Assessment of the learning curve for EUS-guided gastroenterostomy for a single operator

Training and quality indicators in interventional endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has transformed the landscape of minimally invasive gastrointestinal procedures, necessitating specialized training for proficiency in interventional EUS (iEUS). This study evaluates the effectiveness of iEUS training, focusing on learning curves, success rates, and the associated risks in various procedures, aiming to recommend practices for standardizing training and ensuring competency. Key metrics such as procedure type, learning curve for proficiency, success rates, and risk of adverse events were analyzed to establish benchmarks for training programs. Proficiency in pancreatic fluid collection drainage was achieved after 20-30 procedures, with a 100% success rate and a complication rate ranging from 1.5 to 80%. Gallbladder drainage required 19 cases to reach an 86% success rate, with adverse events reported in 19% of cases. Choledocoduodenostomy mastery was observed after approximately 100 cases, with postintervention pancreatitis affecting 5.3-6.6% of all cases. Hepaticogastrostomy showed a 93% success rate after 33 cases, with a 24.8% adverse event rate. Hepaticoenterostomy reached 100% success beyond the 40th patient, with a 20% rate of postsurgical strictures. Pancreatic duct drainage achieved 89% technical and 87% clinical success after 27 cases, with 12-15% adverse events. Gastro-enteric anastomosis required 25 cases for proficiency and approximately 40 cases for mastery, with 5.5% immediate and 1% late adverse events. iEUS training outcomes vary significantly across different procedures, highlighting the importance of structured, procedure-specific training programs to achieve proficiency. These findings provide a foundation for developing universal competency benchmarks in iEUS, facilitating consistent and effective training worldwide.

Assessment of the Learning Curve for a Single-Use Disposable Duodenoscope

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In response to documented duodenoscope-related infectious outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms, the Food and Drug Administration has recommended a transition to duodenoscopes with innovative designs, including duodenoscopes with disposable components or fully disposable duodenoscopes. We aim to characterize the learning curve (LC) for a single-use disposable duodenoscope.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database from 31 patients who underwent ERCP by a single, experienced operator using the EXALT Model D® (Boston Scientific, Marlborough) disposable duodenoscope at a single tertiary referral center. The LC for this device was described by the number of cases needed to achieve proficiency using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Number of attempts to cannulate and time to cannulate the desired duct were assessed as separate endpoints. The overall mean number of attempts and overall mean time to cannulation were used as the target values in the respective CUSUM analyses. Proficiency was defined as the number of procedures where an inflection point was reached in the CUSUM graph. This observation indicates improving operator performance as shown by a decrease in the number of attempts and shortening of cannulation time after the defined number of procedures.

RESULTS

Overall, 31 patients underwent ERCP using the EXALT Model D disposable duodenoscope by a single experienced endoscopist. 6 (19%) patients had a native papilla and the majority of these procedures were classified as ASGE complexity level 2 or above. The procedure was completed using solely the disposable duodenoscope in 27 patients (87%), while a reusable duodenoscope was required for procedure completion in 4 patients (13%). The cross-overs were distributed evenly across the performance period. Procedure-related adverse events included: post-ERCP pancreatitis (3%), bleeding (3%) and no perforations. In the analyses of both endpoints, an inflection of the CUSUM curves is achieved at 10 cases, indicating sustained reduction of cannulation attempts and time to cannulation.

CONCLUSION

Among experienced pancreaticobiliary endoscopists, approximately 10 ERCPs is the threshold whereby procedure-related factors including cannulation success and procedural time improves. Procedure-related adverse events are consistent with those expected with reusable duodenoscopes. The need to cross-over from single-use duodenoscope to reusable duodenoscope did not appear to be related to the learning curve, as they were evenly distributed across the study period. These results can be used to guide adoption of single-use duodenoscopes into clinical practice.

Propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy and enteral stenting for malignant gastric outlet

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) significantly reduce patients' quality of life. Endoscopic treatment involves enteral stenting or endoscopic ultrasonography to perform gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). Aim was to compare enteral stenting with EUS-GE for endoscopic treatment of malignant GOO.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared enteral stenting with EUS-GE for the treatment of malignant GOO. Patients treated at our institution were identified and a propensity score matching analysis was performed. Treatment failure was the primary outcome, while the secondary endpoints were time until treatment failure, technical and clinical success rates, and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were included in the final analysis. Of whom, 44 were included in each of the two treatment groups. Treatment failure occurred significantly more frequently in the enteral stenting group (13/44) compared with the EUS-GE group (4/44; hazard ratio: 4,9; 95% CI 1.6-15.1). A Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a median time until treatment failure of 22.0 weeks (95% CI 4.6-39.4) in the enteral stenting group compared with 76.0 weeks (95% CI 55.9-96.1) in the EUS-GE group (P = .002). No difference in technical success and clinical success was detected. Technical success was achieved in 43/44 patients (97.7%) in the enteral stenting group compared with 41/44 patients (93.2%) in the EUS-GE group, while clinical success was achieved in 32/44 (72.7%) and 35/44 (79.5%) patients, respectively. Nine adverse events were observed (9/44, 10.2%). There were no differences in 30-day adverse event rate and 30-day mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE was superior to enteral stenting in the treatment of malignant GOO in terms of treatment failure and time until treatment failure in a propensity score-matched cohort.

International Consensus Recommendations for Safe Use of LAMS for On- and Off-Label Indications Using a Modified Delphi Process

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications.

METHODS

Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round.

RESULTS

Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events.

DISCUSSION

Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenterostomy versus Enteral Stenting for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) using lumen apposing metal stent has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment for the management of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). We aimed to compare EUS-GE with enteral stenting (ES) for the treatment of mGOO.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-GE or ES for mGOO between June 2017 and June 2023 at two Italian centers were retrospectively identified. The primary outcome was stent dysfunction. Secondary outcomes included technical success, clinical failure, safety, and hospital length of stay. A propensity score-matching analysis was performed using multiple covariates.

RESULTS

Overall, 198 patients were included (66 EUS-GE and 132 ES). The stent dysfunction rate was 3.1% and 16.9% following EUS-GE and ES, respectively (p = 0.004). Using propensity score-matching, 45 patients were allocated to each group. The technical success rate was 100% for both groups. Stent dysfunction was higher in the ES group compared with the EUS-GE group (20% versus 4.4%, respectively; p = 0.022) without differences in clinical efficacy (p = 0.266) and safety (p = 0.085). A significantly shorter hospital stay was associated with EUS-GE compared with ES (7.5 ± 4.9 days vs. 12.5 ± 13.0 days, respectively; p = 0.018). Kaplan-Meier analyses confirmed a higher stent dysfunction-free survival rate after EUS-GE compared with ES (log-rank test; p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE offers lower rates of stent dysfunction, longer stent patency, and shorter hospital stay compared with ES.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus uncovered duodenal metal stenting for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction (DRA-GOO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic method to palliate malignant gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to assess whether the use of EUS-GE with a double balloon occluder for malignant gastric outlet obstruction could reduce the need for reintervention within 6 months compared with conventional duodenal stenting.

METHODS

The was an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted at seven sites in Hong Kong, Belgium, Brazil, India, Italy, and Spain. Consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with malignant gastric outlet obstruction due to unresectable primary gastroduodenal or pancreatobiliary malignancies, a gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) of 0 (indicating an inability in intake food or liquids orally), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or lower were included and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either EUS-GE or duodenal stenting. The primary outcome was the 6-month reintervention rate, defined as the percentage of patients requiring additional endoscopic intervention due to stent dysfunction (ie, restenosis of the stent due to tumour ingrowth, tumour overgrowth, or food residue; stent migration; or stent fracture) within 6 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified secondary outcomes were technical success (successful placement of a stent), clinical success (1-point improvement in gastric outlet obstruction score [GOOS] within 3 days), adverse events within 30 days, death within 30 days, duration of stent patency, GOOS at 1 month, and quality-of-life scores. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03823690) and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 1, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 185 patients were screened and 97 (46 men and 51 women) were recruited and randomly allocated (48 to the EUS-GE group and 49 to the duodenal stent group). Mean age was 69·5 years (SD 12·6) in the EUS-GE group and 64·8 years (13·0) in the duodenal stent group. All randomly allocated patients completed follow-up and were analysed. Reintervention within 6 months was required in two (4%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 14 (29%) in the duodenal stent group [p=0·0020; risk ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·04-0·61]). Stent patency was longer in the EUS-GE group (median not reached in either group; HR 0·13 [95% CI 0·08-0·22], log-rank p<0·0001). 1-month GOOS was significantly better in the EUS-GE group (mean 2·41 [SD 0·7]) than the duodenal stent group (1·91 [0·9], p=0·012). There were no statistically significant differences between the EUS-GE and duodenal stent groups in death within 30 days (ten [21%] vs six [12%] patients, respectively, p=0·286), technical success, clinical success, or quality-of-life scores at 1 month. Adverse events occurred 11 (23%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 12 (24%) in the duodenal stent group within 30 days (p=1·00); three cases of pneumonia (two in the EUS-GE group and one in the duodenal stent group) were considered to be procedure related.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction, EUS-GE can reduce the frequency of reintervention, improve stent patency, and result in better patient-reported eating habits compared with duodenal stenting, and the procedure should be used preferentially over duodenal stenting when expertise and required devices are available.

FUNDING

Research Grants Council (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China) and Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva.

Endoscopic Treatment of Gastric Outlet Obstruction

Endoscopic management of gastric outlet obstruction includes balloon dilation, enteral stenting, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) to relieve mechanical blockage and reestablish per oral intake. Based on the degree of obstruction, patients may experience debilitating symptoms that can quickly lead to malnutrition and delays in chemotherapy. Compared with surgery, minimally invasive endoscopic options can provide similar clinical outcomes with fewer adverse events, faster resumption of oral feeding, and shorter hospitalizations. EUS-GE with a lumen-apposing metal stent has revolutionized treatment, especially in individuals who are not ideal surgical candidates. This article aims to describe endoscopic treatment options and future considerations.

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy for gastric outlet obstruction: a comprehensive meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A comprehensive meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) for benign and malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. The primary outcomes evaluated technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Twenty‑six studies with 1493 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and overall AEs of EUS-GE were 94.0%, 89.9%, and 13.1%, respectively. Eight studies were included in the subgroup meta-analysis for comparative evaluation of EUS-GE and surgical gastroenterostomy (SGE), while seven studies were for EUS-GE and enteral stenting (ES). Compared with SGE, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) of technical success, clinical success, and overall AEs of EUS-GE were 0.17 (p = .003), 1.42 (p = .40), and 0.15 (p < .00001), respectively. When compared with ES, the above corresponding pooled ORs were 0.55 (p = .11), 2.64 (p < .0001), and 0.41 (p = .01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although it is technically challenging, this largest meta-analysis indicates that EUS‑GE has comparable and high technical and clinical success rates and hence a very effective minimally invasive procedure for GOO.

Preferred techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy: a survey of expert endosonographers

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is an emerging procedure that lacks technical standardization with limited adoption beyond expert centers. We surveyed high-volume endosonographers about the technical aspects of EUS-GE to describe how the procedure is currently performed at expert centers and identify targets for standardization. Methods Invitations to complete an electronic survey were distributed to 21 expert EUS practitioners at 19 U.S. centers. Respondents were surveyed about technical aspects of EUS-GE, indications, efficacy, safety, and attitudes toward the procedure. Results All 21 (100%) invited expert endoscopists completed the survey. Nine (42.9%) reported performing >10 EUS-GEs in the last 12 months. About half (47.6%, 10/21) puncture the target loop prior to lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) introduction, most often to confirm the loop is jejunum. No respondents reported guidewire placement prior to LAMS introduction. Most (71.4%, 15/21) do not use a guidewire at any time, while 28.6% (6/21) reported wire placement after distal flange deployment to secure the tract during apposition. Eight (38.1%, 8/21) reported at least one major adverse event, most commonly intraperitoneal LAMS deployment (87.5%, 7/8). Factors most often reported as advantageous for EUS-GE over enteral stenting included lack of papilla interference (33.3%, 7/21) and decreased occlusion risk (23.8%, 5/21). Conclusions Significant variation in performance technique for EUS-GE exists among expert US endoscopists, which may hinder widespread adoption and contribute to inconsistencies in reported patient outcomes. The granularity provided by these survey results may identify areas to focus standardization efforts and guide future studies on developing an ideal EUS-GE protocol.

The Role of Luminal Apposing Metal Stents on the Treatment of Malignant and Benign Gastric Outlet Obstruction

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a clinical syndrome traditionally managed by surgical gastrojejunostomy or enteral stenting. The surgical approach is burdened with a high rate of adverse events (AEs), while enteral stenting has a limited long-term clinical effectiveness, with the need for repeat procedures. The availability of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has resulted a shift in the treatment paradigm of GOO. Indeed, endoscopists are now able to create a stable anastomosis between the stomach and small bowel under endosonographic guidance. EUS-guided gastro-enteroanastomosis (EUS-GE) has the theoretical advantage of a durable luminal patency resulting from stent placement away from the site of obstruction, free from surgical-related AEs. This approach could be especially valuable in terminally ill patients with a limited life expectancy. The present paper reviews procedural techniques and clinical outcomes of EUS-GE in the context of both malignant and benign GOOs.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus surgical gastrojejunostomy for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (ENDURO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a debilitating condition that frequently occurs in patients with malignancies of the distal stomach and (peri)ampullary region. The standard palliative treatment for patients with a reasonable life expectancy and adequate performance status is a laparoscopic surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) emerged as a promising alternative to the surgical approach. The present study aims to compare these treatment modalities in terms of efficacy, safety, and costs.

METHODS

The ENDURO-study is a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. In total, ninety-six patients with gastric outlet obstruction caused by an irresectable or metastasized malignancy will be 1:1 randomized to either SGJ or EUS-GE. The primary endpoint is time to tolerate at least soft solids. The co-primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with persisting or recurring symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction for which a reintervention is required. Secondary endpoints are technical and clinical success, quality of life, gastroenterostomy dysfunction, reinterventions, time to reintervention, adverse events, quality of life, time to start chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, readmissions, weight, survival, and costs.

DISCUSSION

The ENDURO-study assesses whether EUS-GE, as compared to SGJ, results in a faster resumption of solid oral intake and is non-inferior regarding reinterventions for persistent or recurrent obstructive symptoms in patients with malignant GOO. This trial aims to guide future treatment strategies and to improve quality of life in a palliative setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP): NL9592. Registered on 07 July 2021.

Utility of interventional endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic cancer

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has an important role in the management algorithm of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), typically for its diagnostic utilities. The past two decades have seen a rapid expansion of the therapeutic capabilities of EUS. Interventional EUS is now one of the more exciting developments within the field of endoscopy. The local effects of PDAC tend to be in anatomical areas which are difficult to target and endoscopy has cemented itself as a key role in managing the clinical sequelae of PDAC. Interventional EUS is increasingly utilized in situations whereby conventional endoscopy is either impossible to perform or unsuccessful. It also adds a different dimension to the host of oncological and surgical treatments for patients with PDAC. In this review, we aim to summarize the various ways in which interventional EUS could benefit patients with PDAC and aim to provide a balanced commentary on the current evidence of interventional EUS in the literature.

Prospective multicenter assessment of the impact of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy on patient quality of life in unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is increasingly used for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) in inoperable patients. However, the impact of EUS-GE on patient quality of life (QoL) has not been evaluated prospectively.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with unresectable malignant GOO who underwent EUS-GE between August 2019 and May 2021 at 4 Spanish centers were prospectively assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire Core 30 at baseline and 1 month after the procedure. Centralized follow-up by telephone calls was undertaken. The Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System (GOOSS) was used to assess oral intake, defining clinical success as a GOOSS ≥2. Differences between baseline and 30-day QoL scores were assessed using a linear mixed model.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were enrolled, 33 (51.6%) men, with a median age of 77.3 years (interquartile range, 65.5-86.5). The most common diagnoses were pancreatic (35.9%) and gastric (31.3%) adenocarcinoma. Thirty-seven patients (57.9%) presented a 2/3 baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Oral intake was restarted within 48 hours in 61 patients (95.3%), and the median postprocedure hospital stay was 3.5 days (interquartile range, 2-5). The 30-day clinical success rate was 83.3%. A clinically significant increase of 21.6 points (95% confidence interval, 11.5-31.7) in the global health status scale was documented, with significant improvements in nausea and vomiting, pain, constipation, and appetite loss.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-GE relieves GOO symptoms in patients with unresectable malignancy, allowing rapid oral intake and hospital discharge. It also provides a clinically relevant increase in QoL scores at 30 days from baseline. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04660695.).

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy vs. surgical gastrojejunostomy and enteral stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: a meta-analysis

Background and study aims Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) is traditionally treated with surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ), which is effective but associated with high rates of morbidity, or endoscopic stenting (ES), which is less invasive but associated with significant risk of stent dysfunction and need for reintervention. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) provides a robust bypass without the invasiveness of surgery. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing EUS-GE to SGJ and ES for MGOO. Electronic databases were searched from inception through February 2022. A meta-analysis was performed with results reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effects models. Primary outcomes included clinical success without recurrent GOO and adverse events (AEs). Results Sixteen studies involving 1541 patients were included. EUS-GE was associated with higher clinical success without recurrent GOO compared to ES or SGJ [OR 2.60, 95% CI1.58-4.28] and compared to ES alone [OR 5.08, 95% CI 3.42-7.55], but yielded no significant difference compared to SGJ alone [OR 1.94, 95% CI 0.97-3.88]. AE rates were significantly lower for EUS-GE compared to ES or SGJ grouped together [OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.20-0.58], or SGJ alone [OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10-0.30] but were not significant different versus ES alone [OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29-1.14]. Conclusions EUS-GE is the most successful approach to treating MGOO, exhibiting a lower risk of recurrent obstruction compared to ES, and fewer AEs compared to SGJ.

The Role of Endoscopic Management in Afferent Loop Syndrome

Afferent loop syndrome (ALS) is a morbid complication that may occur after gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy reconstruction. The aim of this article is to review the different endoscopic treatment options of ALS. We describe the evolution of the endoscopic treatment of ALS and its limitations despite the overall propitious profile. We analyze the advantages of endoscopic ultrasound-guided entero-enterostomy (EUS EE) over enteroscopy-guided intervention, and the clinical outcomes of EUS EE. We expound on pre-procedural considerations, intra-procedural techniques and post-procedural care following EUS EE. We conclude that given the simplification of the technique and the ability to place a stent away from the tumor, EUS EE is a promising technique that will likely be established as the treatment of choice for ALS.

The learning curve for gasless transaxillary posterior endoscopic thyroidectomy for thyroid cancer: a cumulative sum analysis

Gasless transaxillary posterior endoscopic thyroidectomy (GTPET) is a new approach for thyroid cancer. It allows en bloc resection of the thyroid and central lymph nodes. Few studies have reported on the learning curve for GTPET.We examined the learning curve of GTPET for thyroid cancer by cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis by retrospectively analyzing patients who underwent hemithyroidectomy with ipsilateral central neck dissection between December 2020 and September 2021 at a tertiary medical center, including the first patient. Moving average analysis and sequential time-block analysis were used for validation. Data on the clinical factors between the two periods were compared. In the overall cohort, the average time for GTPET for thyroid cancer was 113.25 min to harvest an average of 6.4 central lymph nodes. The CUSUM curve of the operative time indicated an inflection point after 38 patients. Moving average analysis and sequential time-block analysis validated the number of procedures needed for GTPET proficiency. (124.05 min vs. 107.63 min for the unproficient period vs. proficient period, respectively; P < 0.001) The number of retrieved lymph nodes was not associated with a certain level of proficiency per the learning curve. The main complication during the surgeon's unproficient period was transient hoarseness (3/38), which was similar to that in their proficient period (2/73, p = 0.336). Proficiency in GTPET is associated with performing more than 38 procedures. Standard course training and instruction on careful management are required prior to introducing the procedure.

Factors predictive of persistent fistulas in EUS-directed transgastric ERCP: a multicenter matched case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) is an established method for managing pancreaticobiliary pathology in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients, with high rates of technical success and low rates of serious adverse events (AEs). However, widespread adoption of the technique has been limited because of concerns about the development of persistent gastrogastric or jejunogastric fistulas. Gastrogastric and jejunogastric fistulas have been reported in up to 20% of cases in some series, but predictive risk factors and long-term management and outcomes are lacking. Therefore, our aims were to assess factors associated with the development of persistent fistulas and the technical success of endoscopic fistula closure.

METHODS

This is a case-control study involving 9 centers (8 USA, 1 Europe) from February 2015 to September 2021. Cases of persistent fistulas were defined as endoscopic or imaging evidence of fistula more than 8 weeks after lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) removal. Control subjects were defined as endoscopic or imaging confirmation of no fistula more than 8 weeks after LAMS removal. AEs were defined and graded according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients identified to have evidence of a persistent fistula on follow-up surveillance (cases) were matched with 50 patients with no evidence of a persistent fistula on follow-up surveillance (control subjects) based on age and sex. Mean LAMS dwell time was 74.7 ± 106.2 days. After LAMS removal, argon plasma coagulation (APC) ablation of the fistula was performed in 46 patients (61.3%). Primary closure of the fistula was performed in 26.7% of patients (20: endoscopic suturing in 17, endoscopic tacking in 2, and over-the-scope clips + endoscopic suturing in 1). When comparing cases with control subjects, there was no difference in baseline demographics, fistula site, LAMS size, or primary closure frequency between the 2 groups (P > .05). However, in the persistent fistula group, the mean LAMS dwell time was significantly longer (127 vs 48 days, P = .02) and more patients had ≥5% total body weight gain (33.3% vs 10.3%, P = .03). LAMS dwell time was a significant predictor of persistent fistula (odds ratio, 4.5 after >40 days in situ, P = .01). The odds of developing a persistent fistula increased by 9.5% for every 7 days the LAMS was left in situ. In patients with a persistent fistula, endoscopic closure was attempted in 19 (76%) with successful resolution in 14 (73.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Longer LAMS dwell time was found to be associated with a higher risk of persistent fistulas in EDGE patients. APC or primary closure of the fistula on LAMS removal was not found to be protective against developing a persistent fistula, which, if present, can be effectively managed through endoscopic closure in most cases.

Reduction of Lams-Related Adverse Events with Accumulating Experience in a Large-Volume Tertiary Referral Center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are increasingly used both for on- and off-label indications. We continuously adapt our step-by-step protocol to optimize the safe deployment of LAMSs for the different indications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of this approach over time.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center study on consecutive patients who underwent LAMS placement for on- and off-label indications between June 2020 and June 2022. Endpoints included technical success, clinical success and adverse event rates. We compared the results with our previously published early experience with LAMSs (N = 61), between March 2018 and May 2020.

RESULTS

This cohort consisted of 168 LAMSs in 153 patients. Almost half of them (47.6%) were placed for off-label indications (gastro-enterostomy, temporary access to the excluded stomach in patients with previous gastric bypass, drainage of postsurgical collections, stenting of short refractory gastrointestinal strictures). While the technical and clinical success rates were similar to those in our previously published cohort (97% and 93.5% versus 93.4% and 88.5%, respectively), the adverse event rate dropped from 21.3% to 8.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate the impact of a learning curve in LAMS placement, with a clinically relevant drop in LAMS-related adverse events over time.

Palliative therapy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: how does the endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy compare with surgery and endoscopic stenting? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The gold-standard procedure to address malignant gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) is surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJJ). Two endoscopic alternatives have also been proposed: the endoscopic stenting (ES) and the endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-G). This study aimed to perform a thorough and strict meta-analysis to compare EUS-G with the SGJJ and ES in treating patients with MGOO.

Materials and Methods

Studies comparing EUS-G to endoscopic stenting or SGJJ for patients with MGOO were considered eligible. We conducted online searches in primary databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Lilacs, and Central Cochrane) from inception through October 2021. The outcomes were technical and clinical success rates, serious adverse events (SAEs), reintervention due to obstruction, length of hospital stay (LOS), and time to oral intake.

Results

We found similar technical success rates between ES and EUS-G but clinical success rates favored the latter. The comparison between EUS-G and SGJJ demonstrated better technical success rates in favor of the surgical approach but similar clinical success rates. EUS-G shortens the LOS by 2.8 days compared with ES and 5.8 days compared with SGJJ. Concerning reintervention due to obstruction, we found similar rates for EUS-G and SGJJ but considerably higher rates for ES compared with EUS-G. As to AEs, we demonstrated equivalent rates comparing EUS-G and SGJJ but significantly higher ones compared with ES.

Conclusion

Despite being novel and still under refinement, the EUS-G has good safety and efficacy profiles compared with SGJJ and ES.

Resection speed of endoscopic submucosal dissection according to the location of gastric neoplasia: a learning curve using cumulative sum analysis

BACKGROUND

There is few study evaluating the relationship between endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) resection speed and the lesion characteristics of gastric neoplasia. We investigated the learning curve of consecutive ESDs using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

METHODS

A total of 356 ESDs performed by a single endoscopist were grouped chronologically into three learning periods. The ESD procedure was defined to be fast when resection speed was > 9.0 cm²/hour. The CUSUM method was used to assess the number of ESDs required for achieving proficiency and mastery.

RESULTS

Mean resection speed was significantly faster in Phase III (15.1 cm²/hour) compared to those in Phase I (9.3 cm²/hour) and II (11.4 cm²/hour) (p < 0.001). Tumors in the stomach's upper and middle third location were significantly associated with difficulty in attaining the fast resection speed (odds ratios, 0.05 and 0.36) compared to the lower third location. The number of ESDs required to achieve a competency for fast resection was 15 for tumors in the lower third of the stomach and 98 for those in the upper/middle third location, respectively. In the lower third location of the tumor, the CUSUM curve revealed that 75 cases were needed to achieve proficiency and 174 cases to achieve mastery. However, mastery was not achieved in ESD for the upper/middle third tumor during the study period.

CONCLUSION

The time required to achieve relevant competency in gastric ESD depends on the tumor location.

GIE Editorial Board Top 10: advances in GI endoscopy in 2021

The 9-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performed a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2021 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals on endoscopy-related topics. Votes from each editorial board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study, with a focus on 3 criteria: significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice. The 10 areas identified collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic topics: colonoscopy optimization, bariatric endoscopy, endoscopic needle sampling and drainage, peroral endoscopic myotomy, endoscopic defect closure, meeting systemic challenges in endoscopic training and practice, endohepatology, FNA versus fine-needle biopsy sampling, endoscopic mucosal and submucosal procedures, and cold snare polypectomy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 of the consensus topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2021.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy versus duodenal stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: an international, multicenter, propensity score-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic duodenal stenting is the current standard treatment for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) in patients with limited life expectancy. However, duodenal stenting is prone to stent dysfunction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel technique with potentially superior stent patency. We compared clinical success, safety, and stent dysfunction of EUS-GE and duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO using propensity score matching.

METHODS

This international, multicenter, retrospective study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing EUS-GE or duodenal stenting for GOO between 2015 and 2021 in three European centers. Primary outcomes were clinical success (GOO scoring system [GOOSS] ≥ 2) and stent dysfunction (GOOSS ≤ 1 after initial clinical success). A propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed using age, sex, underlying disease, disease stage, ascites, and peritoneal carcinomatosis as variables.

RESULTS

214 patients underwent EUS-GE (n = 107) or duodenal stenting (n = 107). After propensity score matching, 176 patients were matched and compared. Technical success rates for EUS-GE and duodenal stenting were 94 % (95 %CI 89 %-99 %) vs. 98 % (95 %CI 95 %-100 %), respectively (P = 0.44). Clinical success rates were 91 % (95 %CI 85 %-97 %) vs. 75 % (95 %CI 66 %-84 %; P = 0.008). Stent dysfunction occurred in 1 % (95 %CI 0-4 %) vs. 26 % (95 %CI 15 %-37 %) of patients (P < 0.001). Adverse event rate was 10 % (95 %CI 4 %-17 %) vs. 21 % (95 %CI 12 %-29 %; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

EUS-GE had higher clinical success and lower stent dysfunction, with similar safety, compared with duodenal stenting, suggesting that EUS-GE may be preferred over duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenterostomy for the Palliation of Gastric Outlet Obstruction (GOO): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Different Techniques

INTRODUCTION

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is usually associated with a poor prognosis and a significant decrease in a patient's quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has emerged as a safe and effective palliation procedure for GOO in patients that are unfit for surgery. Without an exclusive gold-standard technique for EUS-GE, we aimed to compare the currently available ones in this systematic review and meta-analysis, the first on this subspecialty.

METHODS

A comprehensive search from multiple electronic databases was performed. The search had a particular emphasis on the techniques used in performing EUS-GE. We identified all the studies in which EUS-GE was performed as palliation for GOO from its inception to the current date. The outcomes analyzed were the following: technical and clinical success, total and severe adverse events (AEs), procedure duration, and length of hospital stay (LOHS).

RESULTS

Twenty studies involving 863 patients were the basis of this statistical analysis. Patients underwent the following techniques: direct gastroenterostomy (DGE) (n=718), balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy (BAGE) (n=27), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass (n=118). In comparison to balloon-assisted techniques, DGE had a lower rate of AEs, -0.121 (95% CI -0.191 to -0.051 p=0.001); and LOHS for the DGE group, -2.684 (95% CI -1.031 to -4.337 p=0.001). The other analyzed outcomes presented no statistically significant differences. On a sub-analysis, BAGE showed a lower rate of AEs than EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass, -0.196 (95% CI -0.061 to -0.331 p=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-GE is a safe and effective procedure for palliating GOO. When correctly administered, any of the analyzed techniques may be used to palliate GOO with similar technical and clinical outcomes. DGE had significantly lower rates of AEs and LOHS, which can be inferred as a safer procedure. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to the limited few studies that are available and accessible. Therefore, further well-designed, randomized clinical studies on the topic are warranted to compare the different techniques from more sources.

Clinical and technical outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy using 20-mm vs. 15-mm lumen-apposing metal stents

BACKGROUND

Most studies on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) utilized a 15-mm lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS). More recently, a 20-mm LAMS has become available. This study aimed to compare rates of technical and clinical success and adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing EUS-GE using a 20-mm vs. 15-mm LAMS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-GE with 15-mm or 20-mm LAMS for malignant GOO during the period from January 2018 to October 2020 were included. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as an increase in the gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) by at least 1 point during follow-up. Secondary outcomes were technical success, maximum tolerated diet, re-intervention rate, and rate/severity of AEs.

RESULTS

267 patients (mean age 67 years, 43 % women) with malignant GOO from 19 centers underwent EUS-GE. Clinical success rates were similar for the 15-mm and 20-mm stents (89.2 % [95 %CI 84.2 %-94.2 %] vs. 84.1 % [77.4%-90.6 %], respectively). However, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the 20-mm group tolerated a soft solid/complete diet at the end of follow-up (91.2 % [84.4 %-95.7 %] vs. 81.2 % [73.9 %-87.2 %], P = 0.04). Overall, AEs occurred in 33 patients (12.4 % [8.4 %-16.3 %]), with similar rates for 15-mm and 20-mm stents (12.8 % [7.5 %-18.2 %] vs. 11.8 % [6 %-17.6 %]), including incidence of severe/fatal AEs (2 % [0.4 %-5.8 %] vs. 3.4 % [0.9 %-8.4 %]).

CONCLUSIONS

The 20-mm and 15-mm LAMS show similar safety and efficacy for patients undergoing EUS-GE for malignant GOO. The 20-mm LAMS allows a more advanced diet and is, thus preferred for EUS-GE.

Anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion: quantitative analysis of a single surgeon's learning experience

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion (ACAF) is a novel surgical technique for the treatment of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) but the surgical learning curve for this technique has not been previously characterized.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to quantify a surgeon's learning curve for ACAF and the effect of surgeon experience on postoperative outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study of a single institution and single surgeon experience with ACAF surgery.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 70 consecutive patients with OPLL undergoing ACAF surgery by a single, non-ACAF trained surgeon between 2017 and 2020 were analyzed.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, errors of surgical procedure, length of hospital stay, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system, and surgical complications) were assessed.

METHODS

We prospectively reviewed the first 70 ACAF procedures between 2017 and 2020 performed by a single, non-ACAF trained surgeon. The function relationship between the operative time and case number was fitted using a locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) plot. Spearman's correlation analysis was performed to determine factors affecting the operative time. The operative time-related learning curve for ACAF was established and difficulty of each procedure was assessed using a cumulative sum (CUSUM) model. The association between the specific errors of surgical procedures and surgeon experience was further analyzed. A modified CUSUM model was also used to establish the surgical procedure-related learning curve, and thus whether these two learning curves matched with each other was observed. Postoperative outcomes in relation to surgeon experience was compared using a Wilcoxon rank sum test and Chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Operative time presented a specific pattern of fewer patient-dependent changes as the case number increased. Spearman's correlation analysis showed the operative time was more affected by the case number (r=-0.73) than the complexity of condition and number of levels hoisted. The operative time-related CUSUM model identified the early (first 29 cases) and late phase (late 41 cases) of the learning process, which was also confirmed by a modified CUSUM model based on surgical procedure. The critical point of the CUSUM model for bilateral osteotomies was at case number 29, and time reduction after the early phase was approximately 34 minutes. Length of hospital stay and blood loss were less during the late phase than during the early phase (p<.05). Although no significant difference was observed in postoperative JOA scores between two phases, patients in the late phase obtained higher recovery rates of neurologic function than those in the early phase (p<.01). There was significant difference in the number of specific errors between the two phases (p=.02). There were no significant differences in overall complication rates between two phases, but a higher incidence of certain complications caused by specific errors was observed in the early phase (p=.02), including CSF leakage, C5 palsy and incomplete decompression.

CONCLUSIONS

We described, for the first time, a detailed learning curve for ACAF surgery. About 29 cases were needed to achieve mastery of ACAF. Once mastered, the surgeon could deal with various OPLL presentations in a universal way regardless of condition complexity and number of surgical levels. Bilateral osteotomies were the most difficult part of ACAF and produced the greatest reduction in time after mastery. We found a close association between specific errors of surgical procedure for ACAF and surgeon experience. Furthermore, certain complications caused by these errors should be on the alert during the early phase of learning ACAF, including CSF leakage, C5 palsy and incomplete decompression.

Analysis of Decreasing Adverse Events with Endoscopic Ultrasound in a New Advanced Endoscopy Program Over Time

OBJECTIVE

New innovations and increasing utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are associated with rare but serious risks. We investigate the rates and risk factors for post-procedural complications over a four-year period at a new advanced endoscopy program.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of all adult patients who underwent upper EUS at an academic level-1 trauma center between April 2015 and November 2019. The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse events within 1 week of EUS. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits and mortality within 30 days after EUS. Chi-square test, t test, and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess risk factors for post-procedural complications.

RESULTS

A total of 968 EUS procedures were performed on 864 patients (54% female; 79% Caucasian; mean age 61 years). The overall incidence of post-procedural adverse event with EUS was 5.6%. The probability of an adverse event decreased by an average of 22% per year (p =0.01, OR 0.78). The risk for adverse events were 3.3% acute pancreatitis, 1.9% clinically significant bleeding, 0.3% bacteremia, 0.2% perforation, and 2.4% 30-day mortality. The adverse event rate was highest among low volume proceduralists (p =0.04). The 30-day mortality was more than threefolds among patients who had an adverse event within 7 days after EUS.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of post-procedural adverse events at a new EUS program was 5.6%, with an average of 22% relative decrease in adverse events per year in the first 4 years.

Exploring training dental implant placement using static or dynamic devices among dental students

BACKGROUND

Static computer-assisted surgery (s-CAIS) and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) are the main digital approaches in guiding dental implant placement.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to explore and compare the learning curves for s-CAIS and d-CAIS by beginners.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three dental students used each dental model for drilling five positions with missing teeth. Operators performed the drilling test for five sets of dental models with an interval of 7 ± 1 days assisted by the d-CAIS system. After a six-month break, the same students performed the drilling test again in the same way but with the s-CAIS system. A total of thirty models were used, and 150 implants were inserted. The operation time and relative deviations were recorded and calculated. Correlations between various deviation parameters and attempts were tested with independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

A significant difference between the two groups was found in the operation time (p < .001). For accuracy, the difference was found in the first attempt of coronal and apical deviations but disappeared as the training went on. As the practice progressed, improvement was evident in the d-CAIS group but not in the s-CAIS group. When reaching the plateau stage of the learning curve of the d-CAIS group (after five attempts), the influence of different methods of guidance was limited between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A learning curve effect was found in d-CAIS but not in s-CAIS in vitro tests by beginners. The operating procedure of dynamic navigated and static template-guided implant placement was easy to master.

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy for malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed ERCP: a retrospective nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has been proposed as an alternative procedure in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) and failed ERCP.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective analysis included all cases of EUS-CDS with LAMS performed in patients with DMBO and failed ERCP in 23 Italian centers from January 2016 to July 2020. Primary endpoints were technical and clinical success. Secondary endpoints were the assessment of the adverse event (AE) rate and variables associated with technical success.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six patients (44.9% women) with a mean age of 73.9 ± 12.6 years were included in the study. The most common etiology of DMBO was pancreatic adenocarcinoma (75%), followed by ampullary cancer (8.6%) and cholangiocarcinoma (6.6%). The common bile duct median diameter was 17.3 ± 3.9 mm. Technical and clinical success were achieved in 239 of 256 (93.3%), and 230 of 239 (96.2%) patients, respectively. The mean follow-up was 151 ± 162 days. Twenty-seven AEs occurred in 25 of 239 patients (10.5%) (3 mild, 21 moderate, and 3 severe). No fatal AEs occurred. Reinterventions to manage AEs with endoscopic or radiologic procedures occurred in 22 patients (9.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study show that EUS-CDS with LAMSs in patients with DMBO and failed ERCP represent a viable alternative in terms of effectiveness and safety with acceptable AE rates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03903523.).

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

1:  ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6:  ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7:  ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Role of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound in gastrointestinal malignancy- current evidence and future directions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to an advanced therapeutic modality. With the advent of better technologies and accessories, EUS has found ground in the management of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, not only for diagnosis but also for therapeutic purposes. EUS can tackle a host of conditions, including hepato-pancreatico-biliary malignancies. Advances and experience in various EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques have enabled the endosonologist to tackle biliary obstruction when conventional techniques of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) fails. More and more emerging data not only establishes the safety of EUS-BD but also demonstrates superior efficacy over PTBD and sometimes even ERCP. Malignant gastric outlet obstruction can now be safely managed with EUS-guided gastroenterostomy. Starting from pain management in malignant tumors through celiac plexus neurolysis to various tumor ablative therapies, EUS has forged ahead over percutaneous treatment or surgical options in the management of GI malignancies. Additional data is now coming up on the prospects of EUS-guided immunotherapy and biological therapy for tumor management. The future of EUS therapeutics in the field of GI malignancies is bright. With increasing evidence, this modality becoming a key player in management of a host of complex clinical conditions arising out of GI malignancies is in the offing. This review focuses on elucidating the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of GI malignancies, a synopsis of various techniques, data on its safety and efficacy as well as future advancements in this domain.

Classification, outcomes, and management of misdeployed stents during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Stent misdeployment (SM) has hindered the dissemination of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) management. We aimed to provide a classification system for SM during EUS-GE and study clinical outcomes and management accordingly.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study involving 16 tertiary care centers (8 in the United States, 8 in Europe) from March 2015 to December 2020. Patients who developed SM during EUS-GE for GOO were included. We propose classifying SM into 4 types. The primary outcome was rate and severity of SM (per American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon), whereas secondary outcomes were clinical outcomes and management of dislodgement according to the SM classification type, in addition to salvage management of GOO after SM.

RESULTS

From 467 EUS-GEs performed for GOO during the study period, SM occurred in 46 patients (9.85%). Most SMs (73.2%) occurred during the first 13 EUS-GE cases by the performing operators. SM was graded as mild (n = 28, 60.9%), moderate (n = 11, 23.9%), severe (n = 6, 13.0%), or fatal (n = 1, 2.2%), with 5 patients (10.9%) requiring surgical intervention. Type I SM was the most common (n = 29, 63.1%), followed by type II (n = 14, 30.4%), type IV (n = 2, 4.3%), and type III (n = 1, 2.2%). Type I SM was more frequently rated as mild compared with type II SM (75.9% vs 42.9%, P = .04) despite an equivalent rate of surgical repair (10.3% vs 7.1%, P = .7). Overall, 4 patients (8.7%) required an intensive care unit stay (median, 2.5 days). The median length of stay was 4 days after SM.

CONCLUSIONS

Although SM is not infrequent during EUS-GE, most are type I, mild/moderate in severity, and can be managed endoscopically with a surgical intervention rate of approximately 11%.

Single session endoscopic ultrasound-guided double bypass (hepaticogastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy) for concomitant duodenal and biliary obstruction: A case series

BACKGROUND

Concomitant malignant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction can be difficult to manage endoscopically with traditional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and luminal stenting. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HG) and gastrojejunostomy (GJ) are novel techniques that can relieve both obstructions in a single session. This study aims to describe the outcomes of combined, single session EUS-HG and EUS-GJ.

METHODS

This is a two-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent same session EUS-HG and EUS-GJ. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AE), reduction in total serum bilirubin, length of hospital stay (LOS), and re-intervention rates.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients underwent EUS-HG and EUS-GJ (12 males, mean age 66.4 years). Twenty-one were performed for malignant obstruction. Technical success was 100% and 95.6% for HG and GJ, respectively. All patients subsequently tolerated a soft diet and 72.7% (16/22) of patients had a 50% reduction in bilirubin post-procedure. The median LOS for the 17 patients who were not discharged home immediately following the procedure was 2 (range 1-20) days. There were five AEs (2 mild, 3 moderate). Only three patients required reintervention (interventional radiology-guided biliary drainage, stent exchange for a benign biliary stricture, and placement of a second stent through an occluded distal common bile duct stent) over a median follow-up of 78 days. One patient with pancreatic cancer underwent successful tumor resection.

CONCLUSION

Single session EUS-guided double bypass (HG and GJ) is technically feasible and safe when conducted by experienced endosonographers. Larger, comparative studies are needed.

Lumen-apposing metal stents (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are a novel class of devices that have expanded the spectrum of endoscopic GI interventions. LAMSs with their dumbbell configuration, short saddle length, and large inner luminal diameter provide favorable stent characteristics to facilitate anastomosis formation between the gut lumen and adjacent structures.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2021 for articles related to LAMSs by using additional relevant keywords such as "walled-off pancreatic necrosis," "pseudocysts," "pancreatic fluid collection," "cholecystitis," "gastroenterostomy," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others.

RESULTS

This technology review describes the full spectrum of LAMS designs and delivery systems, techniques for deployment, procedural outcomes, safety, training issues, and financial considerations.

CONCLUSIONS

Although LAMSs were initially introduced for drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis, the versatility of these devices has led to a variety of off-label uses including gallbladder drainage, enteric bypass with the creation of gastroenterostomies, and treatment of luminal GI strictures.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gastrojejunostomy for gastric outlet obstruction

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a clinical syndrome secondary to luminal obstruction at the level of the stomach and/or duodenum. GOO can be caused by either benign or malignant etiologies, often resulting in early satiety, nausea, vomiting and poor oral intake. GOO is associated with decreased quality of life and has been shown to significantly impact survival in patients with advanced malignancies. Traditional treatment options for GOO can be broadly divided into surgical [surgical gastrojejunostomy (GJ)] and endoscopic interventions (dilation and/or placement of luminal self-expanding metal stents). While surgical GJ has been shown to provide a more lasting relief of symptoms when compared to luminal stenting, it has also been associated with a higher rate of adverse events. Furthermore, many patients with advanced metastatic disease are not good surgical candidates. More recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided GJ has emerged as a potential alternative to traditional surgical and endoscopic approaches. This review focuses on the new advances and technical aspects of EUS-GJ and clinical outcomes in the management of both benign and malignant disease.

EUS-guided Gastroenterostomy: Assessing the Competence of the Endoscopist

Assessing competence is of utmost importance for complex EUS procedures like EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) that are associated with higher risk of procedural complications. It is a matter of intense debate on what is the training needed to carry out these interventions, how to judge for competence, and who can perform these newer interventions. The procedure has several variations including the methods to identify the jejunal loops on EUS like direct puncture, balloon-assisted, and hybrid rendezvous with ultrathin endoscope. Therefore, there is lack of clarity on the role and ways of assessing the learning curve for EUS-GE. In this news and views, we are discussing two studies that assessed the learning curve for EUS-GE.