Initial evaluation of a new plastic pancreatic duct stent for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided placement

Technical review of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage/anastomosis and trans-endosonographically created route procedures for the treatment of pancreatic diseases

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic duct drainage includes two procedures: EUS-guided drainage/anastomosis (EUS-D/A) and trans-papillary drainage with EUS-assisted pancreatic rendezvous. EUS-guided pancreatogastrostomy is the most common EUS-D/A procedure and is recommended as a salvage procedure in cases in which endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails or is difficult. However, initial EUS-D/A is performed in patients with surgically altered anatomy at our institution. It is one of the most difficult interventional EUS procedures and has a high incidence of adverse events. The technical difficulties differ according to etiology, and the incidence of adverse events varies between initial EUS-D/A and subsequent trans-endosonographically/EUS-guided created route procedures. Hence, it is important to meticulously prepare a procedure based on the patient's condition and the available devices. The technical difficulties in EUS-D/A include: (1) determination of the puncture point, (2) selection of a puncture needle and guidewire, (3) guidewire manipulation, and (4) dilation of the puncture route and stenting. Proper technical procedures are important to increase the success rate and reduce the incidence and severity of adverse events. The complexity of EUS-D/A is also contingent on the severity of pancreatic fibrosis and stricture. In post-pancreatectomy cases, determination of the puncture site is important for success because of the remnant pancreas. Trans-endosonographically/EUS-guided created route procedures following initial EUS-D/A are also important for achieving the treatment goal. This article focuses on effective strategies for initial EUS-D/A, based on the etiology and condition of the pancreas. We mainly discuss EUS-D/A, including its indications, techniques, and success-enhancing strategies.

Pancreatic duct stents

Pancreatic duct stenting using endoscopy or surgery is widely used for the management of benign and malignant pancreatic diseases. Endoscopic pancreatic stents are mainly used to relieve pain caused by chronic pancreatitis and pancreas divisum, and to treat pancreatic duct disruption and stenotic pancreaticointestinal anastomosis after surgery. They are also used to prevent postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and postoperative pancreatic fistula, treat pancreatic cancer, and locate radiolucent stones. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasonography and balloon enteroscopy, and newly designed stents have broadened the indications for pancreatic duct stenting. In this review we outlined the types, insertion procedures, efficacy, and complications of endoscopic pancreatic duct stent placement, and summarized the applications of pancreatic duct stents in surgery.

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.

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.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure has resulted in a paradigm shift toward endoscopic management of disease states that previously required percutaneous or surgical approaches. The past few years have seen additional techniques and devices that have enabled endoscopists to expand its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Some of these techniques initially were reported more than a decade ago; however, with further device development and refinement in techniques there is potential for expanding the application of these techniques and new technologies to a broader group of interventional gastroenterologists. Lack of formalized training, devices, and prospective data regarding their use in addition to a scarcity of guidelines on implementation of these technologies into clinical practice are contributing factors impeding the growth of the field of interventional EUS. In April 2019, the American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology conducted its annual Tech Summit and a key session focused on interventional EUS. This article is a White Paper generated from the conference, discusses the published literature pertaining to the topic of interventional EUS, and outlines a proposed framework for the implementation of interventional EUS techniques into clinical practice. Three primary areas of interventional EUS are addressed: (1) EUS-guided access; (2) EUS-guided tumor ablation; and (3) endohepatology. There was general agreement among participants on several key components. The introduction of these novel interventions requires better tools, more data on safety/outcomes, and improved training for endoscopists. Participants also agreed that widespread implementation and use of these techniques will require support from Gastrointestinal Societies and other key stakeholders including payers. Continued work by the Gastrointestinal Societies and manufacturers to provide training programs, appropriate equipment/work environments, and policies that motivate endoscopists to adopt new techniques is essential for growing the field of interventional EUS.

Which Are the Most Suitable Stents for Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions provide easy access to structures adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract, effectively targeting them for therapeutic purposes. They play an important role in the management of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) and bile duct (BD) and pancreatic duct (PD) drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or gallbladder (GB) drainage. Specially designed stents and delivery systems for EUS-guided transluminal interventions allow various new applications and improve the efficacy and safety of these procedures. In fact, EUS-guided drainage has emerged as the treatment of choice for the management of PFC, and recent innovations such as fully covered metal stents (including lumen-apposing metal stents) have improved outcomes in patients with walled-off necrosis. Similarly, EUS-guided BD and PD drainage with specially designed stents can be beneficial for patients with failed ERCP due to an inaccessible papilla, gastric outlet obstruction, or surgically altered anatomy. EUS-guided GB drainage is also performed using dedicated stents in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not fit for surgery. Although the field of dedicated stents for interventional EUS is rapidly advancing with increasing innovations, the debate on the most appropriate stent for EUS-guided drainage has resurfaced. Furthermore, some important questions remain unaddressed, such as which stent improves clinical outcomes and safety in EUS-guided drainage. Herein, the current status and problems of the available stents are reviewed, including the applicable indications, long-term clinical outcomes, comparison between each stent, and their future prospects.

International consensus guidelines on interventional endoscopy in chronic pancreatitis. Recommendations from the working group for the international consensus guidelines for chronic pancreatitis in collaboration with the International Association of Pancreatology, the American Pancreatic Association, the Japan Pancreas Society, and European Pancreatic Club

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

This paper is part of the international consensus guidelines on chronic pancreatitis, presenting for interventional endoscopy.

METHODS

An international working group with experts on interventional endoscopy evaluated 26 statements generated from evidence on 9 clinically relevant questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to evaluate the level of evidence. To determine the level of agreement, a nine-point Likert scale was used for voting on the statements.

RESULTS

Strong consensus was obtained for 15 statements relating to nine questions including the recommendation that endoscopic intervention should be offered to patients with persistent severe pain but not to those without pain. Endoscopic decompression of the pancreatic duct could be used for immediate pain relief, and then offered surgery if this fails or needs repeated endoscopy. Endoscopic drainage is preferred for portal-splenic vein thrombosis and pancreatic fistula. A plastic stent should be placed and replaced 2-3 months later after insertion. Endoscopic extraction is indicated for stone fragments remaining after ESWL. Interventional treatment should be performed for symptomatic/complicated pancreatic pseudocysts. Endoscopic treatment is recommended for bile duct obstruction and afterwards surgery if this fails or needs repeated endoscopy. Surgery may be offered if there is significant calcification and/or mass of the pancreatic head. Percutaneous endovascular treatment is preferred for hemosuccus pancreaticus. Surgical treatment is recommended for duodenal stenosis due to chronic pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This international expert consensus guideline provides evidenced-based statements concerning indications and key aspects for interventional endoscopy in the management of patients with chronic pancreatitis.

Recent innovations in therapeutic endoscopy for pancreatobiliary diseases

The development of endoscopic treatment for pancreatobiliary diseases in recent years is remarkable. In addition to conventional transpapillary treatments under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), new endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapy is being developed and implemented. On the other hand, due to the development/improvement of various devices such as new metal stents, a new therapeutic strategy under ERCP is also advocated. The present review focuses on recent advances in the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts, walled-off necrosis, malignant biliary strictures, and benign biliary/pancreatic duct strictures.

Ex vivo assessment of anchoring force of covered biflanged metal stent and covered self-expandable metal stent for interventional endoscopic ultrasound

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage using a covered biflanged metal stent (CBFMS) and a conventional tubular biliary covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS) has recently been performed by EUS experts. However, appropriate traction force of the sheath to prevent the migration during stent deployment is well unknown. Herein, we assessed the anchoring force (AF) of the distal flange in CBFMSs and CSEMSs.

METHODS

The AFs of four CBFMSs (Stents AX, NG, PL, and SX) and six CSEMSs (Stents BF, BP, EG, HN, SP, and WF) were compared in an ex vivo setting. We assessed the AF produced by each stent using an EUS-guided transmural drainage model and an EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy model consisting of sheet-shaped specimens of the stomach, gelatin gel, and gelatin tubes.

RESULTS

For CBFMSs, the maximum AF of Stent AX was significantly higher than those of Stents PL and SX (P < 0.05) in the porcine model. In the gelatin series, all stents except Stent NG showed a nearly similar AF. For CSEMSs, Stents HN, EG, BF, and WF showed gradual AF elevation in the porcine stomach. Stents SP and BP showed a lower AF than the other four stents. For the gelatin setting, the maximum AF of Stents HN, EG, and WF was higher than those of the other stents regardless of the type of specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

The significance of the AF and traction distance according to the property of various CBFMSs and CSEMSs could be elucidated using ex vivo models.

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.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel

OBJECTIVES

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures.

METHODS

Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question.

RESULTS

A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Antegrade pancreatoscopy via EUS-guided pancreaticogastrostomy allows removal of obstructive pancreatic duct stones

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an effective treatment for pancreaticolithiasis, including use of pancreatoscopy for intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy (IEHL). Pancreatoscopy is often limited by a small-caliber downstream pancreatic duct as well as an unstable pancreatoscope position within the pancreatic head. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (EUS-PG) has been developed as a method to relieve ductal obstruction when retrograde access fails. The current study describes pancreatoscopy via EUS-PG, a novel method for managing obstructing pancreaticolithiasis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From September 2017 to January 2018, patients who underwent EUS-PG followed by antegrade pancreatoscopy via PG were identified. Endoscopy reports, medical charts and relevant laboratory data were reviewed and recorded.

RESULTS

Five patients underwent EUS-PG and antegrade pancreatoscopy via PG during the study period; clinical success rate was 100 %. There were no significant adverse events during the procedure or follow up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatoscopy via PG for IEHL is safe and effective for treating obstructing pancreaticolithiasis in patients who have previously failed ERCP or in clinical scenarios were ERCP is not possible.

Evaluation of a new stent for EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage: long-term follow-up outcome

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has been reported as an alternative for failed conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, there are few dedicated devices for EUS-PD. Recently, we have developed a new plastic stent dedicated to EUS-PD and have conducted a feasibility study to evaluate its efficacy. In the current study, we evaluated the long-term efficacy of this new plastic stent.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Thirty patients (61 ± 14.3 years old, 14 men) with acute recurrent pancreatitis caused by a stricture in the main pancreatic duct (MPD) or stenotic pancreatoenterostomy were treated at our institution using our recently developed 7Fr plastic stent between August 2013 and April 2017.

RESULTS

 The stent was placed successfully in all patients (30/30) and early clinical success was achieved in all of them. Early adverse events (AEs) occurred in seven patients (23.3 %), namely, self-limited abdominal pain (n = 5), mild pancreatitis (n = 1), and bleeding which required transcatheter arterial embolization (n = 1). Two patients died of primary disease and three were lost to follow-up. The remaining 25 patients were followed up after initial EUS-PD for a median of 23 months (range, 6 - 44 months). Twenty patients required regular stent exchange (3 times; range, 1 - 12 times). Spontaneous stent dislodgement was observed in six patients. Four patients wanted their stents removed 1 year after the initial intervention. Twelve patients (48 %) had regular stent exchange 1 year after the initial intervention. Three patients converted to standard transpapillary pancreatic duct stenting by conventional ERCP. Finally, nine patients (36 %) had complete stent removal either intentionally or by spontaneous dislodgement without any symptoms.

CONCLUSION

 The new plastic stent for EUS-PD was associated with not only short-term technical success but also long-term clinical success in the majority of patients evaluated in this study.

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.

Safety and efficacy of ultra-tapered mechanical dilator for EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy and pancreatic duct drainage compared with electrocautery dilator (with video)

Background and Objectives

Successful tract dilation is one of the most important steps to accomplish EUS-guided drainage. Although mechanical dilation is safer than electrocautery dilation, no dedicated mechanical dilator (MD) is currently available. Thus, we developed a new ultra-tapered MD for EUS-guided drainage. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and usefulness of this novel MD.

Patients and Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) or EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) at two centers were included in the study. Dilation of the needle tract was initially performed with a diathermic sheath or the ultra-tapered MD. Technical success and adverse events were assessed.

Results

Sixty-four patients (mean age = 68.9 ± 13.8 years, 35 men) underwent EUS-HGS (49 patients) and EUS-PD (15 patients). Thirty-three patients were included in the cautery dilator (CD) group and 31 in the ultra-tapered MD group. Initial dilation of the puncture site was achieved in 95.3% (61/64): 97% (32/33) of the patients in the CD group and 93.3% (29/31) of the patients in the MD group (P < 0.05). Adverse events were observed in 14 patients: abdominal pain in 8 patients and bleeding in 6 patients at the puncture site. All bleedings occurred in the CD group and there was no patient in whom bleeding occurred after EUS intervention in the MD group (P = 0.04).

Conclusion

The novel ultra-tapered MD designed for interventional EUS appears to be safe and useful as it reduced postprocedure bleeding with a high technical success rate compared with the conventional electrocautery dilator.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Techniques for Accessing and Draining the Biliary System and the Pancreatic Duct

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails to decompress the biliary system or the pancreatic duct, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary or pancreatic access and drainage can be used. Data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. The outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage seem equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP, whereas only retrospective studies are available for pancreatic duct drainage. In this article, revision of the technical and clinical status and the current evidence of interventional EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage are presented.

Current status of interventional endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is being used increasingly in the management of pancreatic fluid collection, biliary and pancreatic duct drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, drainage of the gallbladder, and other conditions. The role of interventional EUS is rapidly expanding and new interventions are continuously emerging. The development of devices could be a major breakthrough in the field of interventional EUS. New devices would enable the expansion of its role even further and prompt its widespread use in clinical practice. This review focuses on the current status of interventional EUS, especially highlighting the topics that are presently drawing the interest of endoscopists.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions

Drainage of obstructed bile duct and pancreatic duct under endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance has evolved into viable techniques suitable for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or altered surgical anatomy. One of the major advantages of EUS guidance is the possibility of multiple access points depending upon patient and ductal anatomy. Unlike ERCP, an approachable papilla is not a requisite for successful EUS-guided biliary or pancreatic ductal drainage. Moreover, as the access is away from the papilla, there is the possibility of reduced pancreatitis. A variety of procedures have become available for EUS-guided drainage, and it is important to develop standard terminology and procedural details. EUS-specific stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents have recently become available, and are likely to impact the outcomes of these procedures. Available data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. Success rate appears to be low for pancreatic duct drainage because of a variety of reasons. Outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage appear equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage appears promising for patients requiring gallbladder drainage but unfit for surgery. Further large controlled studies are needed to evaluate the exact role of these procedures.

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.

Interventional EUS Using a Flexible 19-Gauge Needle: An International Multicenter Experience in 162 Patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To facilitate access for interventional EUS, flexible (nitinol) 19-G needles have been introduced to permit needle puncture even when the echoendoscope is in an angulated position, such as in the second part of the duodenum. The aims of the study were to evaluate the performance of a flexible 19-G needle during interventional EUS procedures and compare outcomes when the echoendoscope was in the straight versus angulated position.

METHODS

A retrospective review was undertaken of 162 consecutive patients that underwent a variety of interventional EUS procedures with a flexible 19-G needle across five centers. Patients were subdivided into categories (straight or angulated) depending on the echoendoscope position used for obtaining access to the area of interest (Fig. 1). Fig. 1 Flexible 19-G needle design. a The needle is able to exit the sheath despite the rotated position. b The needle beveled needle tip RESULTS: In the entire cohort, needle-specific technical success was achieved in 93.2 %, procedural success in 85.2 %, and overall clinical success in 76.5 % of cases at a mean follow-up of 3.1 months. Needle-specific technical success was similar between the straight and angulated cohorts (94.0 vs. 91.2 %, p = 0.74). Procedural success (86.7 vs. 77.2 %, p = 0.05), and rate of clinical success was similar between the cohorts (83.3 vs. 86.4 %, p = 0.79), respectively. Overall adverse events were noted in 14.2 % of patients with no difference between the straight and angulated cohorts (p = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates equivalent technical success, clinical success and safety of using a flexible 19-G needle in straight and angulated endoscope positions for interventional EUS. Therefore, a flexible needle may be considered where an angulated echoendoscope position is encountered.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy in Surgically Altered Anatomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become the mainstay of therapy for pancreatobiliary diseases. While ERCP is safe and highly effective in the general population, the procedure remains challenging or impossible in patients with surgically altered anatomy (SAA). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) allows transmural access to the bile or pancreatic duct (PD) prior to ductal drainage using ERCP-based techniques. Also known as endosonography-guided cholangiopancreatography (ESCP), the procedure provides multiple advantages over overtube-assisted enteroscopy ERCP or percutaneous or surgical approaches. However, the procedure should only be performed by endoscopists experienced in both EUS and ERCP and with the proper tools. In this review, various EUS-guided diagnostic and therapeutic drainage techniques in patients with SAA are examined. Detailed step-by-step procedural descriptions, technical tips, feasibility, and safety data are also discussed.

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: The Basics of When and How to Perform EUS-Guided Pancreatic Duct Interventions

Despite the advances in endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) remains a technically challenging procedure. Technical success rates are greater than 70%; however, the average rate of adverse events is nearly 20%, which increases to 55% when stent migration is included. Until recently, a significant difficulty with this technique was the absence of dedicated devices. Proper patient selection is of utmost importance, and EUS-PDD should be reserved for patients who have failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Furthermore, EUS-PDD must be performed by experienced endoscopists who are familiar with the technique. The most common indications include chronic pancreatitis induced strictures and stones, disconnected pancreatic ducts, inaccessible ampulla, and post-surgical altered anatomy. This manuscript will review the accessories used, techniques employed, and published literature reporting outcomes as well as adverse events regarding EUS-PDD.

Gastro-pancreaticojejunostomy for treatment of pancreatic ductal obstruction in a post-Whipple procedure patient

We report a case of a woman with a medical history of classic Whipple surgery who underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic drainage due to smouldering acute pancreatitis secondary to an obstructing pancreatic ductal stone. A gastro-pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis was created anterogradely, with dilation of both the anastomoses in the same procedure, with subsequent decompression of the pancreatic duct. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) is often impossible to perform in patients with post-Whipple procedure anatomy due to inaccessibility to the pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis. EUS-guided pancreatic drainage may be offered in these patients in whom the pancreatic duct cannot be accessed at ERP. It has been used as a platform for access to and drainage of the pancreatic duct either by rendezvous or transmural drainage. However, only one of four patients achieve successful completion of the rendezvous procedure. There are limited data regarding safety and long-term outcome of this procedure, as well as scant guidelines on the optimal time for leaving stents in place. We believe definitive endoscopic therapy should be attempted, whenever possible, after relief of obstruction. In our case, we expect that stent occlusion is inevitable and that long-term drainage is possible due to drainage occurring between the stent and the stone.

Outcome of stenting in biliary and pancreatic benign and malignant diseases: A comprehensive review

Endoscopic stenting has become a widely method for the management of various malignant and benign pancreatico-biliary disorders. Biliary and pancreatic stents are devices made of plastic or metal used primarily to establish patency of an obstructed bile or pancreatic duct and may also be used to treat biliary or pancreatic leaks, pancreatic fluid collections and to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. In this review, relevant literature search and expert opinions have been used to evaluate the outcome of stenting in biliary and pancreatic benign and malignant diseases.