Comparison of percutaneous vs endoscopic drainage in the management of pancreatic fluid collections: A prospective cohort study

Lumen-apposing metal stents versus traditional self-expanding metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic drainage has become the preferred treatment for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). There is still a lack of reliable evidence to prove which metal stent is the best choice for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of PFCs. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) compared to traditional self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in meta-analysis.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to July 15, 2023. Relevant publications that compared LAMS with traditional SEMS for drainage of patients' PFCs under EUS-guidance were included. This meta-analysis assessed endpoints using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 14.0 statistical software.

RESULT

Nine citations comprising 707 patients with PFCs were included. The clinical success rate of LAMS tended to be higher than that of SEMS (RR = 1.07, 95%CI [1.00, 1.15], P = 0.05). LAMS had a lower technical success rate (RR = 0.97, 95%CI [0.94, 0.99], P = 0.02) and faster procedure time (minutes) (MD =  - 24.29, 95%CI [- 25.59, - 22.99], P < 0.00001) compared to SEMS. In addition, LAMS had fewer overall adverse events (RR = 0.64, 95%CI [0.48, 0.87], P = 0.004). For specific adverse events, LAMS had fewer migration (RR = 0.37, 95%CI [0.19, 0.72], P = 0.003), occlusion (RR = 0.43, 95%CI [0.22, 0.82], P = 0.01) and infection (RR = 0.38, 95%CI [0.20, 0.70], P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in bleeding and perforation between the two stents. For hospital stay (days), LAMS group was similar to SEMS group (MD =  - 3.34, 95%CI [- 7.71, - 1.03], P = 0.13). Regarding recurrence, LAMS group was fewer than SEMS group (RR = 0.41, 95%CI [0.21, 0.78], P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Compared to traditional SEMS, LAMS has a higher clinical success rate, faster procedure time, fewer adverse events, similar hospital stay and lower recurrence rate in EUS-guided drainage of PFCs. LAMS is a good choice with a high technical success rate over 95%, and using a shorter length or "one-step" operation can further improve it. Richer placement experience is required for LAMS placement under EUS-guidance.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic drainage versus percutaneous drainage for pancreatic fluid collection; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) are debris or fluid of the pancreas that needs to be drained out. This may result from surgery or necrotizing pancreatitis. This meta-analysis compared the outcomes of PFC through endoscopic and percutaneous interventions.

METHODS

A medical database was searched up to June 2022, comparing the outcomes of endoscopic drainage (ED) and percutaneous drainage (PD) for the PFC. Eligible studies reporting clinical and technical success and adverse events were selected.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with 1170 patients were included for meta-analysis, of which 543 patients underwent ED and 627 underwent PD. The odd ratio (OR) of technical success was 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31, 2.1) and clinical success was in the favor of the ED group at OR 2.23 (95% CI 1.45, 3.41). Adverse events OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.27, 1.39) and stent migration OR 0.61 (95% CI 0.10, 3.88) were the same in both groups, but hospital stay pooled mean difference of 15.02 days (95% CI 9.86, 20.18), mortality OR 0.24 (95% CI 0.09, 0.67), and re-interventions OR 0.25 (95% CI 0.16, 0.40) favored ED.

CONCLUSIONS

ED is safe and efficient for PFC with higher clinical success, lower mortality rate, hospital stay, and re-interventions compared with PD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Pancreatic Cancer Biopsy Modalities: Comparing Insurance Status, Length of Stay, and Hospital Complications Based on Percutaneous, Endoscopic, and Surgical Biopsy Methods

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is diagnosed histologically through percutaneous biopsy (PB), endoscopic biopsy (EB), or surgical biopsy (SB). Factors and outcomes associated with method type are not clearly understood. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between insurance status, length of hospital stay (LOS), complications, and different pancreatic biopsy modalities.

STUDY

The 2001-2013 database from the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for those with pancreatic cancer who underwent biopsies using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. Data regarding insurance status, hospital stay, demographics, and complications were analyzed using chi-square and multivariate analysis with α < 0.001.

RESULTS

A total of 824,162 patients with pancreatic cancer were identified. Uninsured and Medicaid patients were more likely to get PB compared to SB. Patients were more likely to have acute renal failure (ARF) with an EB compared to SB. Patients were more likely to have a urinary tract infection (UTI) with EB or PB compared to SB. All biopsy types were less likely to have pneumonia; pancreatitis was more prevalent in EB compared to PB and SB.

CONCLUSIONS

Uninsured and Medicaid patients were most likely to have a PB compared to EB despite unclear indications which may represent an underlying discrepancy in healthcare utilization. EB patients had the shortest LOS while SB patients stayed three more days; those who underwent a combination of biopsies had the greatest LOS. Patients with EB were more likely to develop ARF, UTI, and pancreatitis than SB, possibly attributed to the advanced nature of endoscopic ultrasound. It is important to establish appropriate algorithm contributors to guide decision-making.

Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: An Evidence-based Approach

Managing pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) remains a challenge for many clinicians. Recently, significant progress has been made in the therapy of PFCs, including improvements in technology and devices, as well as in the development of minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, many of which are proven less traumatic when compared with surgical options and more efficacious when compared with percutaneous techniques. This review will explore latest developments in the management of PFCs and how they incorporate into the current treatment algorithm.

Endoscopic versus percutaneous drainage for pancreatic fluid collection after pancreatic surgery: An up-to-date meta-analysis and systematic review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUSD) and percutaneous drainage (PD) have reportedly been used for postoperative pancreatic fluid collection (PFC). However, there is limited evidence regarding safety and efficacy in a comparison of EUSD and PD for postoperative PFC. We conducted a search of the databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov, to August 2020. Studies comparing EUSD and PD for postoperative PFC were included. The outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and recurrence of PFC.We included a total of 6 studies involving 247 patients in the current study. There was no significant difference between EUSD and PD in terms of technical success (odds ratio [OR] = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-3.12; p = 0.94) and clinical success (OR = 1.36; 95% CI: 0.68-2.72; p = 0.39). PFC recurrence and adverse events were similar between the two groups (OR = 1.82; 95% CI: 0.75-4.37; p = 0.18 and OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.31-1.92; p = 0.58, respectively).This meta-analysis confirmed that EUSD has comparable safety and efficacy to PD for postoperative PFC. Additional high-quality studies are required in the future.

Endoscopic drainage versus percutaneous drainage for the management of infected walled-off necrosis: a comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative data on percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) vs EUS-guided drainage (EUS-D) for management of symptomatic walled-off-necrosis (WON), specially infected WON with/without organ failure(OF) is limited.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic WON were divided into two groups of PCD and EUS-D, depending on the modality of drainage. Resolution of OF, adverse events, and other outcome measures were recorded. The two modalities were compared among infected WON sub-cohort and also degree of solid component (SC).

RESULTS

218 patients (175 males; 80.3%) were included who underwent either PCD (n = 102) or EUS-D (n = 116). Clinical success was significantly higher in the EUS-D group (92.1% vs 64.6%; p < 0.0001) and even for infected WON (n = 128) (p = 0.004), with higher (p = 0.007) and faster (p < 0.0001) OF resolution. Other outcome measures including mortality were significantly higher in the PCD group. Among subgroups, PCD with >40% SC had the worst clinical success/OF resolution rates, while EUS-D with <40% SC had the best outcomes.

CONCLUSION

EUS-D should be preferred over PCD in the management of WON, infected or otherwise, for higher clinical success, and higher/faster resolution of OF. PCD should be avoided in WON with>40% SC.

Endoscopic cystogastrostomy: Still a viable option in children with symptomatic pancreatic fluid collection

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic transmural drainage is the preferred method of drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) in adults; however, there is scant literature in children. We analyzed our experience of 33 endoscopic cystogastrostomies done in 29 children to find its efficacy and safety.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the prospectively collected database of 31 consecutive children (<18 years) who underwent endoscopic cystogastrostomy from June 2013 to December 2017. The procedure was done using the standard technique with an adult duodenoscope. Data related to clinical details, technical success, complications and follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

The median age was 14 (3-17) years (22 males). Indications were early satiety in 28 (90%), vomiting in 15 (48%), and duodenal obstruction and infected pseudocyst in 2 children each. Etiology includes acute pancreatitis 22, post-traumatic 4 and chronic pancreatitis 5. The procedure was successful in 29 of 31 (93.5%) children with no mortality. Adverse events happened in four cases (12.9%); two infections, another with bleeding and another with pneumoperitonium, both of which resolved spontaneously. Incidents (minor bleeding) were noted in 6 (19%). Stents were removed in 26 (90%) after 12 (7-20) weeks and got spontaneously migrated out in 3 (10%) cases. Over a median follow-up of 26 (5-48) months, 26 (90%) had no recurrence of pseudocyst and 3 (10%) had recurrence of a small, asymptomatic pseudocyst.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic cystogastrostomy is a safe and effective method of draining bulging PFCs in children. The procedure carries acceptable morbidity with minimal recurrence. In younger children it may be the preferred method of drainage of PFCs.