Acute and early EUS-guided transmural drainage of symptomatic postoperative fluid collections

The i-EUS consensus on the management of pancreatic fluid collections - Part 1

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), including pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), are common complications of pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Historically, the treatment of these conditions has relied on surgical and radiological approaches; however, it has later shifted toward an endoscopy-based approach. With the development of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures have become the standard approach for PFC drainage. However, there is still limited consensus on several aspects of the multidisciplinary management of PFCs. The interventional endoscopy and ultrasound (i-EUS) group is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with special interest in biliopancreatic interventional endoscopy, especially interventional EUS. This manuscript describes the first part of the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance on aspects such as indications for treating PFCs, the timing of intervention, and different technical strategies for managing patients with PFCs.

Early versus delayed EUS-guided drainage for postoperative pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs) are common adverse events (AEs) after pancreatic surgery and may need interventions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage for POPFCs is increasingly reported, but its appropriate timing has not been fully elucidated. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate treatment outcomes of POPFCs according to the timing of EUS-guided drainage.

METHODS

Using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database, we identified clinical studies published until December 2022 with data comparing outcomes of early and delayed EUS-guided drainage for POPFCs. We pooled data on AEs, mortality, and technical and clinical success rates, using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

From 1415 papers identified in the initial literature search, we identified 6 retrospective studies, including 128 and 107 patients undergoing early and delayed EUS-guided drainage for POPFCs. The threshold of early and delayed drainage ranged from 14 to 30 days. Distal pancreatectomy was the major cause of POPFCs, ranging from 44 to 100%. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for AEs was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.64, P = 0.55) comparing early to delayed drainage. There was no procedure-related mortality. Technical success was achieved in all cases and a pooled OR of clinical success was 0.60 (95% CI 0.20-1.83, P = 0.37).

CONCLUSION

POPFCs can be managed by early EUS-guided drainage without an increase in AEs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided versus percutaneous drainage for the management of post-operative fluid collections after distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Post-operative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs) can be drained using percutaneous or endoscopic approaches. The primary aim of this study was to compare rates of clinical success between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUSD) with percutaneous drainage (PTD) in the management of symptomatic POPFCs after distal pancreatectomy. Secondary outcomes included technical success, total number of interventions, time to resolution, rates of adverse events (AEs), and POPFC recurrence.

METHODS

Adults who underwent distal pancreatectomy from January 2012 to August 2021 and developed symptomatic POPFC in the resection bed were retrospectively identified from a single academic center database. Demographic data, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were abstracted. Clinical success was defined as symptomatic improvement and radiographic resolution without requiring an alternate drainage modality. Quantitative variables were compared using a two-tailed t-test and categorical data were compared using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Of 1046 patients that underwent distal pancreatectomy, 217 met study inclusion criteria (median age 60 years, 51.2% female), of whom 106 underwent EUSD and 111 PTD. There were no significant differences in baseline pathology and POPFC size. PTD was generally performed earlier after surgery (10 vs. 27 days; p < 0.001) and more commonly in the inpatient setting (82.9% vs. 49.1%; p < 0.001). EUSD was associated with a significantly higher rate of clinical success (92.5% vs. 76.6%; p = 0.001), fewer median number of interventions (2 vs. 4; p < 0.001), and lower rate of POPFC recurrence (7.6% vs. 20.7%; p = 0.007). AEs were similar between EUSD (10.4%) and PTD (6.3%, p = 0.28), with approximately one-third of EUSD AEs due to stent migration.

CONCLUSION

In patients with POPFCs after distal pancreatectomy, delayed drainage with EUSD was associated with higher rates of clinical success, fewer interventions, and lower rates of recurrence than earlier drainage with PTD.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of a Postoperative Fluid Collection in the Setting of Roux-en-Y Anatomy

This data is mandatory please provide if necessary.

Internal drainage for interdisciplinary management of anastomotic leakage after pancreaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) may occur after pancreatic head resection, also in the setting of pancreato-gastric reconstruction. For adequate complication management, a variety of non-standardized treatments are available. Still, data on clinical evaluation of endoscopic methods remain scarce. Based on our interdisciplinary experience on endoscopic treatment of retro-gastric fluid collections after left-sided pancreatectomies, we developed an innovative endoscopic concept with internal peri-anastomotic stent placement for patients with anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collection.

METHODS

Over the period of 6 years (2015-2020) we retrospectively evaluated 531 patients after pancreatic head resections at the Department of Surgery, Charité-Unversitätsmedizin Berlin. Of these, 403 received reconstruction via pancreatogastrostomy. We identified 110 patients (27.3%) with anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collection and could define four treatment groups which received either conservative treatment (C), percutaneous drainage (PD), endoscopic drainage (ED), and/or re-operation (OP). Patients were grouped in a step-up approach for descriptive analyses and in a stratified, decision-based algorithm for comparative analyses. The study's primary endpoints were hospitalization (length of hospital stay) and clinical success (treatment success rate, primary/secondary resolution).

RESULTS

We characterized an institutional, post-operative cohort with heterogenous complication management following pancreato-gastric reconstruction. The majority of patients needed interventional treatments (n = 92, 83.6%). Of these, close to one-third (n = 32, 29.1%) were treated with endoscopy-guided, peri-anastomotic pigtail stents for internal drainage as either primary, secondary and/or tertiary treatment modality. Following a decision-based algorithm, we could discriminate superior primary-(77,8% vs 53.7%) and secondary success rates (85.7% vs 68.4%) as well as earlier primary resolutions (11.4 days, 95%CI (5.75-17.13) vs 37.4 days, 95%CI (27.2-47.5)] in patients receiving an endoscopic compared to percutaneous management.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the importance of endoscopy-guided approaches for adequate treatment of anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collections after pancreatoduodenectomy. We herein report a novel, interdisciplinary concept for internal drainage in the setting of pancreato-gastric reconstruction.

Current landscape of therapeutic EUS: Changing paradigms in gastroenterology practice

Therapeutic EUS has witnessed exponential growth in the last decade, but it has been considered investigational until recently. An increasing body of good-quality evidence is now demonstrating clear advantages over established alternatives, adding therapeutic EUS to management algorithms of complex hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) and gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. In this review, the available evidence and clinical role of therapeutic EUS in established and evolving applications will be discussed. A Graphical Summary for each scenario will provide (1) technical steps, (2) anatomical sketch, (3) best-supporting evidence, and (4) role in changing current and future GI practice. Therapeutic EUS has accepted well-established applications such as drainage of symptomatic peripancreatic fluid collections, biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and treatment of acute cholecystitis in unfit-for-surgery patients. In addition, good-quality evidence on several emerging indications (e.g., treatment of gastric outlet obstruction, local ablation of pancreatic solid lesions, etc.) is promising. Specific emphasis will be given to how these technical innovations have changed management paradigms and algorithms and expanded the possibilities of gastroenterologists to provide therapeutic solutions to old and emerging clinical needs. Therapeutic EUS is cementing its role in everyday practice, radically changing the treatment of different HPB diseases and other conditions (e.g., GI obstruction). The development of dedicated accessories and increased training opportunities will expand the ability of gastroenterologists to deliver highly effective yet minimally invasive therapies, potentially translating into a better quality of life, especially for oncological and fragile patients.

Controversies in EUS-guided treatment of walled-off necrosis

This review gives an overview of different techniques in the treatment of post-acute complications of acute pancreatitis. The endoscopic treatment of those complications is currently standard of care. EUS opened up the broad implementation of internal drainage methods to make them safe and effective. Due to different endoscopic approaches worldwide, controversies have arisen that are pointed out in this paper. The main focus was placed on weighing up evidence to find the optimal approach. However, if no evidence can be provided, the authors, experienced in the field, give their personal advice.

Clinical outcomes of EUS-guided transluminal drainage with a novel lumen-apposing metal stent for postoperative pancreatic fluid collection after pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided transluminal drainage (EUS-TD) is increasingly used for the treatment of postoperative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs). A novel lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) was recently developed and used for the drainage of POPFCs. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel LAMS in patients with POPFCs.

METHODS

Forty-seven patients with symptomatic POPFCs who underwent EUS-TD with a novel LAMS (Niti-S SPAXUS; Taewoong Medical Co, Ltd, Ilsan, South Korea) between April 2019 and July 2020 were included in this study. Clinical outcomes, including technical success, clinical success, and adverse events, were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

EUS-TD was technically successful in 41 of 47 patients (87.2%). Clinical success was achieved in 37 of 41 patients (90.2%). The mean procedure time was 13.7 ± 3.5 minutes. The mean POPFC size was 59 ± 18.9 mm. The mean time interval from surgery to EUS-TD was 24.2 ± 37.6 days. Five patients experienced 6 procedural adverse events (12.8%): 4 (8.5%) POPFC infections and 2 (4.3%) distal stent migrations. The 4 patients with POPFC infection underwent additional endoscopic interventions. Of the 2 patients with stent migration, 1 underwent laparoscopic exploration and surgical extraction of the stent and 1 (2.1%) experienced POPFC recurrence, which was managed with percutaneous drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-TD for symptomatic POPFCs with a novel LAMS is technically feasible and effective, with an acceptable adverse event rate. Further larger-scale prospective studies are required to confirm the findings of this study.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic ultrasound drainage for the management of fluid collections after pancreas surgery

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated systematically. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the outcomes of EUSD in patients with PFC after pancreas surgery and compare it with percutaneous drainage (PCD).

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes EUSD in treatment of PFC after pancreas surgeries, from their inception until January 2022. Two meta-analyses were performed: (A) a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of EUSD (meta-analysis A) and (B) two-arm meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of EUSD and PCD (meta-analysis B). Pooled proportion of the outcomes in meta-analysis A as well as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) in meta-analysis B was calculated to determine the technical and clinical success rates, complications rate, hospital stay, and recurrence rate. ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 610 articles, 25 of which were eligible for inclusion. Included clinical studies comprised reports on 695 patients. Twenty-five studies (477 patients) were included in meta-analysis A and eight studies (356 patients) were included in meta-analysis B. In meta-analysis A, the technical and clinical success rates of EUSD were 94% and 87%, respectively, with post-procedural complications of 14% and recurrence rates of 9%. Meta-analysis B showed comparable technical and clinical success rates as well as complications rates between EUSD and PCD. EUSD showed significantly shorter duration of hospital stay compared to that of patients treated with PCD.

CONCLUSION

EUSD seems to be associated with high technical and clinical success rates, with low rates of procedure-related complications. Although EUSD leads to shorter hospital stay compared to PCD, the certainty of evidence was low in this regard.

The Role of EUS-Guided Drainage in the Management of Postoperative Fluid Collections after Pancreatobiliary Surgery

Postoperative fluid collection (POFC) is a challenging complication following pancreatobiliary surgery. Traditional treatment with surgical drainage is associated with significant morbidity, while percutaneous drainage is associated with a higher rate of recurrence and the need for repeated interventions. Studies have shown that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage may offer a promising solution to this problem. There are limited data on the ideal therapeutic protocol for EUS-guided drainage of POFC including the timing for drainage; type, size, and number of stents to use; and the need for endoscopic debridement and irrigation. Current practices extrapolated from the treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis may not be applicable to POFC. There are increasing data to suggest that drainage procedures may be performed within two weeks after surgery. While most authors advocate the use of double pigtail plastic stents (DPPSs), there have been a number of reports on the use of novel lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs), although no direct comparisons have been made between the two.

Efficacy of Distal Pancreatectomy Combined With Modified DuVal Procedure in Patients With a High Risk of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula

BACKGROUND

The incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after distal pancreatectomy (DP) remains high. The present study aimed to clarify the efficacy of our modified DuVal (mDuVal) pancreatojejunostomy following DP in patients with a high risk of POPF.

METHODS

The medical records of 346 consecutive patients who underwent DP between 2006 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative features were compared between 24 patients undergoing mDuVal (mDuVal group) and 322 patients undergoing standard DP (standard DP group).

RESULTS

Preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 was more frequent in the standard group than in the mDuVal group (P = .02). The start of a solid diet after operation was significantly earlier in the mDuVal group than in the standard DP group (P = .01), while there were no significant differences between the groups for clinically relevant POPF, amylase concentration in the drainage fluid on postoperative day 1 and days 3-5, time to drain removal, additional intervention for POPF, overall complications, or postoperative hospital stay.

DISCUSSION

The mDuVal procedure could be an option for patients with a high risk of POPF to improve the outcomes after DP. Further investigation involving large study populations is necessary to clarify the efficacy of this procedure.

Effectiveness of early endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage for postoperative fluid collection

BACKGROUND

Postoperative abdominal fluid collections (PAFCs) are a potentially fatal complication of pancreatobiliary surgery. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage has recently been shown to be effective in treating PAFCs of more than 4 weeks old. Little is currently known, however, regarding the EUS-guided drainage of PAFCs of less than 4 weeks. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the early drainage (< 4 weeks) of PAFCs via EUS guidance.

METHODS

The data of patients who had undergone EUS-guided PAFC drainage between July 2008 and January 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Data of EUS-guided PAFC drainage were obtained from prospectively collected EUS database of our institute and reviewed of patients' clinical parameters based on electrical medical record.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients who had undergone EUS-guided PAFC drainage within 4 weeks of pancreatobiliary surgery were enrolled. The indications of procedure included abdominal pain (n = 27), fever (n = 18), leukocytosis (n = 2), and increased size of PAFC during external tube drainage (n = 1). Technical success was achieved in all cases, and the clinical success rate was 95.8% (46/48). Four patients underwent secondary procedures. The median period from surgery to EUS-guide drainage was 14 days (Interquartile range [IQR] 10-16), and median time to resolution was 23.5 days (IQR 8.5-33.8). Adverse events occurred in two cases that were developed intracystic bleeding and were successfully resolved by arterial coil embolization.

CONCLUSIONS

Early EUS-guided drainage is a technically feasible, effective, and safe method in patients who have developing PAFCs within 4 weeks of pancreatobiliary surgery.

Efficacy of Early Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transluminal Drainage for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage (EUS-TD) is generally performed 4 weeks after disease onset for evacuating pancreatic fluid collections. However, the optimal timing for conducting the procedure in those diagnosed with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) has not been established. We aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of early EUS-TD procedures for treating POPF.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with POPF who underwent EUS-TD in the Kyushu University Hospital between 2008 and 2019. Clinical features were comparatively analyzed between the two patient groups who underwent either early (≤15 days postoperatively) or late (>15 days postoperatively) EUS-TD. Factors prolonging hospital stay were also analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Thirty patients (median age, 64.5 years) were enrolled. The most common initial operation was distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (60.0%). Median size of POPF was 69.5 (range, 38-145) mm, and median time interval between surgery and EUS-TD was 17.5 (range, 3-232) days. Totally, 47% patients underwent early EUS-TD. Rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications were 100%, 97%, and 6.9%, respectively. No recurrence of POPF occurred during a median follow-up period of 14 months. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were comparable between the early and late drainage patient groups, except for the rates of infection and nonencapsulation of POPF, which were significantly higher in the early drainage group. Performing simultaneous internal and external drainage (hazard ratio (HR): 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11-0.93, p=0.04) and conducting ≥2 treatment sessions (HR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.08-0.84, p=0.02) were significantly associated with prolonged hospitalization after EUS-TD.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-TD is a safe and effective method for managing POPF, regardless of when it is performed in the postoperative period. Once infected POPF occurs, clinicians should not hesitate to perform EUS-TD even within 15 days of the initial operation.