Therapeutic pancreatic endoscopy after Whipple resection requires rendezvous access

Surgical revision for pancreatojejunostomy stricture: a case series of 14 patients

Background

Pancreatojejunostomy stricture (PJS) is a rare long-term complication of pancreaticojejunal anastomosis. This study aimed to investigate the role of surgery in the management of pancreatojejunostomy strictures.

Methods

The database of the Pancreas Center of Nanjing Medical University was retrospectively screened for patients who underwent a surgical revision for PJS between June 2012 and August 2019, and their clinical characteristics and management modalities were reviewed.

Results

Fourteen consecutive cases were retrieved, the median age at index operation was 41.1 years (19–71). The average time between the two operations was 70.6 months (8–270 months). Index procedures included pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) (7/14, 50%), pylorus-preserving PD (4/14, 28.6%), Berger procedure (2/14, 14.3%), and middle pancreatectomy (1/14, 7.1%). The diameter of the main pancreatic duct was < 4 mm in all 14 cases, and nine underwent pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) stenting during the index operation. The most frequent complaints were abdominal pain (6/14, 42.9%), recurrent acute pancreatitis (6/14, 42.9%), pancreatic fistula (1/14, 7.1%), and abdominal distention (1/14, 7.1%). The diagnosis of PJ stricture was confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging in all cases. All patients had a main duct diameter > 5 mm before surgical revision. All patients underwent wedge excision with interrupted one-layer suturing with absorbable sutures and without stent placement. In this series, only one patient required reoperation. Upon follow-up, 11 of 12 patients had complete resolution of the PJ stricture.

Conclusion

PJS is a long-term complication of pancreatojejunostomy. Surgical revision of the anastomosis is a safe and effective treatment modality.

Transjejunal endoscopic ultrasound‐guided pancreatic drainage for pancreatic jejunostomy stricture using a forward‐viewing echoendoscope in a patient with altered anatomy

Pancreatic jejunostomy stricture (PJS) is one of the major late complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided pancreatic drainage (EUS‐PD) is considered a salvage treatment for symptomatic PJS after endoscopic retrograde pancreatography failure; however, the technical success rate of the endoscopic treatment of PJS remains unsatisfactory, mainly due to surgically altered anatomy. Herein, we describe a case of PJS successfully treated with transjejunal EUS‐PD using a forward‐viewing echoendoscope. A 62‐year‐old man who suffered from repetitive severe back pain due to PJS was referred to our hospital. Since transgastric EUS‐PD was difficult, we attempted transjejunal EUS‐PD using a forward‐viewing echoendoscope. To facilitate scope insertion, we first straightened the afferent jejunal loop and placed a stiff guidewire. With this scheme, we successfully performed transjejunal EUS‐PD and placed a 5‐Fr plastic stent. In conclusion, this technique is useful for treating patients with PJS when transgastric EUS‐PD is difficult.

EUS guided pancreatic duct decompression in surgically altered anatomy or failed ERCP - A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

INTRODUCTION

EUS-PD (EUS guided pancreatic duct drainage) is classified into two types: EUS-guided rendezvous techniques and EUS-guided PD stenting. Prior studies showed significant variation in terms of technical success, clinical success and adverse events.

METHODS

Three independent reviewers performed a comprehensive review of all original articles published from inception to June 2020, describing pancreatic duct drainage utilizing EUS. Primary outcomes were technical success, clinical success of EUS-PDD and safety of EUS-PD in terms of adverse events. All meta-analysis and meta-regression tests were 2-tailed. Finally, probability of publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and with Egger's test.

RESULTS

A total of sixteen studies (503 patients) described the use of EUS-PD for pancreatic duct decompression yielded a pooled technical success rate was 81.4% (95% CI 72-88.1, I 2 = 74). Meta-regression revealed that proportion of altered anatomy and method of dilation of tract explain the variance. Overall pooled clinical success rate was 84.6% (95% CI 75.4-90.8, I 2 = 50.18). Meta-regression analysis revealed that the type of pancreatic duct decompression, proportion of altered anatomy and follow up time explained the variance. Overall pooled adverse event rate was 21.3% (95% CI 16.8-26.7, I 2 = 36.6). The most common post procedure adverse event was post procedure pain. Overall pooled adverse event rate of post EUS-PD pancreatitis was 5% (95% CI 3.2-7.8, I 2 = 0).

CONCLUSION

The systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression provides answer to the questions of the overall technical success, clinical success and the adverse event rate of EUS-PD by summarizing the available literature.

Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography-guided versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided technique for pancreatic duct cannulation in patients with pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Stenosis of the pancreaticojejunostomy is a well-known long-term complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Traditionally, the endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided intervention has emerged as an alternative, but the success rate and adverse event rate of both treatment modalities are poorly known. We aimed to compare the outcome data of both interventions.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search using the Pubmed/Medline and Embase databases in order to summarize the available data regarding efficacy and complications of ERP- and EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage and compare these outcome data using uniform outcome measures in a multilevel logistic model. RESULTS : 13 studies were included, involving 77 patients who underwent ERP-guided drainage, 145 who underwent EUS-guided drainage, and 12 patients who underwent both modalities. An EUS-guided approach was significantly superior to an ERP-guided approach with regard to pancreatic duct opacification (87 % vs. 30 %; P < 0.001), cannulation success (79 % vs. 26 %; P < 0.001), and stent placement (72 % vs. 20 %; P < 0.001). An EUS-guided approach also appeared superior with regard to clinical outcomes such a pain resolution. The adverse event rate between the two treatment modalities could not be compared due to insufficient data. All included studies were found to be of low quality.

CONCLUSION

Based on limited available data, EUS-guided PD intervention appears superior to ERP-guided PD intervention.

Long-term outcomes after endoscopic retrograde pancreatic drainage for symptomatic pancreaticojejunal anastomotic stenosis

There is limited evidence supporting the usefulness of endoscopic retrograde pancreatic drainage (ERPD) for symptomatic pancreaticojejunal anastomotic stenosis (sPJS). We examined the usefulness of ERPD for sPJS. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 10 benign sPJS patients. A forward-viewing endoscope was used in all sessions. Following items were evaluated: technical success, adverse events, and clinical outcome of ERPD. The technical success rate was 100% (10/10) in initial ERPD; 9 patients had a pancreatic stent (no-internal-flap: n = 4, internal-flap: n = 5). The median follow-up was 920 days. Four patients developed recurrence. Among them, 3 had a stent with no-internal-flap in initial ERPD, the stent migrated in 3 at recurrence, and a stent was not placed in 1 patient in initial ERPD. Four follow-up interventions were performed. No recurrence was observed in 6 patients. None of the stents migrated (no-internal-flap: n = 1, internal-flap: n = 5) and no stents were replaced due to stent failure. Stenting with no-internal-flap was associated with recurrence (p = 0.042). Mild adverse events developed in 14.3% (2/14). In conclusions, ERPD was performed safely with high technical success. Recurrence was common after stenting with no-internal-flap. Long-term stenting did not result in stent failure.

Clinical trial register and their clinical registration number: Nos. 58-115 and R2-9.

EUS-guided pancreatic drainage: A steep learning curve

Background and Objective:

EUS-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) is an efficacious, acceptable risk option for patients with pancreatic duct obstruction who fail conventional ERCP. The aim of this study was to define the learning curve (LC) for EUS-PD.

Methods:

Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-PD by a single operator were included from a dedicated registry. Demographics, procedural info, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Nonlinear regression and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses were conducted for the LC.

Results:

Fifty-six patients were included (54% of male, with a mean age of 58 years). Technical success was achieved in 47 patients (84%). Stent placement was antegrade in 36 patients (77%) and retrograde in 11 (23%). Clinical success was achieved in 46/47 (98%) patients who achieved technical success. Adverse events were seen in 13 patients (6 of whom did not achieve technical success) and included bleeding requiring embolization (n = 5), bleeding treated with clips peri-procedurally (n = 1), pancreatitis (n = 5), and a pancreatic fluid collection drained via EUS-drainage (n = 2). The median procedural time was 80 min (range 49–159 min). The CUSUM chart showed that 80-min procedural time was achieved at the 27^th procedure. Durations further reduced 40^th procedure onward, reaching a plateau indicating proficiency (nonlinear regression P < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

Endoscopists experienced in EUS-PD are expected to achieve a reduction in procedural time over successive cases, with efficiency reached at 80 min and a learning rate of 27 cases. Continued improvement is demonstrated with additional experience, with plateau indicating mastery suggested at the 40^th case. EUS-PD is probably one of the hardest therapeutic endosonographic procedures to learn.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct intervention and pancreaticogastrostomy using a novel cross-platform technique with small-caliber devices

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) has been used as an alternative to surgery to drain pancreatic ducts for treatment of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS). Previous techniques involved using needle-knife cautery, bougie dilation or a stent extraction screw to allow stent passage through the gastric wall and pancreatic parenchyma, with potential for severe complications including duct leak, especially if drainage fails. A novel technique employing EUS guided puncture of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) with a 19- or a 22-gauge needle, passage of an 0.018-guidewire, dilation of the tract with a small-diameter (4 F) angioplasty balloon and placement of 3F plastic stents with the pigtail curled inside the duct as an anchor. Methods  This is a retrospective case series at a single tertiary center. EUS-guided PG was considered when conventional endoscopic pancreatic duct drainage failed. Main outcomes included technical and clinic success and complications. Results  Eight patients underwent PG. Indications were DPDS (n = 4), stenotic pancreaticoenteral anastomosis after Whipple procedure (n = 3) and chronic pancreatitis with dilated MPD (n = 1). Median MPD diameter was 6.75 mm [IQR 2.8 - 7.6]. Technical success was achieved in seven of eight cases (88 %); angioplasty balloon passed into the pancreatic duct in all accessed ducts. There was one asymptomatic duct leak, and no major or delayed complications, with clinical improvement (complete or partial) in five of eight (71 %). Conclusions  EUS-guided PG using a small-caliber guidewire, 4F angioplasty balloon, and reverse 3F single pigtail stents offers a safe and atraumatic alternative without use of cautery.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with surgically altered anatomy: Techniques and literature review

There are various reconstruction techniques that are used after upper gastrointestinal surgery. In recent years, opportunities for endoscopic diagnosis and treatment have been increasing in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. With the advent of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (IV-EUS), various procedures have been developed mainly for patients in whom endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is difficult to carry out. Indications for such procedures are expanding. IV-EUS for surgically altered anatomy (SAA) includes EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration, biliary interventions (e.g. biliary drainage, treatment of bile duct stricture, removal of bile duct stones, and the rendezvous technique), and pancreatic interventions (e.g. rendezvous technique after Whipple surgery). In addition, there have been reports of various EUS-related procedures using a forward-viewing curved linear-array echoendoscope that are carried out for postoperative intestinal tract reconstruction. Although interventional EUS is a useful therapeutic procedure for SAA, there are still no dedicated devices, and standardization of the procedure is warranted.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage

Endoscopic transpapillary or transanastomotic pancreatic duct drainage (PD) is the mainstay of drainage in symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction or leakage. However, transpapillary or transanastomotic PD can be technically difficult due to the tight stricture or surgically altered anatomy (SAA), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided PD (EUS-PD) is now increasingly used as an alternative technique. There are two approaches in EUS-PD: EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV) and EUS-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TMD). In cases with normal anatomy, EUS-RV should be the first approach, whereas EUS-TMD can be selected in cases with SAA or duodenal obstruction. In our literature review, technical success and adverse event rates were 78.7% and 21.8%, respectively. The technical success rate of EUS-RV appeared lower than EUS-TMD due to the difficulty in guidewire passage. In future, development of dedicated devices and standardization of EUS-PD procedure are necessary.

Late Pancreatic Anastomosis Stricture Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

With an increasing postoperative survival and prolonged follow-up, late complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) have yet to be thoroughly described and analyzed. Among those, pancreatic anastomosis stricture may lead to severe consequences.

METHODS

A systematic review focusing on pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis (PJA) stricture.

RESULTS

PJA stricture incidence reached 1.4-11.4% with a median time interval of 34 months after PD. No risk factor was identified. PJA stricture repercussions were inconsistent but postprandial abdominal pain and recurrent acute pancreatitis were the most common symptoms, followed by impaired pancreatic function. To confirm diagnosis, secretin-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (SMRCP) sensitivity reached 56-100%. As impaired pancreatic function is not improved by any procedure, only PJA stricture leading to abdominal pain or acute pancreatitis should be considered for treatment. Endoscopic techniques (mainly ultrasound-assisted "rendezvous") should be proposed prior to surgical repair, with a morbidity, an overall technical and clinical success reaching 16.5-33% and 28.6-100% and 33-100%, respectively. Regarding surgical repair, overall morbidity varied between 14.3 and 33%, with a clinical success reaching 26.1-100%. Finally, total pancreatectomy with islet auto-transplantation should be considered only for pain intractable to medical management and recurrent acute pancreatitis which has failed medical, endoscopic, and traditional surgical management strategies.

CONCLUSION

PJA stricture following PD is a late, unusual, and potentially serious complication. When there is currently no clear consensus, PJA stricture leading to abdominal pain or acute pancreatitis should be considered treatment. With increasing survival after PD, further studies should focus on late complications.

CORE TIP

Stricture of pancraticojejunostomy is a late and potentially serious complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Incidence reaches 1.4-11.4% and no risk factor is identified. Symptoms are inconsistent but postprandial abdominal pain, recurrent acute pancreatitis, and impaired pancreatic function are the most frequent. To confirm diagnosis, secretin-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is the best modality. Only PJA stricture leading to abdominal pain or acute pancreatitis should be considered for treatment. Endoscopic techniques (mainly ultrasound-assisted "rendezvous") should be proposed prior to surgical repair. Finally, total pancreatectomy with islet auto-transplantation should be considered only for pain intractable to medical management and recurrent acute pancreatitis which has failed medical, endoscopic, and traditional surgical management strategies.

Successful Endoscopic Treatment of Severe Pancreaticojejunostomy Strictures by Puncturing the Anastomotic Site with an EUS-guided Guidewire

Pancreaticojejunostomy stricture (PJS) is a late complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. The endoscopic treatment of PJS is very challenging due to the difficulty of locating the small anastomotic site and passing the stricture using a guidewire. We herein report two cases of severe PJS. These patients could not be treated using only double-balloon endoscopy or endoscopic ultrasound-guided puncture of the main pancreatic duct because of severe stenosis at the anastomotic site. However, we could treat them by the rendezvous technique using the rigid part of the guidewire to penetrate PJS. This method was useful and safe for treating severe PJS.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Intervention

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct intervention (EUS-PDI) is an emerging endoscopic approach allowing access and intervention to the pancreatic duct (PD) for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) or patients with surgically altered anatomy. As opposed to biliary drainage for which percutaneous drainage is an alternative following failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the treatment options after failed ERP are very limited. Therefore, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided access to the PD and options for subsequent drainage may play an important role as an alternative to surgical intervention. However, this approach is technically demanding with a high risk of complications, and should only be performed by highly experienced endoscopists. In this review, we describe an overview of the current endoscopic approaches, basic technical tips, and outcomes using these procedures.

An international multicenter study comparing EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography after Whipple surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic management of post-Whipple pancreatic adverse events (AEs) with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (e-ERP) is associated with high failure rates. EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) has shown promising results; however, no comparative data have been done for these 2 modalities. The goal of this study is to compare EUS-PDD with e-ERP in terms of technical success (PDD through dilation/stent), clinical success (improvement/resolution of pancreatic-type symptoms), and AE rates in patients with post-Whipple anatomy.

METHODS

This is an international multicenter comparative retrospective study at 7 tertiary centers (2 United States, 2 European, 2 Asian, and 1 South American). All consecutive patients who underwent EUS-PDD or e-ERP between January 2010 and August 2015 were included.

RESULTS

In total, 66 patients (mean age, 57 years; 48% women) and 75 procedures were identified with 40 in EUS-PDD and 35 in e-ERP. Technical success was achieved in 92.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 20% of procedures in the e-ERP group (OR, 49.3; P < .001). Clinical success (per patient) was attained in 87.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 23.1% in the e-ERP group (OR, 23.3; P < .001). AEs occurred more commonly in the EUS-PDD group (35% vs 2.9%, P < .001). However, all AEs were rated as mild or moderate. Procedure time and length of stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-PDD is superior to e-ERP in post-Whipple anatomy in terms of efficacy with acceptable safety. As such, EUS-PDD should be considered as a potential first-line treatment in post-pancreaticoduodenectomy anatomy when necessary expertise is available.

EUS-guided pancreatic drainage for pancreatic strictures after failed ERCP: a multicenter international collaborative study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) is considered first-line therapy for management of symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction. Technical failure with ERP occurs when the main pancreatic duct cannot be cannulated. EUS-guided drainage of the pancreatic duct is a minimally invasive alternative to surgery for failed conventional ERP. We present an international, multicenter study on the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) for patients who fail conventional endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

Between January 2006 and December 2015, 80 patients underwent EUS-PD at 4 academic centers in 3 countries. Patient demographics, medical history, procedure data, and follow-up clinical data were collected. Technical success was defined as successful pancreatic duct drainage with stent placement. Clinical success was defined as resolution or improvement of symptoms or improvement on postprocedure imaging.

RESULTS

Eighty patients (62.5% men; mean age, 58.2 ± 15.5 years) were included. All patients had attempted ERP and/or extracorporeal lithotripsy if needed before EUS-PD. Technical success was achieved in 89% of patients (n = 71). Clinical success was achieved in 81% of patients overall (65/80) and in 92% of patients who achieved technical success (65/71). Immediate adverse events occurred in 20% of patients (n = 16) and delayed adverse events occurred in 11% of patients (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

With appropriate endoscopic expertise, EUS-PD offers a minimally invasive, more effective, and safer alternative to some surgical PD procedures. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01522573.).

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Bilioenteric Anastomosis

For diagnosis and treatment of pancreatobiliary diseases, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is useful method nowadays and its technically success rate is usually in about 90%-95% of patients with normal gastric and pancreaticobiliary anatomy. Recently ERCP is significantly challenging after intestinal reconstruction, particularly in patients who have undergone pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD, classic Whipple’s operation) or pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD) with reconstruction. PD and PPPD relate to numerous techniques have been presented for reconstruction of the digestive tract and pancreaticobiliary tree during the resection bilioenteric stricture commonly occurs later in the postoperative course and developed in 5-year cumulative probability of biliary stricture rate of 8.2% and pancreaticoenteric stricture of 4.6%. This complication was no difference in incidence between patients with benign or malignant disease. In PD or PPPD with reconstruction, short pancreatobiliary limb with biliojejunal anastomosis site is made usually, modestly success rate of intubation to blind loop and cannulation with conventional endoscope. However, in combined Reux-en-Y anastomosis, longer pancreatobiliary limb and additional Reux limb are obstacle to success intubation and cannulation by using conventional endoscope. In this situation, new designed enetroscope with dedicated accessories is efficient.

Endoscopic characteristics and usefulness of endoscopic dilatation of anastomotic stricture following pancreaticojejunostomy: case series and a review of the literature

The incidence of pancreatitis induced by anastomotic stricture following pancreaticodigestive tract anastomosis as a late-onset adverse event has been reported to be 3% or lower, but some cases repeatedly relapse and are difficult to treat. Endoscopic identification and treatment of the anastomotic site are considered to be difficult, and only a small number of cases have been reported. We present three cases with recurrent pancreatitis induced by anastomotic stricture following pancreaticojejunostomy applied after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We successfully identified the anastomotic site and performed endoscopic dilatation of the anastomotic stricture, and pancreatitis has not recurred. We characterized endoscopic features of the anastomotic site, understanding of which is essential to identify the site, and investigated useful techniques to identify the site and perform cannulation for pancreatography. Furthermore, we showed the safety and usefulness of endoscopic dilatation for anastomotic stricture following pancreaticojejunostomy according to our three cases and a review of the literature.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Treatment of Pancreaticocutaneous Fistulas

Pancreaticocutaneous fistulas (PCFs) may be refractory to medical therapy or endoscopic retrograde cholangopancreaticography. Four patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided management of refractory PCFs, which were internalized by endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural puncture of the pancreatic duct (n = 2), fistula tract (n = 1), or both (n = 1), with placement of transmural stents providing internal drainage to the stomach (n = 3) or duodenum (n = 1). Drainage from PCFs ceased in all patients, and all percutaneous drains were removed; internal stents were left in place indefinitely. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions may successfully treat PCFs, allowing removal of percutaneous drains, and are an attractive alternative for patients who might otherwise require pancreatic resection.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreaticobiliary intervention in patients with surgically altered anatomy and inaccessible papillae: A review of current literature

The management of pancreaticobiliary disease in patients with surgically altered anatomy is a growing problem for gastroenterologists today. Over the years, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as an important diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the treatment of pancreaticobiliary disease. Patient anatomy has become increasingly complex due to advances in surgical resection of pancreaticobiliary disease and EUS has emerged as the therapy of choice when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography failed cannulation or when the papilla is inaccessible such as in gastric obstruction or duodenal obstruction. The current article gives a comprehensive review of the current literature for EUS-guided intervention of the pancreaticobiliary tract in patients with altered surgical anatomy.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Previous Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Performing ERCP in patients with previous pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is technically challenging. Balloon-assisted ERCP has recently been recognized as a useful tool in patients with surgically altered anatomies. However, there are few studies that focus on ERCP in post-PD patients.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of ERCP in patients in post-PD and the patterns for type of endoscopes used.

METHODS

Patients with previous PD who had undergone ERCP were included in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty ERCP procedures were performed on 47 post-PD patients. The overall success of ERCP was 82.3 % (107/130). Endoscope insertion to the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses was accomplished in 93.8 % (122/130), which resulted in successful completion of ERCP in 87.7 % (107/122) of the procedures: 89.5 % (94/105) in biliary indications and 76.5 % (13/17) in pancreas indications. Using the conventional endoscopes (CEs) led to ERCP success in 66.4 % (71/107) of attempts versus 78.3 % (36/46) with balloon-assisted enteroscopes (BAEs). Among 105 cases in which CEs were initially tried, ERCP was successful in 69 (65.7 %) cases with CEs alone. When CEs failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses, the subsequent use of BAEs resulted in a successful ERCP in 16/19 (84.2 %) of attempts.

CONCLUSIONS

ERCP in post-PD patients can be performed with a high success rate. We recommend that CEs should be used initially for ERCP in patients with PD and that BAEs be reserved for situation in which CEs have failed to reach the pancreaticobiliary anastomoses.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Surgically Altered Anatomy

ERCP in surgically altered anatomy requires the endoscopist to fully understand the procedural goals and the reconstructed anatomy before proceeding. Altered anatomy presents a variety of challenges unique to enteroscopy, and others related to accessing the biliary or pancreatic duct from unusual orientations. Both side-viewing and forward-viewing endoscopes, as well as single and double balloon techniques, are available for ERCP in these settings. Endoscope selection largely depends on the anatomy and length of reconstructed intestinal limbs. Endoscopist experience with performing ERCP in surgically altered anatomy is the most important factor for determining outcomes and success rates.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided endotherapy

Over the last 2 decades, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from a noninvasive diagnostic tool to a combined diagnostic and therapeutic modality. The use of EUS complementary to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has made possible biliary and pancreatic drainage in situations where conventional ERCP is unsuccessful or unlikely to be feasible. The degree of proximity to the pancreas achieved during the procedure has enabled therapeutic interventions such as drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, pancreatic cyst ablation, and pancreatic cancer therapy. Real-time visualization of flow in adjacent blood vessels using Doppler ultrasound has allowed endovascular therapy for ablation of gastric varices and feeding vessels. Furthermore, the role of EUS is evolving in a multitude of applications such as bilioenteric and enteroenteric anastomosis in a minimally invasive manner, potentially reducing the need for surgery. This article reviews the role of EUS as an alternative to surgery in selective situations and provides an overview of future directions and evolving uses of EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions

When endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography fails to decompress the pancreatic or biliary system, alternative interventions are required. In this situation, endosonography guided cholangio-pancreatography (ESCP), percutaneous radiological therapy or surgery can be considered. Small case series reporting the initial experience with ESCP have been superseded by comprehensive reports of large cohorts. Although these reports are predominantly retrospective, they demonstrate that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided biliary and pancreatic interventions are associated with high levels of technical and clinical success. The procedural complication rates are lower than those seen with percutaneous therapy or surgery. This article describes and discusses data published in the last five years relating to EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic intervention.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from a purely diagnostic procedure to one with therapeutic capabilities. One of the most challenging therapeutic intervention for endosonographers is EUS-guided pancreatic drainage. The development of this technique has allowed access and drainage of the main pancreatic duct after failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and can avoid invasive procedures such as surgical and percutaneous interventions. This review discusses the indications, technique, challenges, and an algorithmic approach to EUS-guided pancreatic drainage.

EUS-guided pancreatic duct intervention: outcomes of a single tertiary-care referral center experience

BACKGROUND

EUS can provide access to the main pancreatic duct (MPD) for therapeutic intervention. The long-term clinical success of EUS-guided MPD interventions is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine technical and clinical success rates, predictors of success, and long-term outcomes of EUS-guided MPD intervention.

DESIGN

Retrospective, single-center study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

Forty-five patients.

INTERVENTION

EUS-guided MPD stent retrieval or placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical and clinical success rates, adverse events, and long-term clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the 45 patients, 37 had undergone failed ERCP, and 29 had surgically altered anatomy. Median follow-up after initial EUS-guided intervention was 23 months. Two patients underwent EUS for stent removal, and EUS-guided MPD stent placement was attempted in 43 patients. Technical success was achieved in 32 of 43 patients (74%) with antegrade (n = 18) or retrograde (n = 14) stent insertion. Serious adverse events occurred in 3 patients (6%). Patients underwent a median of 2 (range 1-6) follow-up procedures for revision or removal of stents, without adverse events. Complete symptom resolution occurred in 24 of 29 patients (83%) while stents were in place, including all 6 with nondilated ducts. Stents were removed in 23 patients, who were then followed for an additional median of 32 months; 4 patients had recurrent symptoms. Among the 11 failed cases, most had persistent symptoms or required surgery.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study design, individualized patient management.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided MPD intervention is feasible and safe, with long-term clinical success in the majority of patients. EUS provides important treatment options, particularly in patients who would otherwise undergo surgery.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of the pancreatic duct

Over the last 2 decades there has been continuing development in endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). EUS-guided pancreatic drainage is an evolving procedure that can be offered to patients who are high-risk surgical candidates and in whom the pancreatic duct cannot be accessed by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Although EUS-guided pancreatic drainage is a minimally invasive alternative option to surgery and interventional radiology, owing to its complexity and potential for fulminant complications it is recommended that these procedures be performed by highly skilled endoscopists. Additional data are needed to define risks and long-term outcomes more accurately via a dedicated prospective registry.

Pancreatic duct drainage using EUS-guided rendezvous technique for stenotic pancreaticojejunostomy

The patient was a 30-year-old female who had undergone excision of the extrahepatic bile duct and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy for congenital biliary dilatation at the age of 7. Thereafter, she suffered from recurrent acute pancreatitis due to pancreaticobiliary maljunction and received subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. She developed a pancreatic fistula and an intra-abdominal abscess after the operation. These complications were improved by percutaneous abscess drainage and antibiotic therapy. However, upper abdominal discomfort and the elevation of serum pancreatic enzymes persisted due to stenosis from the pancreaticojejunostomy. Because we could not accomplish dilation of the stenosis by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, we tried an endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guided rendezvous technique for pancreatic duct drainage. After transgastric puncture of the pancreatic duct using an EUS-fine needle aspiration needle, the guidewire was inserted into the pancreatic duct and finally reached to the jejunum through the stenotic anastomosis. We changed the echoendoscope to an oblique-viewing endoscope, then grasped the guidewire and withdrew it through the scope. The stenosis of the pancreaticojejunostomy was dilated up to 4 mm, and a pancreatic stent was put in place. Though the pancreatic stent was removed after three months, the patient remained symptom-free. Pancreatic duct drainage using an EUS-guided rendezvous technique was useful for the treatment of a stenotic pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic duct access: techniques and literature review of pancreatography, transmural drainage and rendezvous techniques

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided (EUS)-guided pancreatic interventions have gained increasing attention. Here we review EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) access techniques and outcomes. EUS-guided PD intervention is divided into two types, antegrade and rendezvous techniques, following EUS-guided pancreatography. In the antegrade technique, pancreaticoenterostomy is carried out by stent placement between the PD and the stomach, duodenum, or jejunum. Transenteric antegrade PD stenting is conducted by stent placement, advancing anteriorly into the PD through the pancreatic tract. The rendezvous technique is carried out by using a guidewire through the papilla or anastomotic site for retrograde stent insertion. In terms of EUS-guided PD stenting, 11 case reports totaling 75 patients (35 normal anatomy, 40 altered anatomy) have been published. The technical success rate was greater than 70%. Early adverse events, including severe hematoma and severe pancreatitis,occurred in seven (63.6%) of 11 reports. Regarding the rendezvous technique, 12 case reports totaling 52 patients (22 normal anatomy, 30 altered anatomy) have been published. The technical success rate ranged from 25% to 100%. It was 48% in one report that involved more than 20 cases. Once stents were placed, all patients became free of symptoms. Early mild adverse events occurred in four (36.4%) of 11 reports. In conclusion, although it can be risky because of possible serious or even fatal adverse events, including pancreatic juice leakage, perforation and severe acute pancreatitis, EUS-PD access seems to be promising for treating symptomatic pancreatic diseases caused by PD stricture and pancreaticoenterostomy stricture.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic duct drainage after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with malignant and benign pancreatic duct obstructions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided pancreatic drainage has been advocated as a rescue treatment for management of patients in whom retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) is technically unsuccessful. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of EUS-guided drainage for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 17 EUS-guided PD drainage (EUS-PD) procedures were carried out in 14 patients (age: mean 64.6 years, range 54-81 years, eight men).

RESULTS

The rendezvous technique was successful in 11 of 17 procedures (64.7%). Three of five patients with an unsuccessful rendezvous technique successfully underwent EUS-PD stenting (7-Fr plastic stent [two cases], 5-Fr endoscopic nasobiliary drainage [one case]). In the two remaining patients, puncture and pancreatography were successful; however, antegrade passage of the guidewire failed.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided decompression of PD is a feasible and effective treatment for the management of symptomatic high-pressure PD due to stricture of the PD and/or stenotic pancreatodigestive anastomosis. However, this procedure is technically challenging, has a high rate of complications, and should be done only at tertiary-care centers.

Initial experience with EUS-guided cholangiopancreatography for biliary and pancreatic duct drainage: a Spanish national survey

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided cholangiopancreatography (ESCP) allows transmural access to biliopancreatic ducts when ERCP fails. Data regarding technical details, safety, and outcomes of ESCP are still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of ESCP in community and referral centers at the initial development phase of this procedure, to identify the ESCP stages with higher risk of failure, and to evaluate the influence on outcomes of factors related to the endoscopist.

DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective study.

SETTING

Public health system hospitals with experience in ESCP in Spain.

PATIENTS

A total of 125 patients underwent ESCP in 19 hospitals, with an experience of <20 procedures.

INTERVENTION

ESCP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical success and complication rates in the initial phase of implantation of ESCP are described. The influence of technical characteristics and endoscopist features on outcomes was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients from 19 hospitals were included. Biliary ESCP was performed in 106 patients and pancreatic ESCP was performed in 19. Technical success was achieved in 84 patients (67.2%) followed by clinical success in 79 (63.2%). Complications occurred in 29 patients (23.2%). Unsuccessful manipulation of the guidewire was responsible for 68.2% of technical failures, and 58.6% of complications were related to problems with the transmural fistula.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of ESCP during its implantation stage reached a technical success rate of 67.2%, with a complication rate of 23.2%. Intraductal manipulation of the guidewire seems to be the most difficult stage of the procedure.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: endosonographic cholangiopancreatography

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard approach to gaining access to the biliary and pancreatic ductal systems. However, in a small subset of cases anatomic constraints imposed by disease states or abnormal anatomy preclude ductal access via conventional ERCP. With the advent of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), with its unique capabilities of accurate imaging and ductal access via transmural puncture, there is now an alternative to surgical and percutaneous radiologic approaches in situations inaccessible to ERCP: endosonographic cholangiopancreatography (ESCP). This article reviews the background, technical details, published experience, and role of ESCP in clinical practice.

Therapeutic endoscopy for stenotic pancreatodigestive tract anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatodigestive tract anastomotic site stenosis is a problematic complication after pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of endoscopic treatments for a stenotic pancreatodigestive tract anastomosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Endoscopic units of a university-affiliated hospital and a general hospital.

PATIENTS

Fourteen patients with recurrent pancreatitis (n=10) and pancreatic fluid fistula (n=4) after anatomy-altering surgery with pancreatodigestive tract anastomosis.

INTERVENTIONS

The initial ERCP included obtaining a pancreatogram, introducing a 0.025-inch guidewire through the anastomosis, along which a 5F plastic stent or nasopancreatic drain was inserted. If initial ERCP failed, we attempted EUS-guided rendezvous, with a guidewire passed antegrade from the main pancreatic duct across the stenotic anastomosis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Rates of successful intervention and clinical relief.

RESULTS

The initial intervention was successfully achieved in 6 of 14 patients (38%). Of the 6 patients with successful therapeutic endoscopies, 4 (66.7%) and 2 (25.0%) had undergone a previous pancreatogastrostomy or pancreatojejunostomy, respectively. Eight patients with an initial unsuccessful intervention successfully underwent a second intervention using an EUS-guided or US-guided rendezvous method. Finally, stenosis was relieved in all patients with either the retrograde placement of a pancreatic duct stent across the stenosis of an anastomotic site or antegrade percutaneous bougienage of the stenotic anastomosis.

LIMITATIONS

Small sample size and lack of control patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment of stenotic pancreatodigestive tract anastomosis for transanastomotic pancreatic juice drainage is safe and feasible.

Pancreatic antegrade needle-knife (PANK) for treatment of symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction in Whipple patients (with video)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic decompression of symptomatic main pancreatic duct (MPD) dilation in Whipple patients is often difficult because of stenosis of the pancreaticojejunal (PJ) anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and procedural safety of the pancreatic antegrade needle-knife (PANK) technique, with the goal of restoring antegrade MPD flow, when endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) and EUS-guided rendezvous fail.

SETTING

Tertiary care center.

DESIGN

Retrospective series.

PATIENTS

Three patients with symptomatic MPD dilation refractory to ERP and EUS-guided rendezvous.

INTERVENTIONS

Under EUS guidance, a 19-gauge echo-needle was used to gain access to the dilated MPD and a Jagwire advanced. After failed attempts at antegrade guidewire passage across the PJ stenosis, deep transgastric MPD access was achieved via a Soehendra stent retriever and balloon dilation. Careful antegrade needle-knife of the stenotic site was performed. A long pancreatic stent spanning the jejunum, MPD, and gastric access site was placed. Four to 8 weeks later, this stent was upsized and converted to a PJ stent, which in turn was removed 4 weeks thereafter.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical feasibility and complications.

RESULTS

All 3 patients successfully underwent the PANK procedure. Pre- and post-MRCP studies showed the mean MPD diameter decreased 60% from 8.3 mm to 3.6 mm (mean follow-up 8 months). At 24-month follow-up, all 3 patients experienced decreased or resolved pain without further need for MPD intervention.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study with small numbers.

CONCLUSIONS

When ERP and EUS rendezvous fail, the PANK procedure using a staged stent strategy seems to be an effective means of MPD decompression.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound for biliary and pancreatic disorders

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has greatly expanded since the first clinical examination performed nearly 30 years ago. The introduction of linear instruments allowed tissue sampling (Kulesza and Eltoum Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1248-1254, 2007; Levy and Wiersema Gastrointest Endosc 62:417-426, 2005) and therapeutic interventions applications, including celiac plexus and ganglia blockade and neurolysis (Wiersema and Wiersema Gastrointest Endosc 44:656-662, 1996; Levy and Wiersema Gastroenterol Clin North Am, 35:153-165, 2006; Levy et al. Am J Gastroenterol 103:98-103, 2008), pancreatic fluid drainage (Lopes et al. Arq Gastroenterol 45:17-21, 2008; Norton et al. Mayo Clin Proc 76:794-798, 2001; Kruger et al. Gastrointest Endosc 63:409-416, 2006; Seifert et al.: Endoscopy 32:255-259, 2000), cholecystenterostomy (Kwan et al. Gastrointest Endosc 66:582-586, 2007), and delivery of cytotoxic agents (eg, chemotherapy, radioactive seeds, and gene therapy) (Chang et al.: Cancer 88:1325-1335, 2000; Chang Endoscopy 38(Suppl 1):S88-S93, 2006). The continued need to develop less invasive alternatives to surgical and interventional radiologic therapies drove the development of EUS-guided methods for biliary and pancreatic intervention. This article reviews existing data and focuses on established and emerging EUS techniques for accessing and draining the bile and pancreatic ducts.

Endosonography-guided cholangiopancreatography as a salvage drainage procedure for obstructed biliary and pancreatic ducts

Endoscopic ultrasound allows transmural access to the bile or pancreatic ducts and subsequent contrast injection to provide ductal drainage under fluoroscopy using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-based techniques. Differing patient specifics and operator techniques result in six possible variant approaches to this procedure, known as endosonography-guided cholangiopancreatography (ESCP). ESCP has been in clinical use for a decade now, with over 300 cases reported. It has become established as a salvage procedure after failed ERCP in the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Its role in the management of clinically severe chronic/relapsing pancreatitis remains under scrutiny. This review aims to clarify the concepts underlying the use of ESCP and to provide technical tips and a detailed step-by-step procedural description.