Utility of methylated DNA markers for the diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Early identification of malignant biliary strictures (MBS) is challenging, with up to 20% classified as indeterminants after preliminary testing and tissue sampling with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We aimed to evaluate the use of methylated DNA markers (MDM) from biliary brushings to enhance MBS detection in a prospective cohort. METHODS: Candidate MDMs were evaluated for their utility in MBS diagnosis through a series of discovery and validation phases. DNA was extracted from biliary brushing samples, quantified, bisulfite-converted, and then subjected to methylation-specific Droplet Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction (ddPCR).  Patients were considered to have no malignancy if the sampling was negative and there was no evidence of malignancy after 1 year or definitive negative surgical histopathology. RESULTS: Fourteen candidate MDMs were evaluated in the discovery phase, with top-performing and new markers evaluated in the technical validation phase. The top four MDMs were TWIST1, HOXA1, VSTM2B, and CLEC11A, which individually achieved AUC values of 0.82, 0.81, 0.83, and 0.78, respectively, with sensitivities of 59.4%, 53.1%, 62.5%, and 50.0%, respectively, at high specificities for malignancy of 95.2-95.3% for the final biologic validation phase. When combined as a panel, the AUC was 0.86, achieving 73.4% sensitivity and 92.9% specificity, which outperformed cytology and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). CONCLUSIONS: The selected methylated DNA markers demonstrated improved performance characteristics for the detection of MBS compared to cytology and FISH. ​ Therefore, MDMs should be considered viable candidates for inclusion in diagnostic testing algorithms.​.

Safety of EUS latex balloon use in patients with a latex allergy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Balloons are used in EUS to improve visualization. However, data on the safety of latex balloons in patients with latex allergies are limited, and nonlatex alternatives can be costly. We investigated the safety of latex balloon use during EUS. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted at a tertiary center between 2019 and 2022. Patients with reported latex allergies who underwent linear EUS were included. Baseline demographics, EUS characteristics, and adverse events were collected. The primary outcome was the rate of adverse events. RESULTS: Eighty-seven procedures were performed on 57 unique patients (mean age, 65.3 ± 14.5 years). Latex balloons were used in 59 procedures (67.8%), with only 8 procedures (13.6%) using prophylactic medications. No adverse events occurred during or after procedures, regardless of medication use or history of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of EUS latex balloons in patients with a latex allergy was associated with no adverse events.

Lumen-apposing metal stents with or without coaxial plastic stent placement for the management of pancreatic fluid collections.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coaxial double-pigtail plastic stent (DPPS) placement is often performed within lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to prevent adverse events (AEs) such as stent occlusion and bleeding. This study compares the safety and outcomes of LAMSs alone versus LAMSs with coaxial DPPSs for PFC management. METHODS: Patients undergoing drainage of a PFC with LAMSs were retrospectively identified and categorized as LAMS or LAMS/DPPS based on initial drainage strategy. The AE rate, AE type, and clinical success were extracted by chart review. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-five individuals (83 LAMS, 102 LAMS/DPPS) were identified. No significant differences were found in rates of clinical success (75.9% LAMS vs 69.6% LAMS/DDPS, P = .34) or overall AEs (15.7% LAMS vs 15.7% LAMS/DPPS, P = .825). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative single-center study, placement of a coaxial DPPS for drainage of PFCs with LAMSs did not affect rates of AEs or clinical success.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Endoscopic Approach to Recurrent Acute and Chronic Pancreatitis: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review is to provide practical, evidence-based guidance to clinicians regarding the role of endoscopy for recurrent acute and chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide guidance on a topic of clinical importance to the AGA membership, underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC), and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This review is framed around the 8 best practice advice points agreed upon by the authors, based on the results of randomized controlled trials, observational studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well expert consensus in this field. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: After an unrevealing initial evaluation, endoscopic ultrasound is the preferred diagnostic test for unexplained acute and recurrent pancreatitis. Magnetic resonance imaging with contrast and cholangiopancreatography is a reasonable complementary or alternative test to endoscopic ultrasound, based on local expertise and availability. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for reducing the frequency of acute pancreatitis episodes in patients with pancreas divisum is controversial, but minor papilla endotherapy may be considered, particularly for those with objective signs of outflow obstruction, such as a dilated dorsal pancreatic duct and/or santorinicele. There is no role for ERCP to treat pain alone in patients with pancreas divisum. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: The role of ERCP for reducing the frequency of pancreatitis episodes in patients with unexplained recurrent acute pancreatitis and standard pancreatic ductal anatomy is controversial and should only be considered after a comprehensive discussion of the uncertain benefits and potentially severe procedure-related adverse events. When pursued, ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy alone may be preferable to dual sphincterotomy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Surgical intervention should be considered over endoscopic therapy for long-term treatment of patients with painful obstructive chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is a reasonable alternative to surgery for suboptimal operative candidates or those who favor a less invasive approach, assuming they are clearly informed that the best practice advice primarily favors surgery. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: When ERCP is pursued, small (≤5mm) main pancreatic duct stones can be treated with pancreatography and conventional stone extraction maneuvers. For larger stones, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and/or pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy may be required. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: When ERCP is pursued, prolonged stent therapy (6-12 months) is effective for treating symptoms and remodeling main pancreatic duct strictures. The preferred approach is to place and sequentially add multiple plastic stents in parallel (upsizing); emerging evidence suggests that fully covered self-expanding metal stents may have a role for this indication, but additional research is necessary. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: ERCP with stent insertion is the preferred treatment for benign biliary stricture due to chronic pancreatitis. FCSEMS placement is favored over multiple plastic stents whenever feasible, given similar efficacy but significantly reduced need for stent exchange procedures during the treatment course. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Celiac plexus block should not be routinely performed for the management of pain due to chronic pancreatitis. The decision to proceed with celiac plexus block in selected patients with debilitating pain in whom other therapeutic measures have failed can be considered on a case-by-case basis, but only after discussion of the unclear outcomes of this intervention and its procedural risks.

A Protocolized Management of Walled-Off Necrosis (WON) Reduces Time to WON Resolution and Improves Outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with infected or symptomatic walled-off necrosis (WON) have high morbidity and health care utilization. Despite the recent adoption of nonsurgical treatment approaches, WON management remains nonalgorithmic. We investigated the impact of a protocolized early necrosectomy approach compared with a nonprotocolized, clinician-driven approach on important clinical outcomes. METHODS: Records were reviewed for consecutive patients with WON who underwent a protocolized endoscopic drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (cases), and for patients with WON treated with a lumen-apposing metal stent at the same tertiary referral center who were not managed according to the protocol (control subjects). The protocol required repeat cross-sectional imaging within 14 days after lumen-apposing metal stent placement, with regularly scheduled endoscopic necrosectomy if WON diameter reduction was <50%. Control patients were treated according to their clinician's preference without an a priori strategy. Inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis was used to evaluate the influence of being in the protocolized group on time to resolution. RESULTS: A total of 24 cases and 47 control subjects were included. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. Although numbers of endoscopies and necrosectomies were similar, cases had lower adverse event rates, shorter intensive care unit stay, and required nutritional support for fewer days. On matched multivariate Cox regression, cases had earlier WON resolution (hazard ratio, 5.73; 95% confidence interval, 2.62-12.5). This was confirmed in the inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis (hazard ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.92-6.01). CONCLUSIONS: A protocolized strategy resulted in faster WON resolution compared with a discretionary approach without the need for additional therapeutic interventions, and with a better safety profile and decreased health care utilization.

Uncovered versus fully covered self-expandable metal stents for the management of distal malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are widely used for palliation of distal malignant biliary obstruction (dMBO). However, previous studies comparing the outcomes between uncovered SEMSs (UCSEMSs) and fully covered SEMSs (FCSEMSs) report conflicting results. This large cohort study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between UCSEMSs and FCSEMSs for dMBO. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in patients with dMBO who underwent either UCSEMS or FCSEMS placement between May 2017 and May 2021. Primary outcomes were rates of clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and unplanned endoscopic reintervention. Secondary outcomes were types of AEs, intervention-free stent patency, and management and outcomes of stent occlusion. RESULTS: The cohort included 454 patients (364 in the UCSEMS group and 90 in the FCSEMS group). Median follow-up duration was 9.6 months and was similar between the 2 groups. Use of UCSEMSs and FCSEMSs had comparable clinical success (P = .250). However, use of UCSEMSs had significantly higher rates of AEs (33.5% vs 21.1%; P = .023) and unplanned endoscopic reintervention (27.0% vs 11.1%; P = .002). UCSEMSs had a higher rate of stent occlusion (26.9% vs 8.9%; P < .001) and shorter median time to stent occlusion (4.4 months vs 10.7 months; P = .002). Stent reintervention-free survival was higher in the FCSEMS group. FCSEMSs had a significantly higher rate of stent migration (7.8% vs 1.1%; P < .001), but patients in the FCSEMS group had similar rates of cholecystitis (.3% vs 1.1%; P = .872) and post-ERCP pancreatitis (6.3% vs 6.6%; P = .90). When UCSEMSs did occlude, placement of a coaxial plastic stent had a higher rate of stent reocclusion compared with coaxial SEMS placement (46.7% vs 19.7%; P = .007). CONCLUSION: FCSEMSs should be considered for the palliation of dMBO because of lower rates of AEs, longer patency rates, and lower rates of unplanned endoscopic intervention.

Novel classification system for walled-off necrosis: a step toward standardized nomenclature and risk-stratification framework.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal therapeutic approach for walled-off necrosis (WON) is not fully understood, given the lack of a validated classification system. We propose a novel and robust classification system based on radiologic and clinical factors to standardize the nomenclature, provide a framework to guide comparative effectiveness trials, and inform the optimal WON interventional approach. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent endoscopic management of WON by lumen-apposing metal stent placement at a tertiary referral center. Patients were classified according to the proposed QNI classification system: quadrant ("Q"), represented an abdominal quadrant distribution; necrosis ("N"), denoted by the percentage of necrosis of WON; and infection ("I"), denoted as positive blood culture and/or systemic inflammatory response syndrome reaction with a positive WON culture. Two blinded reviewers classified all patients according to the QNI system. Patients were then divided into 2 groups: those with a lower QNI stratification (≤2 quadrants and ≤30% necrosis; group 1) and those with a higher stratification (≥3 quadrants, 2 quadrants with ≥30% necrosis, or 1 quadrant with >60% necrosis and infection; group 2). The primary outcome was mean time to WON resolution. Secondary procedural and clinical outcomes between the groups were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (75% men) were included and stratified by the QNI classification; group 1 comprised 17 patients and group 2, 54 patients. Patients in group 2 had a higher number of necrosectomies, longer hospital stays, and more readmissions. The mean time to resolution was longer in group 2 than in group 1 (79.6 ± 7.76 days vs 48.4 ± 9.22 days, P = .02). The mortality rate was higher in group 2 (15% vs 0%, P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the heterogeneous nature of WON in severe acute pancreatitis, a proposed QNI system may provide a standardized framework for WON classification to inform clinical trials, risk-stratify the disease course, and potentially inform an optimal management approach.

A novel blood-sensing capsule for rapid detection of upper GI bleeding: a prospective clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Upper GI bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency associated with high resource utilization, morbidity, and mortality. Timely EGD can be challenging from personnel, resource, and access perspectives. PillSense (EnteraSense Ltd, Galway, Ireland) is a novel swallowed bleeding sensor for the detection of UGIB, anticipated to aid in patient triage and guide clinical decision-making for individuals with suspected UGIB. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, single-arm comparative clinical trial of a novel bleeding sensor for patients with suspected UGIB was performed at a tertiary care center. The PillSense system consists of an optical sensor and an external receiver that processes and displays data from the capsule as "Blood Detected" or "No Blood Detected." Patients underwent EGD within 4 hours of capsule administration; participants were followed up for 21 days to confirm capsule passage. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were accrued to the study (59.5% male; mean age, 62.4 ± 14.3 years). Sensitivity and specificity for detecting the presence of blood were 92.9% (P = .02) and 90.6% (P < .001), respectively. The capsule's positive and negative predictive values were 74.3% and 97.8%, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were 9.9 and .08. No adverse events or deaths occurred related to the PillSense system, and all capsules were excreted from patients on follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The PillSense system is safe and effective for detecting the presence of blood in patients evaluated for UGIB before upper GI endoscopy. It is a rapidly deployed tool, with easy-to-interpret results that will affect the diagnosis and triage of patients with suspected UGIB. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05385224.).

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of benign gastrointestinal tract strictures: a single-center experience and proposed treatment algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are an alternative therapeutic option for benign gastrointestinal (GI) tract strictures. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAMS for the management of benign GI strictures. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent a LAMS placement for benign luminal GI strictures at a tertiary care center between January 2014 and July 2021 were reviewed. Primary outcomes included technical success, early clinical success, and adverse events (AEs). Other outcomes included rates of stent migration and re-intervention after LAMS removal. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients who underwent 128 LAMS placements (67.9% female, mean age of 54.3 ± 14.2 years) were included, and 70.6% of the patients had failed prior endoscopic treatments. The majority of strictures (83.5%) were anastomotic, and the most common stricture site was the gastrojejunal anastomosis (65.9%). Technical success was achieved in 100% of procedures, while early clinical success was achieved in 98.4%. The overall stent-related AE rate was 25%. The migration rate was 27.3% (35/128). Of these, five stents were successfully repositioned endoscopically. The median stent dwell time was 119 days [interquartile range (IQR) 68-189 days], and the median follow-up duration was 668.5 days [IQR: 285.5-1441.5 days]. The re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was 58.3%. CONCLUSIONS: LAMS is an effective therapeutic option for benign GI strictures, offering high technical and early clinical success. However, the re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was high. In select cases, using LAMS placement as destination therapy with close surveillance is a reasonable option.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided versus percutaneous drainage for the management of post-operative fluid collections after distal pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs) can be drained using percutaneous or endoscopic approaches. The primary aim of this study was to compare rates of clinical success between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUSD) with percutaneous drainage (PTD) in the management of symptomatic POPFCs after distal pancreatectomy. Secondary outcomes included technical success, total number of interventions, time to resolution, rates of adverse events (AEs), and POPFC recurrence. METHODS: Adults who underwent distal pancreatectomy from January 2012 to August 2021 and developed symptomatic POPFC in the resection bed were retrospectively identified from a single academic center database. Demographic data, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were abstracted. Clinical success was defined as symptomatic improvement and radiographic resolution without requiring an alternate drainage modality. Quantitative variables were compared using a two-tailed t-test and categorical data were compared using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Of 1046 patients that underwent distal pancreatectomy, 217 met study inclusion criteria (median age 60 years, 51.2% female), of whom 106 underwent EUSD and 111 PTD. There were no significant differences in baseline pathology and POPFC size. PTD was generally performed earlier after surgery (10 vs. 27 days; p < 0.001) and more commonly in the inpatient setting (82.9% vs. 49.1%; p < 0.001). EUSD was associated with a significantly higher rate of clinical success (92.5% vs. 76.6%; p = 0.001), fewer median number of interventions (2 vs. 4; p < 0.001), and lower rate of POPFC recurrence (7.6% vs. 20.7%; p = 0.007). AEs were similar between EUSD (10.4%) and PTD (6.3%, p = 0.28), with approximately one-third of EUSD AEs due to stent migration. CONCLUSION: In patients with POPFCs after distal pancreatectomy, delayed drainage with EUSD was associated with higher rates of clinical success, fewer interventions, and lower rates of recurrence than earlier drainage with PTD.

Utility of Urgent Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Predicted Mild Acute Pancreatitis and Cholestasis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) within 72 h is suggested for patients presenting with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) and biliary obstruction without cholangitis. This study aimed to identify if urgent ERCP (within 24 h) improved outcomes compared to early ERCP (24-72 h) in patients admitted with predicted mild ABP. METHODS: Patients admitted for predicted mild ABP defined as a bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis score < 3 and underwent ERCP for biliary obstruction within 72 h of presentation during the study period were included. Patients with prior biliary sphincterotomy or surgically altered anatomy preventing conventional ERCP were excluded. The primary outcome was the development of moderately severe or severe pancreatitis based on the revised Atlanta classification. Secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, the need for ICU admission, and ERCP-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Of the identified 166 patients, baseline characteristics were similar between both the groups except for the WBC count (9.4 vs. 8.3/µL; p < 0.044) and serum bilirubin level (3.0 vs. 1.6 mg/dL; p < 0.0039). Biliary cannulation rate and technical success were both high in the overall cohort (98.8%). Urgent ERCP was not associated with increased development of moderately severe pancreatitis (10.4% vs. 15.7%; p = 0.3115). The urgent ERCP group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay [median 3 (IQR 2-3) vs. 3 days (IQR 3-4), p < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: Urgent ERCP did not impact the rate of developing more severe pancreatitis in patients with predicted mild ABP but was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay and a lower rate of hospital readmission.

Predicting the Need for Step-Up Therapy After EUS-Guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections With Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A significant proportion of individuals with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) require step-up therapy after endoscopic drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents. The aim of this study is to identify factors associated with PFCs that require step-up therapy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of PFCs with lumen-apposing metal stents from April 2014 to October 2019 at a single center was performed. Step-up therapy included direct endoscopic necrosectomy, additional drainage site (endoscopic or percutaneous), or surgical intervention after the initial drainage procedure. Multivariable logistic regression was performed using a backward stepwise approach with a P ≤ .2 threshold for variable retention to identify factors predictive for the need for step-up therapy. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients were included in the final study cohort, of whom 69 (50.7%) required step-up therapy. Independent predictors of step-up therapy included: collection size measuring ≥10 cm (odds ratio [OR], 8.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.36-23.61), paracolic extension of the PFC (OR, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.60-10.23), and ≥30% solid necrosis (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.48-12.16). In a sensitivity analysis of 81 patients with walled-off necrosis, 51 (63.0%) required step-up therapy. Similarly, factors predictive of the need for step-up therapy for walled-off necrosis included: collection size measuring ≥10 cm (OR, 6.94; 95% CI, 1.76-27.45), paracolic extension of the PFC (OR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.18-12.14), and ≥30% solid necrosis (OR, 7.10; 95% CI, 1.16-43.48). CONCLUSIONS: Half of all patients with PFCs drained with lumen-apposing metal stents required step-up therapy, most commonly direct endoscopic necrosectomy. Individuals with PFCs ≥10 cm in size, paracolic extension, or ≥30% solid necrosis are more likely to require step-up therapy and should be considered for early endoscopic reintervention.

Effects of Blended (Yellow) vs Forced Coagulation (Blue) Currents on Adverse Events, Complete Resection, or Polyp Recurrence After Polypectomy in a Large Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. RESULTS: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01936948.

Endoscopic therapies for gallbladder drainage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis has expanded in patients who are considered nonoperative candidates. Traditionally managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC), improvement in techniques and devices has led to increased use of endoscopic methods for gallbladder drainage. This document reviews technical aspects of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) and EUS-guided GBD (EUS-GBD) as well as their respective technical/clinical success and adverse event rates. Available comparative data are also reviewed among nonsurgical gallbladder drainage techniques (PC, ET-GBD, and EUS-GBD). METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through March 2021 for relevant articles by using keywords including "acute cholecystitis," "interventional EUS," "percutaneous cholecystostomy," "transpapillary gallbladder drainage," "EUS-guided gallbladder drainage," "lumen-apposing metal stent," "gallbladder stenting," and "endoscopic gallbladder drainage." The manuscript was drafted by 2 authors and reviewed by members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and subsequently by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Governing Board. RESULTS: Multiple studies have demonstrated acceptable outcomes comparing PC and both endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques, ET-GBD and EUS-GBD. Published data suggest that endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques may be associated with lower rates of adverse events and improved quality of life. However, there are important clinical considerations for choosing among these treatment options, requiring a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach to therapeutic decision-making in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of EUS-GBD and ET-GBD in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis may result in favorable outcomes when compared with PC. Further improvements in techniques and training should lead to more widespread acceptance and dissemination of these treatment options.

Lumen-apposing metal stents (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are a novel class of devices that have expanded the spectrum of endoscopic GI interventions. LAMSs with their dumbbell configuration, short saddle length, and large inner luminal diameter provide favorable stent characteristics to facilitate anastomosis formation between the gut lumen and adjacent structures. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2021 for articles related to LAMSs by using additional relevant keywords such as "walled-off pancreatic necrosis," "pseudocysts," "pancreatic fluid collection," "cholecystitis," "gastroenterostomy," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others. RESULTS: This technology review describes the full spectrum of LAMS designs and delivery systems, techniques for deployment, procedural outcomes, safety, training issues, and financial considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Although LAMSs were initially introduced for drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis, the versatility of these devices has led to a variety of off-label uses including gallbladder drainage, enteric bypass with the creation of gastroenterostomies, and treatment of luminal GI strictures.

Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE): a retrospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP; EDGE) is an alternative to enteroscopy- and laparoscopy-assisted ERCP in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy. Although short-term results are promising, the long-term outcomes are not known. The aims of this study were: (1) to determine the rates of long-term adverse events after EDGE, with a focus on rates of persistent gastrogastric or jejunogastric fistula; (2) to identify predictors of persistent fistula; (3) to assess the outcomes of endoscopic closure when persistent fistula is encountered. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective study involving 13 centers between February 2015 and March 2019. Adverse events were defined according to the ASGE lexicon. Persistent fistula was defined as an upper gastrointestinal series or esophagogastroduodenoscopy showing evidence of fistula. RESULTS: 178 patients (mean age 58 years, 79 % women) underwent EDGE. Technical success was achieved in 98 % of cases (175/178), with a mean procedure time of 92 minutes. Periprocedural adverse events occurred in 28 patients (15.7 %; mild 10.1 %, moderate 3.4 %, severe 2.2 %). The four severe adverse events were managed laparoscopically. Persistent fistula was diagnosed in 10 % of those sent for objective testing (9/90). Following identification of a fistula, 5 /9 patients underwent endoscopic closure procedures, which were successful in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: The EDGE procedure is associated with high clinical success rates and an acceptable risk profile. Persistent fistulas after lumen-apposing stent removal are uncommon, but objective testing is recommended to identify their presence. When persistent fistulas are identified, endoscopic treatment is warranted, and should be successful in closing the fistula.

Clip Closure Prevents Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Large Colon Polyps in a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01936948.

Preoperative predictors of choledocholithiasis in patients presenting with acute calculous cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Markedly increased liver chemistries in patients presenting with acute calculous cholecystitis (AC) often prompt an evaluation for concomitant choledocholithiasis (CDL). However, current guidelines directing the workup for CDL fail to address this unique population. The aims of this study are to define the range of presenting laboratory values and imaging findings in AC, develop a model to predict the presence of concurrent CDL, and develop a management algorithm that can be easily applied on presentation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients presenting with AC to a large tertiary hospital over a 3.5-year period. CDL was defined as common bile duct (CBD) stone(s), sludge, or debris seen on any of the following studies: US, CT, magnetic resonance imaging/MRCP, EUS, ERCP, or intraoperative cholangiogram. A multivariable model to predict CDL was developed on 70% of the patients and validated on the remaining 30%. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients were identified and 65 (17.8%) had concurrent CDL. Univariable analysis was used to predict CDL and demonstrated statistically significant odds ratios for transaminases >3 times the upper limit of normal, alkaline phosphatase (AlkPhos) above normal, lipase >3 times the upper limit of normal, total bilirubin ≥1.8 mg/dL, and CBD diameter >6 mm. In the validation cohort, an optimal model containing alanine transaminase (ALT) >3 times the upper limit of normal, abnormal AlkPhos, and CBD diameter >6 mm was found to have an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.91. When 0 or 1 risk factors were present, 98.6% of patients did not have CDL. When all 3 risk factors were present, 77.8% were found to have CDL. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of CDL is high among patients with AC. When a validated model is used, application of cutoffs for ALT, AlkPhos, and CBD diameter can effectively triage patients with low and high likelihood for CDL to surgery or ERCP, respectively.