreatic fluid collection often occurs as a local complication of acute pancreatitis, and drainage is indicated in symptomatic patients. The drainage may be surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided. In symptomatic collections older than 4 weeks and localized in the upper abdomen, EUS-guided drainage is the first choice of treatment. Lumen-apposing metal stents are useful in cases of walled-off necrosis, facilitating access to the cavity; however, they do not reduce the number of necrosectomy sessions required. In most pancreatic pseudocysts requiring drainage, plastic stents remain the first choice of treatment. This review aimed to summarize the principles and techniques of step-up therapy of pancreatic fluid collections, including preprocedural and postprocedural assessment and practical approaches of drainage and necrosectomy, making available evidence more accessible to endoscopists aiming to train for this procedure. Successful and safe EUS drainage connotes early recognition and treatment of complications and the presence of a multidisciplinary team for optimal patient management. However, the best time for necrosectomy, modality of drainage method (lumen-apposing metal stents or plastic stents), and duration of antibiotherapy are still under evaluation.

Endoscopic Management of Necrotic Pancreatic Fluid Collections in the Setting of Disrupted Pancreatic Duct Syndrome: Out Like a LAMS?

In this commentary, the recent study "Safety and Efficacy of Long-Term Transmural Plastic Stent Placement After Removal of Lumen Apposing Metal Stent In Resolved Pancreatic Fluid Collections With Duct Disconnection at Head/Neck of Pancreas" is addressed. Some background information regarding endoscopic management of walled off necrosis is mentioned, then the study is summarized, followed by a critique about the strengths and limitations of the study. Further areas of research are also mentioned.

WONDER-01: immediate necrosectomy vs. drainage-oriented step-up approach after endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis-study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

With the increasing popularity of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural interventions, walled-off necrosis (WON) of the pancreas is increasingly managed via non-surgical endoscopic interventions. However, there has been an ongoing debate over the appropriate treatment strategy following the initial EUS-guided drainage. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) removes intracavity necrotic tissue, potentially facilitating early resolution of the WON, but may associate with a high rate of adverse events. Given the increasing safety of DEN, we hypothesised that immediate DEN following EUS-guided drainage of WON might shorten the time to WON resolution compared to the drainage-oriented step-up approach.

METHODS

The WONDER-01 trial is a multicentre, open-label, superiority, randomised controlled trial, which will enrol WON patients aged ≥ 18 years requiring EUS-guided treatment in 23 centres in Japan. This trial plans to enrol 70 patients who will be randomised at a 1:1 ratio to receive either the immediate DEN or drainage-oriented step-up approach (35 patients per arm). In the immediate DEN group, DEN will be initiated during (or within 72 h of) the EUS-guided drainage session. In the step-up approach group, drainage-based step-up treatment with on-demand DEN will be considered after 72-96 h observation. The primary endpoint is time to clinical success, which is defined as a decrease in a WON size to ≤ 3 cm and an improvement of inflammatory markers (i.e. body temperature, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein). Secondary endpoints include technical success, adverse events including mortality, and recurrence of the WON.

DISCUSSION

The WONDER-01 trial will investigate the efficacy and safety of immediate DEN compared to the step-up approach for WON patients receiving EUS-guided treatment. The findings will help us to establish new treatment standards for patients with symptomatic WON.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05451901, registered on 11 July 2022. UMIN000048310, registered on 7 July 2022. jRCT1032220055, registered on 1 May 2022.

The Use of PuraStat® in the Management of Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis Drained Using Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents: A Case Series

Background and Objectives: Bleeding is one of the most feared and frequent adverse events in the case of EUS-guided drainage of WOPN using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) and of direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). When it occurs, its management is still controversial. In the last few years, PuraStat, a novel hemostatic peptide gel has been introduced, expanding the toolbox of the endoscopic hemostatic agents. The aim of this case series was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PuraStat in preventing and controlling bleeding of WOPN drainage using LAMSs. Materials and Methods: This is a multicenter, retrospective pilot study from three high-volume centers in Italy, including all consecutive patients treated with the novel hemostatic peptide gel after LAMSs placement for the drainage of symptomatic WOPN between 2019 and 2022. Results: A total of 10 patients were included. All patients underwent at least one session of DEN. Technical success of PuraStat was achieved in 100% of patients. In seven cases PuraStat was placed for post-DEN bleeding prevention, with one patient experiencing bleeding after DEN. In three cases, on the other hand, PuraStat was placed to manage active bleeding: two cases of oozing were successfully controlled with gel application, and a massive spurting from a retroperitoneal vessel required subsequent angiography. No re-bleeding occurred. No PuraStat-related adverse events were reported. Conclusions: This novel peptide gel could represent a promising hemostatic device, both in preventing and managing active bleeding after EUS-guided drainage of WON. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm its efficacy.

Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent With and Without Concurrent Double-Pigtail Plastic Stent for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are often used to drain pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, adverse events, such as stent obstruction, infection, or bleeding, have been reported. Concurrent double-pigtail plastic stent (DPPS) deployment has been suggested to prevent these adverse events. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of LAMS with DPPS vs. LAMS alone in the drainage of PFCs.

Methods

An extensive search was conducted in the literature to include all the eligible studies that compared LAMS with DPPS vs. LAMS alone for drainage of PFCs. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained within a random-effect model. The outcomes were technical and clinical success, and overall adverse events, including stent migration and occlusion, bleeding, infection, and perforation.

Results

Five studies involving 281 patients with PFCs (137 received LAMS plus DPPS vs. 144 received LAMS alone) were included. LAMS plus DPPS group was associated with comparable technical success (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97 - 1.04, P = 0.70) and clinical success (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.88 - 1.17). Lower trends of overall adverse events (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.32 - 1.29), stent occlusion (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.27 - 1.49), infection (RR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.15 - 1.64), and perforation (RR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.06 - 2.78) were observed in LAMS with DPPS group compared to LAMS alone but without a statistical significance. Stent migration (RR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.50 - 3.34) and bleeding (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.25 - 1.72) were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Deployment of DPPS across LAMS for drainage of PFCs has no significant impact on efficacy or safety outcomes. Randomized, controlled trials are necessary to confirm our study results, especially in walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

Endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Progress and challenges

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) represents a severe condition in patients with acute pancreatitis. Invasive interventions are recommended in symptomatic INP. Growing evidence has suggested interventional strategies of INP evolving from traditional surgery to minimally invasive step-up endoscopic procedures. However, there is still no standardized protocol for endoscopic interventions. Recently, various studies have been published about the endoscopic management of INP. This article reviews published articles and guidelines to present the progress and challenges of endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy in INP.

Endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Progress and challenges

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) represents a severe condition in patients with acute pancreatitis. Invasive interventions are recommended in symptomatic INP. Growing evidence has suggested interventional strategies of INP evolving from traditional surgery to minimally invasive step-up endoscopic procedures. However, there is still no standardized protocol for endoscopic interventions. Recently, various studies have been published about the endoscopic management of INP. This article reviews published articles and guidelines to present the progress and challenges of endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy in INP.

Endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Progress and challenges

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) represents a severe condition in patients with acute pancreatitis. Invasive interventions are recommended in symptomatic INP. Growing evidence has suggested interventional strategies of INP evolving from traditional surgery to minimally invasive step-up endoscopic procedures. However, there is still no standardized protocol for endoscopic interventions. Recently, various studies have been published about the endoscopic management of INP. This article reviews published articles and guidelines to present the progress and challenges of endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy in INP.

Endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Progress and challenges

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) represents a severe condition in patients with acute pancreatitis. Invasive interventions are recommended in symptomatic INP. Growing evidence has suggested interventional strategies of INP evolving from traditional surgery to minimally invasive step-up endoscopic procedures. However, there is still no standardized protocol for endoscopic interventions. Recently, various studies have been published about the endoscopic management of INP. This article reviews published articles and guidelines to present the progress and challenges of endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy in INP.

Computed tomography imaging-based predictors of the need for a step-up approach after initial endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage for pancreatic fluid collections

BACKGROUND

A step-up approach is recommended as a new treatment algorithm for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, determining which patients with PFCs require a step-up approach after endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TD) is unclear. If the need for a step-up approach could be predicted, it could be performed early for relevant patients. We aimed to identify PFC-related predictive factors for a step-up approach after EUS-TD.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients who had undergone EUS-TD for PFCs from January 2008 to May 2020. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate PFC factors related to requiring a step-up approach. A step-up approach was performed for patients who did not respond clinically to EUS-TD.

RESULTS

We enrolled 81 patients, of whom 25 (30.9%) required a step-up approach. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the pre-EUS-TD number of PFC-occupied regions ≥ 3 (multivariate odds ratio [OR] 16.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.68-97.6, P = 0.002), the post-EUS-TD PFC-remaining percentage ≥ 35% (multivariate OR 19.9, 95% CI 2.91-136.1, P = 0.002), and a positive sponge sign, which is a distinctive computed tomography finding in the early stage after EUS-TD (multivariate OR 6.26, 95% CI 1.33-29.3, P = 0.020), were independent predictive factors associated with requiring a step-up approach for PFCs.

CONCLUSION

Pre-EUS-TD PFC-occupied regions, post-EUS-TD PFC-remaining percentage, and a positive sponge sign were predictors of the need for a step-up approach. Patients with PFC with these findings should be offered a step-up approach whereas conservative treatment is recommended for patients without these findings.

CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN 000030898.

Does a coaxial double pigtail stent reduce adverse events after lumen apposing metal stent placement for pancreatic fluid collections? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMSs) have a higher clinical success rate for managing pancreatic fluid collections. But they are associated with adverse events (AEs) like bleeding, migration, buried stent, occlusion, and infection. It has been hypothesized that placing a double pigtail stent (DPS) within LAMS may mitigate these AEs. The present systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the outcome and AEs associated with LAMS with or without a coaxial DPS (LAMS-DPS).

Methods:

A comprehensive literature search of three databases from January 2010 to August 2022 was conducted for studies comparing the outcome and AEs of LAMS alone and LAMS-DPS. Pooled incidence and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for all the dichotomous outcomes.

Results:

Overall, eight studies ( n = 460) were included in the final analysis. The clinical success rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.87–1.14) and the risk of overall AEs (RR 1.60, 95% CI: 0.95–2.68) remained comparable between both groups. There was no difference in the risk of bleeding between LAMS alone and LAMS-DPS (RR 1.80, 95% CI: 0.83–3.88). Individual analysis of other AEs, including infection, stent migration, occlusion, and reintervention, showed no difference in the risk between both procedures.

Conclusion:

The present meta-analysis shows that coaxial DPS within LAMS may not reduce AE rates or improve clinical outcomes. Further larger studies, including patients with walled-off necrosis, are required to demonstrate the benefit of coaxial DPS within LAMS.

Does a coaxial double pigtail stent reduce adverse events after lumen apposing metal stent placement for pancreatic fluid collections? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMSs) have a higher clinical success rate for managing pancreatic fluid collections. But they are associated with adverse events (AEs) like bleeding, migration, buried stent, occlusion, and infection. It has been hypothesized that placing a double pigtail stent (DPS) within LAMS may mitigate these AEs. The present systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the outcome and AEs associated with LAMS with or without a coaxial DPS (LAMS-DPS).

Methods

A comprehensive literature search of three databases from January 2010 to August 2022 was conducted for studies comparing the outcome and AEs of LAMS alone and LAMS-DPS. Pooled incidence and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for all the dichotomous outcomes.

Results

Overall, eight studies (n = 460) were included in the final analysis. The clinical success rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.87-1.14) and the risk of overall AEs (RR 1.60, 95% CI: 0.95-2.68) remained comparable between both groups. There was no difference in the risk of bleeding between LAMS alone and LAMS-DPS (RR 1.80, 95% CI: 0.83-3.88). Individual analysis of other AEs, including infection, stent migration, occlusion, and reintervention, showed no difference in the risk between both procedures.

Conclusion

The present meta-analysis shows that coaxial DPS within LAMS may not reduce AE rates or improve clinical outcomes. Further larger studies, including patients with walled-off necrosis, are required to demonstrate the benefit of coaxial DPS within LAMS.

Current uses of electro-cautery lumen apposing metal stents in endoscopic ultrasound guided interventions

The electro-cautery lumen apposing metal stent (EC-LAMS) is a newly developed device that integrates the electro-cautery cyctotome with the one-step metal stent delivery and releasing system in recent years. LAMS was first designed to complete the drainage of pancreatic fluid collection under endoscopic ultrasound guidance, and the technological innovation of EC-LAMS has made more off-labeled indications of endoscopic intervention for gastrointestinal diseases realized, such as abdominal fluid drainage, bile duct, or gallbladder drainage through stomach or duodenum, gastrointestinal anastomosis, and the establishment of fistulous channel for further endoscopic operation when necessary. The unique feature of this metal stent is that it has the design of a saddle shape and a large lumen, and can almost connect the adjacent structures to minimize the risk of perforation and leakage. Compared with traditional LAMS, EC-LAMS, an advanced integrated device, can greatly simplify the endoscopic process, shorten the procedure time and reduce the technical difficulty, thus it can help endoscopists complete more complex endoscopic interventions. In this review, we discuss the state of art with regard to EC-LAMS and its endoscopic process, current indications, outcomes, adverse events, and future application prospects.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound guided drainage of pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis after failure of percutaneous drainage

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) represents the gold standard for initial drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) due to various etiologies. However, data concerning salvage EUS drainage after initial percutaneous drainage are limited. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic collections after failure of percutaneous drainage.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in a single, tertiary university center from August 2013 to January 2020. Indication was pancreatic collection after acute pancreatitis with PFC requiring EUS-guided drainage after failure of percutaneous drainage.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients with PFC after acute pancreatitis were included (mean age 64.1 ± 11.3 years) of which 4/22 (18.2%) had pancreatic pseudocyst and 18/22 (81.8%) presented with a walled-off necrosis. Seventy-six interventions were performed among the 22 patients. Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) were used in 5/22 (22.7%) and double pigtail plastic stents in 17/22 (77.3%) of interventions with a median number intervention of 3 per patient (range 1 to 7). Technical success rate was 98.7% (75/76) with an overall clinical success of 81.8% (18/22). Procedure related adverse events rate was 9.1% (2/22) including one bleeding and one pancreatic fistula. Two non-procedure related deaths were observed.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided pancreatic collection drainage is clinically effective and safe after clinical/technical failure of radiological percutaneous management.

Interventional radiology followed by endoscopic drainage for pancreatic fluid collections associated with high bleeding risk: Two case reports

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal drainage is an advanced technique used to treat pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, gastric varices and intervening vessels may be associated with a high risk of bleeding and are, therefore, listed as relative contraindications. Herein, we report two patients who underwent interventional embolization before EUS-guided drainage.

CASE SUMMARY

Two 32-year-old males developed symptomatic PFCs after acute pancreatitis and came to our hospital for further treatment. One patient suffered from intermittent abdominal pain and vomiting, and computed tomography (CT) imaging showed an encapsulated cyst 7.93 cm × 6.13 cm in size. The other patient complained of a mass inside the abdomen, which gradually became enlarged. Gastric varices around the ideal puncture site were detected by EUS when we evaluated the possibility of endoscopic drainage in both patients. Interventional embolization was recommended as the first procedure to decrease the risk of bleeding. After that, EUS-guided transluminal drainage was successfully conducted, without vascular rupture. No postoperative complications occurred during hospitalization, and no recurrence was detected at the last follow-up CT scan performed at 1 mo.

CONCLUSION

Interventional embolization is a safe, preoperative procedure that is performed before EUS-guided drainage in PFC patients with gastric varices or at high risk of bleeding.

Invasive intervention timing for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Late invasive intervention is not late for collection

With the advance of invasive interventions, the treatment model for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) has shifted from open surgery to the step-up minimally invasive treatment. Late intervention, originating from the open surgery era, has been questioned in the minimally invasive period. With the emergence of new high-quality evidence about the timing for intervention, it seems to be increasingly apparent that, even in the age of minimal invasiveness, “late intervention” waiting for the necrotic collections to be encapsulated is still necessary. This opinion review mainly discusses the intervention timing for INP.

Interventional endoscopy for abdominal transplant patients

Interventional endoscopy can play a significant role in the care and management of children pre-and post- abdominal solid organ transplantation. Such procedures primarily include endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE), though additional interventions are available using standard endoscopes (gastroscopes, colonoscopes) for therapeutics purposes such as endoscopic hemostasis. The availability of pediatric practitioners with the advanced training to effectively and safely perform these procedures are most often limited to large tertiary care pediatric centers. These centers possess the necessary resources and ancillary staff to provide the comprehensive multi-disciplinary care needed for these complex patients. In this review, we discuss the importance of interventional endoscopy in caring for transplant patients, during their clinical course preceding the potential need for solid organ transplantation and inclusion of a discussion related to endoscopic post-surgical complication management. Given the highly important role of interventional endoscopy in patients with recurrent and chronic pancreatitis, we also include a discussion related to this complex disease process leading up to those patients that may need pancreas surgery including total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT).

Effectiveness and Safety of Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents in Endoscopic Interventions for Off-Label Indications

BACKGROUND

Although released only for drainage of pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (WON) with ≤ 30% solid debris, the utilization of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) in "real-world" practice has deviated from approved indications. We evaluated the contemporary use of LAMS and associated clinical, procedural outcomes in the setting of a tertiary referral center in the USA.

METHODS

Data from 303 consecutive patients who underwent LAMS placement were analyzed. Outcomes included technical and clinical success rates and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 303 patients, 190 (62.7%) received LAMS for off-label indications. The latter included gallbladder drainage (n = 56, 18.5%), gastroenterostomy (n = 52, 17.2%), treatment of gastrointestinal strictures (n = 37, 12.2%), biliary drainage (n = 20, 6.6%), temporary gastric access for endoscopy (n = 13, 4.3%), symptomatic WON with > 30% solid debris (n = 8, 2.6%), and miscellaneous (n = 4, 1.3%). Technical success rates in the on- and off-label arm were 98.2% and 95.8%, respectively (P = .331; 95% CI 0.08 to 1.96). Clinical success rates in the on- and off-label arm were 89.4% and 83.2%, respectively (P = .137; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.19). The rate of adverse events was 20.5% (n = 39) in the off-label arm and 16.8% (n = 19) in the on-label arm (P = .242; 95% CI 0.69 to 2.34).

CONCLUSION

Off-label use of LAMS out-numbered on-label use in our practice. The safety profile between the groups was similar and with the exception of refractory stricture treatment, efficacy was comparable.

Visceral artery pseudoaneurysms in necrotizing pancreatitis: risk of early bleeding with lumen-apposing metal stents

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Visceral artery pseudoaneurysm (PSA) in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, clinical presentation, management, and outcomes of PSA in NP.

METHODS

All NP patients managed at our institution between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database for PSA. Demographics, clinical presentation, method of diagnosis, management, and outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine of 607 patients (6.4%) with NP had a confirmed diagnosis of PSA. Demographics, presence of infected necrosis, development of organ failure(s), and severity of disease were similar between PSA and no PSA. Endoscopic and percutaneous drainages for walled-off necrosis (WON) were more common in the PSA group. Seven patients developed PSA without requiring any intervention for WON, and 17 patients (43.6%) had lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) placed before PSA diagnosis. The time from NP diagnosis to PSA diagnosis was shorter in these patients (n = 17) compared with the remaining patients (n=22; 47 days [interquartile range {IQR}: 17-85] vs 109 days [IQR: 61-180.5, P=0.009]). In addition, 7 of 11 patients (63.6%) with early PSA (defined by <3 weeks from index cystgastrostomy/cystduodenostomy) had an indwelling LAMS at the time of the PSA diagnosis. Seventy-seven percent of patients presented with anemia, 74.3% with GI bleeding, and 30% with hemorrhagic shock. CT was diagnostic for PSA in 83.9% with a false-negative rate of 16.1%. Splenic (50%) and gastroduodenal (28%) arteries were the most common arteries involved by PSA. Angiography and embolization for PSA were successful in 33 of 35 patients. In-hospital mortality was observed in 9 patients (23.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although visceral artery PSA affects a small percentage of NP patients, it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In addition, bleeding from PSA induced by erosion of LAMSs may occur in the first 2 weeks, prompting individualization of removal intervals.

Treatment and Prevention of Intraabdominal Bleeding in Necrotizing Pancreatitis Patients Treated With a Step-Up Approach

OBJECTIVES

A minimally invasive step-up (MIS) approach for management of necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) has been associated with reduced morbidity and mortality compared with open surgical techniques. We sought to evaluate bleeding complications in NP patients treated with a MIS approach and to describe the management and outcomes of these events.

METHODS

An observational, cohort study was performed using a prospectively maintained NP database at a tertiary referral center from 2013 to 2019.

RESULTS

Of 119 NP patients, 13% suffering bleeding events, and 18% underwent an intervention. There was a 6-fold higher mortality rate in patients with bleeding events (n = 3; 18.8%) compared with those without (n = 3; 2.9%) ( P = 0.031). The most common intervention for hemorrhage control was endovascular coil embolization (75%), which was successful 88% of the time. Seven patients underwent prophylactic vascular intervention, which was 100% successful in preventing bleeding events from the embolized vessel.

CONCLUSIONS

Bleeding events in NP patients treated with a MIS approach are associated with a 6-fold increase in mortality. Endovascular intervention is an effective strategy for the management of bleeding events. Prophylactic embolization may be an effective technique for reducing bleeding complications.

Management of pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections often develop as a complication of acute pancreatitis but can be seen in a variety of conditions including chronic pancreatitis, trauma, malignancy or post-operatively. It is important to classify a pancreatic fluid collection in order to optimize treatment strategies and management. Most interventions are targeted towards the management of delayed complications of pancreatitis, including pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis (WON), which often develop days to weeks after the initial episode of pancreatitis. Surgical, percutaneous, and endoscopic interventions are all possible methods for treatment of pancreatic fluid collections, however endoscopic drainage with endoscopic ultrasound has become first-line. Advances within endoscopic drainage strategies have also led to innovative changes in the specific stents used for treatment, with possible options including double pigtail plastic stents, fully covered self-expanding metal stents and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS).