EUS 2008 Working Group document: evaluation of EUS-guided drainage of pelvic-fluid collections (with video)

EUS-guided transrectal drainage of pelvic abscesses: a retrospective analysis of 17 patients

Background

Pelvic abscess is a common complication of abdominal surgery or intestinal or gynecological diseases. Over the last decades, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to percutaneous or surgical treatment of pelvic abscesses.

Aim

To evaluate safety and efficacy of EUS-guided transrectal pelvic abscess drainage in a single center.

Methods

From February 2017 to April 2023, all data on patients who were treated for pelvic abscesses by EUS-guided drainage in a single center, were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

A total of 17 patients were treated for pelvic abscesses by EUS-guided drainage. The procedure was technically successful and uneventful in all 17 patients (100%). Etiology of the abscess was postsurgical (n=5, 29%), secondary to medical illness (n=10, 59%) or gastrointestinal perforation (n=2, 12%). The abscess was multilocular in 5 patients (29%), the mean largest diameter was 76 mm (range 40-146 mm). Drainage was performed using 2 double pigtail stents, and in 1 patient an additional 10 Fr drainage catheter was deployed. Two patients (12%) required a second endoscopic intervention. Treatment success, defined by complete abscess resolution on follow-up CT scan along with symptom relief, was 100%. There was no need for surgical intervention. The median post-procedural hospital stay was 5 days. No recurrence was reported within a median time of follow-up of 39 months.

Conclusion

EUS-guided transrectal drainage of pelvic abscesses using double pigtail stents is safe and highly effective. This case series contributes to the cumulative evidence that, in expert hands, EUS-guided drainage should be considered as first-line approach for treatment of pelvic abscesses.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of Pelvic Fluid Collections

Pelvic fluid collections can be challenging and often inaccessible because of their location and close proximity to adjacent organs and spine. This causes an increased risk for morbidity and poor outcomes. Recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound and therapeutic devices provide an effective, safe, and minimally invasive option to surgery or interventional radiology. These devices offer a relatively pain-free method that has shown good outcomes with minimal risk in recent case series, and has increasingly become the first-line treatment of choice. This article summarizes the current literature and the technique and considerations for successful drainage of these collections.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Perirectal Abscess Drainage without Drainage Catheter: A Case Series

A perirectal abscess is a relatively common disease entity that occurs as a postsurgical complication or as a result of various medical conditions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage was recently described as a promising alternative treatment. Previous reports have recommended placement of a drainage catheter through the anus for irrigation, which is inconvenient to the patient and carries a risk of accidental dislodgement. We report four cases of perirectal abscess that were successfully treated with only one or two 7 F double pigtail plastic stent placements and without a drainage catheter for irrigation.

Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided tissue sampling facilitates the detection of local recurrence and extra pelvic metastasis in pelvic urologic malignancy

Pelvic lymph node dissection is the gold standard for assessing nodal disease in prostate or bladder cancer and is superior to CT, MRI and PET staging. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) provides an alternative, less invasive method of cytohistologic material acquisition, but its performance in pelvic urologic malignancy is unknown. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS guided tissue sampling for these malignancies when compared to a composite cytohistologic and surgical gold standard. A median of 3 FNA passes were performed (n = 19 patients) revealing a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 94.4% (72–99), 100% (2–100), 100% (80–100) and 50% (1–98) respectively. The perirectal space was the most frequently sampled location irrespective of the primary urological cancer origin. Final diagnosis established by EUS tissue sampling included bladder cancer (n = 1), bladder cancer local recurrence (n = 8), bladder cancer extra pelvic metastases (n = 1), prostate cancer (n = 2), prostate cancer local recurrence (n = 4), prostate cancer extra pelvic metastases (n = 1), testicular cancer extra pelvic metastases (n = 1) and a benign seminal vesicle (n = 1). EUS guided sampling of the gut wall, lymph nodes, or perirectal space yields suitable diagnostic material to establish the presence of primary, local recurrence or extra pelvic metastases of pelvic urologic malignancy.

Effectiveness of EUS in drainage of pelvic abscesses in 25 consecutive patients (with video)

BACKGROUND

Preliminary evidence suggests that EUS is a minimally invasive alternative to surgery and percutaneous techniques for drainage of pelvic abscesses. The EUS 2008 Working Group identified the technique as a priority for research and recommended its validation in a larger cohort of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rates of technical and treatment success, rate of recurrence, and complications of EUS-guided drainage of a pelvic abscess in a large cohort of patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients referred for EUS-guided drainage of a pelvic abscess that was not amenable to drainage under US or CT guidance.

METHODS

In patients with an abscess that measured less than 8 cm in size, two 7F transrectal stents were deployed. In patients with an abscess that measured 8 cm or more in size, an additional 10F drainage catheter was deployed. All patients underwent follow-up CT at 36 hours to assess response to therapy. If the abscess had decreased in size by more than 50%, the drainage catheters were discontinued and patients were discharged from the hospital. The stents were then retrieved by sigmoidoscopy at 2 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

We evaluated the rates of technical and treatment success, rate of recurrence, and complications of the EUS-based approach. Technical success was defined as the ability to drain the abscess under EUS guidance. Treatment success was defined as symptom relief in association with complete resolution of the abscess on follow-up CT at 2 weeks. Recurrence was defined as the need for repeat EUS-guided drainage of a pelvic abscess within 90 days after the stent retrieval.

RESULTS

The procedure was technically successful in all 25 patients (100%) in whom it was attempted, and no complications were encountered. Mean size of the abscess was 68.5 x 52.4 mm. In addition to transrectal stents, a drainage catheter was deployed in 10 patients. Treatment was successful in 24 (96%) of 25 patients. The mean duration of the postprocedure hospital stay was 3.2 days. At a mean follow-up of 189 days (range 93-817), all 24 patients were doing well without abscess recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is a minimally invasive, safe, and effective technique that affords long-term benefit for patients undergoing pelvic abscess drainage.