Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage for patients with symptomatic obstruction and enlargement of the pancreatic duct

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.

Current status and future perspectives for endoscopic treatment of local complications in chronic pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis is a progressive disease characterized by irregular fibrosis, cellular infiltration, and parenchymal loss within the pancreas. Chronic pancreatitis treatment includes lifestyle modifications based on disease etiology, dietary adjustments appropriate for each stage and condition, drug therapy, endoscopic treatments, and surgical treatments. Although surgical treatments of symptomatic chronic pancreatitis provide good pain relief, endoscopic therapies are recommended as the first-line treatment because they are minimally invasive. In recent years, endoscopic therapy has emerged as an alternative treatment method to surgery for managing local complications in patients with chronic pancreatitis. For pancreatic stone removal, a combination of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and endoscopic extraction is used. For refractory pancreatic duct stones, intracorporeal fragmentation techniques, such as pancreatoscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy and laser lithotripsy, offer additional options. Interventional endoscopic ultrasound has become the primary treatment modality for pancreatic pseudocysts, except in the absence of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. This review focuses on the current status of endoscopic therapies for common local complications of chronic pancreatitis, including updated information in the past few years.

Endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis in the treatment of symptoms associated with inflammatory diseases of the pancreas

BACKGROUND

The outflow of pancreatic juice into the duodenum is often impaired in pancreatic inflammatory diseases. The basis of interventional treatment in these cases is anatomical transpapillary access of the main pancreatic duct during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which ensures the physiological outflow of pancreatic juice into the lumen of the digestive tract. However, in some patients, anatomical changes prevent transpapillary drainage of the main pancreatic duct. Surgery is the treatment of choice in such cases.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes of all patients with acute or chronic pancreatitis who underwent endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis under EUS guidance in 2018-2023 at the Department of General, Gastroenterological and Oncological Surgery, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.

RESULTS

In 9 patients [7 men, 2 women; mean age 53.45 (36-66) years], endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis under EUS guidance was performed because of the lack of transpapillary access during ERCP. Narrowing of the main pancreatic duct at the head of the pancreas was observed in 4/9 patients (44.44%). Pancreatic fragmentation (disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome) was diagnosed in 3/9 patients (33.33%). In 2/9 patients (22.22%), narrowing of the pancreatoenteric anastomosis was observed after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Technical success of endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy was observed in 8/9 patients (88.89%). Endotherapeutic complications were observed in 2/9 patients (22.22%). Clinical success was achieved in 8/9 patients (88.89%). The mean follow-up period was 451 (42-988) d. Long-term success of endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis was achieved in 7/9 patients (77.78%).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy under EUS guidance is an effective and safe treatment method, especially in the absence of transpapillary access to the main pancreatic duct.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage: a comprehensive state of the art review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) has traditionally been the standard modality for pancreatic endotherapy. However, in certain situations, failure of retrograde ductal access may warrant an alternative modality of drainage. This can occur in various settings like difficult and/or surgically altered anatomy or duodenal obstruction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a relatively newer addition to the armamentarium for endoscopic access to the PD.

AREAS COVERED

This comprehensive state-of-art review aims to give an overview of the indications, technical details, different approaches, and outcomes of EUS-PDD, with the latest evidence available in scientific literature.

EXPERT OPINION

Akin to its biliary drainage counterpart, EUS-PDD enables an EUS-assisted-ERP using rendezvous technique or EUS-guided drainage through transmural stenting. The technique has evolved over the ensuing years with multitude of accessories, approaches, and devices to optimize the outcomes. However, the technical success and adverse events rates need to be further improved. Additionally, it has a steep learning curve with requirements of advanced technical skill and optimum infrastructure back-up. Meticulous patient selection, precise knowledge of ductal anatomy, appropriate approach, and carefully chosen accessories can improve its clinical outcomes.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct interventions: A single tertiary center experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct intervention (EUS-PDI) is one of the most technically challenging procedures. There remains a knowledge gap due to its rarity. The aim is to report the accumulated EUS-PDI experience in a tertiary center.

METHODS

Single tertiary center, retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data during the study period, from January 2013 to June 2021.

RESULTS

In total, 14 patients (85% male; mean age, 61 years, range 37-81) and 25 EUS-PDI procedures for unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) were included. Principal etiology was chronic pancreatitis with pancreatic duct obstruction (78%). EUS-guided assisted (colorant and/or guidewire, rendezvous) ERP was performed in 14/25 (56%); and transmural drainage in 11 procedures, including pancreaticogastrosmy in 9/25 (36%) and pancreaticoduodenostomy in 2/25 (8%). Overall technical and clinical success was 78.5% (11/14). Three (21%) patients required a second procedure with success in all cases. Two failed cases required surgery. Three (21%) adverse events (AEs) were noted (fever, n=1; perforation, n=1; pancreatitis, n=1). Patients underwent a median of 58 months (range 24-108) follow-up procedures for re-stenting. Spontaneous stent migration was detected in 50% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-PDI is an effective salvage therapy for unsuccessful ERP, although 21% of patients may still experience AEs. In case of EUS-guided rendezvous failure, it can cross over to a transmural drainage.

Current paradigm of endoscopic ultrasound in biliary and pancreatic duct drainage: an update

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the workhorse for biliary and pancreatic ductal interventions. Despite advances in both endoscopes and accessories for ERCP, it still has limitations in the presence of altered anatomy, luminal obstruction hindering access to the papilla, and proximal duct obstructions by tight stricture, calculi or intraductal growth. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) have expanded the rescue procedures after failed ERCP. This review discusses the techniques and results of various EUS-BD procedures, as well as EUS-PDD.

Outcomes of minor versus major papilla rendez-vous for EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage

OBJECTIVES

EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) using rendez-vous has been suggested as a safer alternative to pancreatogastrostomy. Fibrostenotic disease in the pancreatic head may however preclude major papilla rendez-vous, leading to preferential guidewire advancement through the minor papilla. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of minor and major papilla rendez-vous.

METHODS

This is a tertiary single-center retrospective analysis of all consecutive EUS-PD procedures performed from 2015 to April 2022. EUS-PD was only performed following failed retrograde attempts. Successful EUS-PD rendez-vous cases were included and minor and major papilla procedures were compared.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis (66.6% male, mean age 56.1 [SD±14.8] years, 54.6% active smokers). In 21 patients (63.6%), minor papilla rendez-vous was attained. Clinical success was achieved in 81.0% vs. 58.3% in the major papilla group (p = 0.230). The overall incidence of AE was similar in both groups (9 [42.9%] vs. 4 [33.3%] events, p = 0.719), with a comparable distribution in severe, moderate and mild AE. Incidence of recurrent pancreatitis was almost identical (28.6% vs. 25.0%, p = 1.000).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with symptomatic chronic pancreatitis, EUS-PD using minor or major papilla rendez-vous attained similar results, suggesting that pancreatic duct drainage through the minor papilla can be considered as equally effective.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic duct drainage is one of the most challenging procedures in therapeutic endoscopy. Technical success is lower than for other therapeutic EUS procedures. However, when successful in a clear clinical indication, this procedure can offer a useful therapeutic alternative and improves the overall clinical success of the endoscopic approach. Current challenges include the standardization of clinical indications and of the techniques used for accessing the pancreatic duct, the strategy for mid-term and long-term management, and definition of the scope of the training that should be offered to a few highly experienced endoscopists.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

Techniques and Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided-Pancreatic Duct Drainage (EUS- PDD)

Endoscopic ultrasound guided-pancreatic duct drainage (EUS- PDD) is one of the most technically challenging procedures for the interventional endoscopist. The most common indications for EUS- PDD are patients with main pancreatic duct obstruction who have failed conventional endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) drainage or those with surgically altered anatomy. EUS- PDD can be performed via two approaches: the EUS-rendezvous (EUS- RV) or the EUS-transmural drainage (TMD) techniques. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated review of the techniques and equipment available for EUS- PDD and the outcomes of EUS- PDD reported in the literature. Recent developments and future directions surrounding the procedure will also be discussed.

EUS-guided transenteric pancreatic duct drainage

Endoscopic drainage requires transpapillary access to the pancreatic duct during ERCP. When ERCP failed, EUS-guided pancreatico-gastro or bulbostomy and/or rendez-vous technique offers an alternative to surgery. Although data has demonstrated that the procedure can be safe and effective, EUS-guided PD drainage remains one of the most technically challenging therapeutic EUS interventions, as evidenced by the multiple considerations on device selection and the risk of severe complications.

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.

Historical perspective on needle development: From the past to the future

With the introduction of EUS, endoscopy was no longer limited to luminal indications. However, the method was unable to distinguish malignant from benign lesions. Consequently, needles designed for tissue acquisition under EUS-guidance was designed. Initially, the needles were designed for fine needle aspiration (FNA); nevertheless, with increased requirement for the precured tissue in terms of quality and quantity, newly design needles aimed at obtaining tissue cores for histological assessment were developed. Recent studies demonstrate superiority of these fine needle biopsy needles (FNB) compared to FNA needles.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided access procedures following surgery

EUS-guided therapeutic procedures have emerged in the recent years as a minimally invasive option for the management of complex hepatobiliary disorders. Gastrointestinal surgeries, e.g., pancreaticoduodenectomy, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, and partial gastrectomy with different reconstructions are commonly performed for a wide range of indications that include tumour resections and weight loss. Conventional endoscopic procedures are challenging in those patients due to inaccessible or unreachable ampulla. Patients with surgically altered anatomy are good candidates for EUS-guided access procedures that have shown good technical and clinical success rates. This category of procedures includes EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic drainage, EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and EUS-guided Gastroenterostomy. Studies have shown that these procedures have comparable or better results than traditional endoscopic, interventional radiology-guided and surgical procedures. This article discusses the indications, technique and outcome of the different EUS-guided access procedures in patients with surgically altered anatomy.

When ERCP Fails: EUS-Guided Access to Biliary and Pancreatic Ducts

Pancreaticobiliary (PB) endotherapy continues to progress in the era of therapeutic endosonography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary method for PB access in native and altered anatomy. In altered anatomy, PB access can be obtained via enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (e-ERCP) or laparoscopy-assisted ERCP; however, both approaches have significant limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary and pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-BPD) are increasingly becoming the preferred alternative when ERCP fails, with advantages over percutaneous drainage. EUS-BPD continues to evolve with better feasibility, safety and efficacy as dedicated procedural equipment continues to improve. In this article, we discuss the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) when ERCP fails and their indications, technique, and outcomes.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been continuously evolving for the past three decades and has become widely used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The efficacy of therapeutic EUS (TEUS) has proven to be superior and better tolerated than conventional percutaneous or surgical techniques. TEUS has allowed the performance of multiple procedures including gallbladder, pancreatic duct and biliary drainage as well as gastrointestinal anastomoses. TEUS procedures generally require the following critical steps: needle access, guidewire placement, fistula creation and stent deployment. The indications and contraindication for TEUS procedures vary with different procedures but common contraindications include hemodynamic instability, severe coagulopathy unable to be reversed, large volume ascites or the inability to obtain access to the target site. Proficiency and high volume in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and diagnostic EUS procedures are required for training in TEUS. The complexity of the cases performed can be seen as a pyramid with drainage of pancreatic fluid collections at the base, pancreaticobiliary decompression in the middle, and creation of digestive anastomosis at the top. The mastery of each level is crucial prior to reaching the next level of complexity. TEUS has been incorporated in our arsenal and is impacting on a daily basis the way we offer minimally invasive therapy.

EUS-guided drainage of the pancreatic duct for the treatment of postoperative stenosis of pancreatico-digestive anastomosis or pancreatic duct stenosis complicating chronic pancreatitis: Experience at a tertiary care center

Background and Objectives

For the treatment of pancreatic duct stenosis due to chronic pancreatitis (CP) or postoperative (PO) stenosis, endoscopic procedures are usually the first choice. In cases of failure of the recommended treatment by ERCP, anastomosis between the Wirsung duct and the stomach or duodenum can be performed under EUS guidance. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the outcomes of pancreatico-gastric or pancreaticoduodenal anastomosis under EUS for PO stenosis versus CP stenosis.

Subjects and Methods

This was a retrospective, single-center, consecutive case study of patients who underwent EUS-guided Wirsungo-gastric/bulbar anastomosis.

Results

Forty-three patients were included. Twenty-one patients underwent treatment for PO stenosis, and 22 patients underwent treatment for CP stenosis. The technical success rate was 95.3% (41/43), with 100% in cases of PO stenosis and 90.9% in cases of CP stenosis. The clinical success rate was 72.5% (29/40): 75% (15/20) in cases of PO stenosis and 70% (14/20) in cases of CP stenosis. The overall morbidity rate was 34.9% (15/43). The main complication was postprocedural pain, occurring in 20.9% (9/443) of patients. The rate of stent migration or obstruction was 27.9% (12/43). There was no difference in patient outcomes or morbidity according to the etiology of the stenosis. The median follow-up duration in this study was 14 months.

Conclusions

EUS-guided Wirsungo-gastric/duodenal anastomosis is a feasible, minimally invasive, safe, and relatively effective procedure. The rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications were not different between patients with PO and CP stenosis. However, the follow-up period was too short to assess recurrent symptoms in these patients.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To update on recent advances in interventional endoscopic ultrasound (INVEUS) techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of linear echoendoscopes with larger instrument channels and the combined development of new tools and devices have enabled various new applications of minimally invasive endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal interventions of the pancreas, biliary system and peri-gastrointestinal structures. In this review, EUS-guided interventions are discussed and evaluated: drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, access and drainage of bile ducts, gallbladder and pancreatic duct, treatment of gastrointestinal haemorrhage, coeliac plexus block and coeliac plexus neurolysis, fiducial placement, solid and cystic tumour ablation, drug delivery and brachytherapy, gastroenterostomy, angiotherapy and other EUS-guided applications. The EUS-guided interventions are classified based on the available evidence as established or experimental, standardized or nonstandardized procedures in common or rare diseases with well or little known complications and their established or nonestablished treatment.

SUMMARY

Some EUS-guided interventions have sparse published evidence with only single-centre studies, case series or individual case reports, others like drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections have become widely accepted practice. INVEUS has been accepted as an alternative to several surgical approaches, EUS-guided techniques result in faster recovery times, shorter hospital stay and lower costs.

Approach to management of pancreatic strictures: the gastroenterologist's perspective

Pancreatic strictures represent a complex clinical problem which often requires multidisciplinary management with a team of gastroenterologists, surgeons and radiologists. Dominant strictures are largely due to inflammatory processes of the pancreas like chronic pancreatitis. However, differentiating benign from malignant processes of the pancreas, leading to strictures is imperative and remains a challenge. With advances in endoscopic management, options for therapy include endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) in situations where ERCP is not feasible or fails. However, endoscopic therapy is suited for a select group of patients and surgery remains key to management in many patients. In this narrative review, we look at the gastroenterologist's perspective and approach to pancreatic ductal strictures, including endoscopic and surgical management.

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.

Large-duct pattern invasive adenocarcinoma of the pancreas–a variant mimicking pancreatic cystic neoplasms: A minireview

Pancreatic cancer currently has no subtypes that inform clinical decisions; hence, there exists an opportunity to rearrange the morphological and molecular taxonomy that guides a better understanding of tumor characteristics. Nonetheless, accumulating studies to date have revealed the large-duct type variant, a unique subtype of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) with cystic features. This subtype often radiographically mimics intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) and involves multiple small cysts occasionally associated with solid masses. The “bunch-of-grapes” sign, an imaging characteristic of IPMNs, is absent in large-duct PDA. Large-duct PDA defines the mucin profile, and genetic alterations are useful in distinguishing large-duct PDA from IPMNs. Histologically, neoplastic ducts measure over 0.5 mm, forming large ductal elements. Similar to classic PDAs, this subtype is frequently accompanied by perineural invasion and abundant desmoplastic reactions, and KRAS mutations in codon 12 are nearly ubiquitous. Despite such morphological similarities with IPMNs, the prognosis of large-duct PDA is equivalent to that of classic PDA. Differential diagnosis is therefore essential.

EUS-guided pancreatic ductal intervention: A comprehensive literature review

EUS has opened a new frontier in endoscopic techniques for accessing pancreatic ducts in patients with failed ERCP. The major indications of EUS-guided pancreatic duct intervention (EUS-PDI) are main pancreatic duct (MPD) strictures due to chronic pancreatitis or strictures of pancreaticojejunal or pancreaticogastric anastomosis after Whipple resection, which lead to recurrent acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided pancreaticogastro or duodenostomy offers an alternative to surgery when transpapillary drainage fails or is not possible. We provide an expert commentary and a brief overview on this relatively novel technique utilizing EUS-PDI creation in patients with impaired drainage of the MPD who have failed other conventional endoscopic techniques for MPD drainage and either are poor surgical candidates or are reluctant to undergo surgery.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 714 patients

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a minimal-invasive therapeutic option to surgery and in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). The aim of this review was to quantitatively appraise the clinical outcomes of EUS-PDD by meta-analysis methods. Methods  We searched multiple databases from inception through March 2020 to identify studies that reported on EUS-PDD. Pooled rates of technical success, successful drainage of pancreatic duct, clinical success, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I ² % and 95 % prediction interval. Results  A total of 22 studies (714 patients) were included. The pooled rate of technical success in EUS-PDD was 84.8 % (95 % CI 79.1-89.2). The pooled rate of successful PD drained by EUS-PDD was 77.5 % (95 % CI 63.1-87.4). The pooled rate of clinical success of EUS-PDD was 89.2 % (95 % CI 82.1-93.7). The pooled rate of all adverse events was 18.1 % (95 % CI 14.2-22.9). On sub-group analysis, the pooled technical success and clinical success of EUS-PDD from Japanese data were considerably superior (91.2 %, 83-95.6 & 92.5 %, 83.9-96.7, respectively). The pooled rate of post EUS-PDD acute pancreatitis was 6.6 % (95 % CI 4.5-9.4), bleeding was 4.1 % (95 % CI 2.7-6.2), perforation and/or pneumoperitoneum was 3.1 % (95 % CI 1.9-5), pancreatic leak and/or pancreatic fluid collection was 2.3 % (95 % CI 1.4-4), and infection was 2.8 % (95 % CI 1.7-4.6). Conclusion  EUS-PDD demonstrates high technical success and clinical success rates with acceptable adverse events. Technical success was especially high for anastomotic strictures.

Endoscopic endgame for obstructive pancreatopathy: outcomes of anterograde EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage. A dual-center study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Anterograde endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) refers to transmural drainage of the main pancreatic duct via an endoprosthesis passed anterograde through the gastric (or intestinal) wall. Anterograde EUS-PDD is a rescue procedure for recalcitrant cases of benign obstructive pancreatopathy.

METHODS

We conducted a dual-center retrospective chart review of 28 patients (mean age, 59 years; 50% female) who underwent attempted anterograde EUS-PDD between April 2016 and September 2019 for chronic pancreatitis (CP) (93%) or pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis (PJS) after Whipple resection (7%). The study endpoint was achievement of transpapillary/transanastomotic drainage (definitive therapy).

RESULTS

Gastropancreaticoenterostomy (ring drainage, definitive therapy) was successfully performed during the index procedure in the 2 patients with PJS (technical success, 100%). Clinical success was 100% in the 2 ring drainage recipients during a mean 18-month follow-up period. The remaining 26 patients with CP underwent attempted pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) with 81% technical success, 75% clinical success, and 15% adverse events (AEs). Repeat endoscopic transmural interventions were performed in the 15 patients with clinical success after PG creation. Definitive therapy transpired in all 15 patients after a median 1 repeat procedure per patient. Clinical success after definitive therapy was maintained in all 15 patients (100%) during a median 4.5-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In agreement with previous studies, our study showed mild to moderately high rates of technical failure (19%), clinical failure (25%), and AEs (15%) during index drainage (PG creation). Among patients with CP with both technical and clinical success after index PG creation (n = 15), 100% definitive therapy was achieved and clinical outcomes were excellent (100% clinical success, 0% AEs).

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: Techniques and Literature Review of Transmural Stenting

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has emerged as an option in patients with failure of retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) because of difficulty in cannulation or surgically altered anatomy. This article provides a comprehensive review of the techniques and outcomes of EUS-PD, especially EUS-guided pancreatic transmural stenting. The clinical data derived from a total of 401 patients were reviewed in which the overall technical and clinical success rates were 339/401 (85%, range 63%–100%) and 328/372 (88%, range 76%–100%), respectively. Short-term adverse events occurred in 25% (102/401) of the cases, which included abdominal pain (n=45), acute pancreatitis (n=17), bleeding (n=10), and issues associated with pancreatic juice leakage such as perigastric or peripancreatic fluid collection (n=9). In conclusion, although EUS-PD remains a challenging procedure with a high risk of adverse events such as pancreatic juice leakage, perforation, and severe acute pancreatitis, the procedure seems to be a promising alternative for PD drainage in patients with altered anatomy or unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography.

Chronic pancreatitis: an overview of diagnosis and management

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pancreatitis entails a heavy burden on the healthcare system because of its often protracted evolution, requiring complex diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on novel imaging and endoscopic diagnostic and therapeutic interventions that have changed the management of patients with chronic pancreatitis. We have conducted an extensive search of original papers and guidelines, in order to provide a comprehensive and up to date review of available evidence in these areas of interest.

EXPERT OPINION

The traditional challenges in managing chronic pancreatitis patients stemmed from the limitations of diagnostic modalities, which could not correctly identify patients in an early stage of the disease, as well as from the scarcity of therapeutic options available. Advances in imaging of CT-scan, MRI, and EUS have opened the way for early diagnosis and staging. This has allowed more aggressive and tailored therapeutic modalities, particularly in endoscopic therapy and minimally invasive surgical interventions. Although high-quality data from large RCTs is still scarce, evidence-based algorithms for diagnosis and therapy are now changing the way we address this chronic disease. In the near future, we can expect a tailored approach based on patient and disease-related predictive factors, relying on a vast armamentarium of endoscopic and surgical solutions.

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.

Six-year retrospective analysis of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic ductal interventions at a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic ductal intervention (EUS-PDI) serves as a rescue therapy in patients with failure of retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) at the time of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). We review our experience of this procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent EUS-PDI for an unsuccessful ERP and altered anatomy.

RESULTS

A total of 44 (65.9% male) patients underwent EUS-PDI with a mean age of 43.5 years, (range: 23-67). Transgastric rendezvous technique was carried out in 23/44 (52.3%), transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy in 18/44 (40.9%) and transduodenal pancreaticobulbostomy in 3/44 (6.8%). Overall technical and clinical success was seen in 88.6% (39/44) and 81.8% (36/44), respectively. Technical success of transgastric rendezvous was 95.6% and that of transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy was 77.8%. Two of seven patients with failure to access the PD had successfully undergone EUS-PD stenting at subsequent attempt. Ten immediate adverse events (AE) were noted which included abdominal pain (n = 4), pancreatitis (n = 2), fever (n = 2), minor bleeding (n = 1), and stripping of wire (n = 1). Delayed AE included stent blockage in 12/39 (30.8%) and spontaneous stent migration in 5/39 (12.8%) which were managed with stent exchange at follow up. The rendezvous technique was associated with fewer AE than transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasonography-PDI is an effective treatment modality and salvage therapy in patients with unsuccessful ERP. Technical and clinical success seen with this study is comparable to studies conducted across the world. EUS-PDI needs to show cost-effectiveness in future studies.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Transmural Stenting and Transmural Intervention

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic access is an emergent method that can be divided into the two main techniques of EUS-guided rendezvous and pancreatic transmural stenting (PTS). While many reports have described EUS-guided procedures, the indications, technical tips, clinical effects, and safety of EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) remain controversial. This review describes the current status of and problems associated with EUS-PD, particularly PTS. We reviewed clinical data derived from a total of 334 patients. Rates of technical and clinical success ranged from 63% to 100% and 76% to 100%, respectively. In contrast, the rate of procedure-related adverse events was high at 26.7% (89/334). The most frequent adverse events comprised abdominal pain (n=38), acute pancreatitis (n=15), bleeding (n=9), and issues associated with pancreatic juice leakage such as perigastric fluid, pancreatic fluid collection, or pancreatic juice leaks (n=8). In conclusion, indications for EUS-PTS are limited, as is the evidence of its viability, due to the scarcity of expert operators. Despite improvements made to various devices, EUS-PTS remains technically challenging. Therefore, a long-term, large-scale, multicenter study is required to establish this technique as a viable alternative drainage method.

Anterograde Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: A Technical Review

The advancement of pancreatic endotherapy has increased the availability of minimally invasive endoscopic pancreatic ductal drainage techniques. In this regard, familiarity with endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is critical for treatment of obstructed pancreatic ductal systems, especially in nonsurgical candidates and in patients desiring a minimally invasive approach. Two distinct forms of EUS-PDD exist, viz. rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (rendezvous-assisted ERP) and anterograde EUS-PDD. Anterograde EUS-PDD refers to transmural anterograde passage of a pancreatic drainage catheter or stent directly into the main pancreatic duct, through either the gastric or enteral wall. Rendezvous-assisted ERP should be attempted after failed conventional ERP, and anterograde EUS-PDD should be considered if rendezvous-assisted ERP fails or is not technically feasible. Common clinical scenarios that fulfil these conditions are chronic pancreatitis with high-grade main pancreatic duct obstruction, surgically altered anatomy with ductal/anastomotic obstruction, pancreas divisum, and disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. The focus of this review article is anterograde EUS-PDD and its indications, technique, and outcomes. It also provides a summary of our own experience with this procedure, and a video demonstration of the technique.

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.

Endoscopic treatment of pain in chronic pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pain is the most common symptom of chronic pancreatitis, having a profound effect on patients and a broad socioeconomic impact. Endoscopy is guideline recommended as first-line management for chronic pancreatitis pain in certain clinical scenarios. Herein, we provide an evidence-based review of the endoscopic treatment of pain due to chronic pancreatitis while highlighting some important confounders in the measurement of this outcome in clinical practice and research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple recent studies have reported on the efficacy of current endoscopic therapies for chronic pancreatitis pain. Despite the high technical success rates of these procedures, pain outcomes remain disappointing. Complex mechanisms beyond ductal hypertension, such as central sensitization, visceral hypersensitivity and inflammatory neuritis account for some of the discordance observed between the rates of technical and clinical success. In addition, the sham effect is increasingly recognized as a confounder when interpreting the procedural benefit. Nevertheless, there are multiple promising innovations in the field of pancreatic endoscopy that are aimed to improve technical and clinical outcomes, but rigorous investigation is necessary to establish their role in clinical practice.

SUMMARY

Endoscopic therapy for chronic pancreatitis pain appears to be safe and effective in certain contexts and recent innovations in the field will hopefully further improve outcomes. In addition to evaluating the technical success of endotherapy in chronic pancreatitis, methodologically rigorous research focusing on patient-centered outcomes and accounting for the sham effect is necessary to advance this field.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography in the Pancreas

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has enabled therapeutic endoscopists to intervene on conditions that have otherwise not been accessible with conventional endoscopy. Inflammatory fluid collections of the pancreas that may benefit from drainage are often not identifiable without EUS. Furthermore, EUS may improve the safety of transmural drainage by allowing for the identification of intervening blood vessels and reducing the need for fluoroscopy, and is complemented by new devices that simplify the access and stent delivery process. The use of EUS has also made the treatment of various pancreatic duct disorders possible when direct access is otherwise impossible.

Updates in Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasonography

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in the possibilities of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). From EUS fine needle aspiration of cancerous lesion to pseudocyst drainage, it has now not only replaced some of the percutaneous techniques but has permitted to bypass all together laparoscopic approach for patient with altered anatomy or malignant gastric outlet obstruction. This review will emphasize the novel therapeutic EUS procedures added to our arsenal.

Management of delayed stenosis of pancreatico-enteric anastomosis following pancreatoduodenectomy

Stenosis of the pancreatico-enteric anastomosis following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), a late post-operative complication that is seen mainly after PD for diseases with good prognosis, has been reported in less than 3% of cases in the literature. Most often asymptomatic, pancreatic-enteric anastomotic stenosis can lead to pancreatitis, pain or pancreatic insufficiency. Symptomatic stenosis is difficult to treat and its management is not standardized. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is the best investigation to confirm the diagnosis of stenosis. The Endoscopic UltraSonography (EUS) « rendezvous » technique, associating an endoscopic approach and EUS-guided puncture of the main pancreatic duct, has been available since 2010. Of note, however, the failure rate of the EUS series is as high as 25%, leading to repeat procedures. Surgical reconstruction of the anastomosis has been reported with good results in terms of morbidity. Surgical re-do of the pancreatico-enteric anastomosis for stenosis following PD carries a low risk of pancreatic fistula (around 5%) and an overall morbidity rate of around 20%.

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.

EUS-Guided Transluminal Interventions

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has transitioned from a diagnostic to a therapeutic one over the past 40 years. With the advent of curvilinear array echoendoscopes in the 1990s with an accessory channel, multiple tools and devices have been developed and used for a variety of transluminal interventions. EUS provides a viable option and is becoming the procedure of choice for many interventions, including bile and pancreatic duct drainage, guiding angiotherapy, pancreatic fluid collection management, gallbladder drainage, and creating a gastrojejunostomy. Although reports demonstrate the technical success of these interventions, there is tremendous study heterogeneity and a relative lack of controlled randomized trials, which may limit our understanding of their role and utility. Furthermore, adverse events are relatively common and occasionally severe. Despite the limitations, available data strongly indicate the efficacy of EUS interventions when performed by well-trained endosonographers in carefully selected patients and managed in a multidisciplinary setting.

Present status and perspectives of endosonography 2017 in gastroenterology

Endoscopic ultrasound has become an essential tool in modern gastroenterology and abdominal surgery. Compared with all other endoscopic methods, it has the most potential for innovation and its future looks bright. Thus, we compiled this summary of established and novel applications of endoscopic ultrasound methods to inform the reader about what is already possible and where future developments will lead in improving patient care further. This review is structured in four parts. The first section reports on developments in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound, the second looks at semi-invasive endoscopic ultrasound, and the third discusses advances in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound. An overview on the future prospects of endoscopic ultrasound methods concludes this article.

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.

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.

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.