Double-Blind Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Glucagon vs Placebo in the Resolution of Alimentary Esophageal Impaction.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of glucagon vs placebo in resolving esophageal foreign body impaction (EFBI), as well as the length of the procedure and adverse events. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial involving consecutive patients diagnosed with alimentary EFBI. Participants were randomized to receive either 1 mg of intravenous glucagon or placebo. All patients underwent upper endoscopy, and adverse events were assessed through a protocolized telephonic interview 7 days later. RESULTS: The study included 72 subjects in the glucagon group and 68 in the placebo group. The foreign body was not identified in 23.6% of subjects in the glucagon group and 20.6% of subjects in the placebo group (difference 3%, 95% confidence interval -10.7% to 16.8%, P = 0.67). The median time required to remove the foreign body was similar in both groups 4 minutes (range 2-10) in the glucagon group and 3.5 minutes (range 2-7) in the placebo group (difference 0.5 minutes, 95% confidence interval -1.3 to 2.3; P = 0.59). The most common adverse event reported in both groups was mild pharyngeal pain. DISCUSSION: Glucagon is no more effective than placebo in resolving EFBI or shortening the time required to remove the foreign body (EUDRA-CT number 2019-004920-40).

International Consensus Recommendations for Safe Use of LAMS for On- and Off-Label Indications Using a Modified Delphi Process.

INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications. METHODS: Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round. RESULTS: Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events. DISCUSSION: Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage with long-term lumen-apposing metal stent indwell: 1-year results from a prospective nationwide observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study aimed to determine safety and risk factors for adverse events (AEs) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with long-term indwell of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS). METHODS: This study is a multicenter prospective observational study on consecutive high surgical-risk patients requiring gallbladder drainage who underwent EUS-GBD with LAMS over 12 months. Centralized telephone follow-up interviews were conducted every 3 months for 1 year. Patients were censored at LAMS removal, cholecystectomy, or death. AE-free survival was determined using log-rank tests. Cumulative risks were estimated using life-table analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were included (53.7% male, median [interquartile range] age of 84.6 [76.5-89.8] years, and 85.4% with acute cholecystitis). Technical success was achieved in 79 (96.3%), and clinical success in 73 (89%). No patient was lost to follow-up; 45 patients (54.9%) completed 1-year follow-up with in situ LAMS. Median (interquartile range) LAMS indwell time was 364 (47-367) days. Overall, 12 (14.6%) patients presented 14 AEs, including 5 (6.1%) recurrent biliary events (3 acute cholangitis, 1 mild acute pancreatitis, and 1 acute cholecystitis). Patients with pancreatobiliary malignancy had an increased risk of recurrent biliary events (33% vs 1.5%, P = 0.001). The overall 1-year cumulative risk of recurrent biliary events was 9.7% (4.1-21.8%). The 1-year risk of AEs and of severe AEs was 18.8% (11-31.2%) and 7.9% (3.3-18.2%), respectively. Pancreatobiliary malignancy was the single risk factor for recurrent biliary events; LAMS misdeployment was the strongest risk factor for AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term LAMS indwell does not increase the risk of delayed AEs following EUS-GBD.

Plastic pigtail vs lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of walled-off necrosis (PROMETHEUS study): an open-label, multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have displaced double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) as the standard treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON),ß but evidence for exclusively using LAMS is limited. We aimed to assess whether the theoretical benefit of LAMS was superior to DPS. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, randomized trial was carried out in 9 tertiary hospitals. Between June 2017, and Oct 2020, we screened 99 patients with symptomatic WON, of whom 64 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the DPS group (n = 31) or the LAMS group (n = 33). The primary outcome was short-term (4-weeks) clinical success determined by the reduction of collection. Secondary endpoints included long-term clinical success, hospitalization, procedure duration, recurrence, safety, and costs. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT03100578. RESULTS: A similar clinical success rate in the short term (RR, 1.41; 95% CI 0.88-2.25; p = 0.218) and in the long term (RR, 1.2; 95% CI 0.92-1.58; p = 0.291) was observed between both groups. Procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LAMS group (35 vs. 45-min, p = 0.003). The hospital admission after the index procedure (median difference, - 10 [95% CI - 17.5, - 1]; p = 0.077) and global hospitalization (median difference - 4 [95% CI - 33, 25.51]; p = 0.82) were similar between both groups. Reported stent-related adverse events were similar for the two groups (36 vs.45% in LAMS vs. DPS), except for de novo fever, which was significantly 26% lower in LAMS (RR, 0.26 [0.08-0.83], p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical superiority of LAMS over DPS for WON therapy was not proved, with similar clinical success, hospital stay and similar safety profile between both groups, yet a significant reduction in procedure time was observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03100578.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) Clinical Guidelines.

Acute pancreatitis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. It can develop complications such as fluid collections and necrosis. Infection of necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with organ failure and worse prognosis. In the past years, the treatment of pancreatic collections has shifted from open surgery to minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasound guided drainage. These guidelines from a selection of experts among the Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) have the purpose to provide advice on the management of pancreatic collections based on a thorough review of the available scientific evidence. It also reflects the experience and clinical practice of the authors, who are advanced endoscopists or clinical pancreatologists with extensive experience in managing patients with acute pancreatitis.

Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage: A Comprehensive Review on Indications, Techniques, and Future Perspectives.

In recent years, therapeutic endoscopy has become a fundamental tool in the management of gallbladder diseases in light of its minimal invasiveness, high clinical efficacy, and good safety profile. Both endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (TGBD) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) provide effective internal drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis unfit for cholecystectomy, avoiding the drawbacks of external percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD). The availability of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for EUS-guided transluminal interventions contributed to the expansion of endoscopic therapies for acute cholecystitis, making endoscopic gallbladder drainage easier, faster, and hence more widely available. Moreover, EUS-GBD with LAMS opened the possibility of several cholecystoscopy-guided interventions, such as gallstone lithotripsy and clearance. Finally, EUS-GBD has also been proposed as a rescue drainage modality in malignant biliary obstruction after failure of standard techniques, with encouraging results. In this review, we will describe the TBGD and EUS-GBD techniques, and we will discuss the available data on clinical efficacy in different settings in comparison with PGBD. Finally, we will comment on the future perspectives of EUS-GBD, discussing the areas of uncertainty in which new data are more strongly awaited.

Prospective multicenter assessment of the impact of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy on patient quality of life in unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is increasingly used for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) in inoperable patients. However, the impact of EUS-GE on patient quality of life (QoL) has not been evaluated prospectively. METHODS: Consecutive patients with unresectable malignant GOO who underwent EUS-GE between August 2019 and May 2021 at 4 Spanish centers were prospectively assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire Core 30 at baseline and 1 month after the procedure. Centralized follow-up by telephone calls was undertaken. The Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System (GOOSS) was used to assess oral intake, defining clinical success as a GOOSS ≥2. Differences between baseline and 30-day QoL scores were assessed using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were enrolled, 33 (51.6%) men, with a median age of 77.3 years (interquartile range, 65.5-86.5). The most common diagnoses were pancreatic (35.9%) and gastric (31.3%) adenocarcinoma. Thirty-seven patients (57.9%) presented a 2/3 baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Oral intake was restarted within 48 hours in 61 patients (95.3%), and the median postprocedure hospital stay was 3.5 days (interquartile range, 2-5). The 30-day clinical success rate was 83.3%. A clinically significant increase of 21.6 points (95% confidence interval, 11.5-31.7) in the global health status scale was documented, with significant improvements in nausea and vomiting, pain, constipation, and appetite loss. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GE relieves GOO symptoms in patients with unresectable malignancy, allowing rapid oral intake and hospital discharge. It also provides a clinically relevant increase in QoL scores at 30 days from baseline. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04660695.).

Endoscopic removal of lumen-apposing metal stents - risk factors for stent embedment, complex removals, and adverse events: analysis from a multicenter prospective case series.

BACKGROUND: Removing lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) may be difficult and even harmful, but these features have seldom been analyzed. We aimed to generate a comprehensive assessment of the feasibility and safety of LAMS retrieval procedures. METHODS: A prospective multicenter case series including all technically successfully deployed LAMSs between January 2019 and January 2020 that underwent endoscopic stent removal. All retrieval-related data were prospectively recorded using standardized telephone questionnaires as part of centralized follow-up that ended after stent removal had been performed. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the potential risk factors for complex removal. RESULTS: For the 407 LAMSs included, removal was attempted in 158 (38.8 %) after an indwell time of 46.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] 31-70). The median (IQR) removal time was 2 (1-4) minutes. Removal was labelled as complex in 13 procedures (8.2 %), although advanced endoscopic maneuvers were required in only two (1.3 %). Complex removal risk factors were stent embedment (relative risk [RR] 5.84, 95 %CI 2.14-15.89; P = 0.001), over-the-wire deployment (RR 4.66, 95 %CI 1.60-13.56; P = 0.01), and longer indwell times (RR 1.14, 95 %CI 1.03-1.27; P = 0.01). Partial and complete embedment were observed in 14 (8.9 %) and five cases (3.2 %), respectively. The embedment rate during the first 6 weeks was 3.1 % (2/65), reaching 15.9 % (10/63) during the following 6 weeks (P = 0.02). The adverse event rate was 5.1 %, including seven gastrointestinal bleeds (5 mild, 2 moderate). CONCLUSIONS: LAMS removal is a safe procedure, mostly requiring basic endoscopic techniques attainable in conventional endoscopy rooms. Referral to advanced endoscopy units should be considered for stents with known embedment or long indwell times, which may require more technically demanding procedures.

Antimigration versus conventional fully covered metal stents in the endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures after deceased-donor liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Migration of fully covered metal stents (FCMS) remains a limitation of the endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures (ABS) following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The use of antimigration FCMS (A-FCMS) might enhance endoscopic treatment outcomes for ABS. METHODS: Single center retrospective study. Consecutive patients with ABS following OLT who underwent ERCP with FCMS placement between January 2005 and December 2020 were eligible. Subjects were grouped into conventional-FCMS (C-FCMS) and A-FCMS. The primary outcome was stent migration rates. Secondary outcomes were stricture resolution, adverse event, and recurrence rates. RESULTS: A total of 102 (40 C-FCMS; 62 A-FCMS) patients were included. Stent migration was identified at the first revision in 24 C-FCMS patients (63.2%) and in 21 A-FCMS patients (36.2%) (p = 0.01). The overall migration rate, including the first and subsequent endoscopic revisions, was 65.8% in C-FCMS and 37.3% in A-FCMS (p = 0.006). The stricture resolution rate at the first endoscopic revision was similar in both groups (60.0 vs 61.3%, p = 0.87). Final stricture resolution was achieved in 95 patients (93.1%), with no difference across groups (92.5 vs 93.5%; p = 0.84). Adverse events were identified in 13 patients (12.1%) with no difference across groups. At a median follow-up of 52 (IQR: 19-85.5) months after stricture resolution, 25 patients (24.5%) developed recurrences, with no difference across groups (C-FCMS 30% vs A-FCMS 21%; p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: The use of A-FCMS during ERCP for ABS following OLT results in significantly lower stent migration rates compared to C-FCMS. However, the clinical benefit of reduced stent migration is unclear. Larger studies focusing on stricture resolution and recurrence rates are needed.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review.

1: ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

The endoscopic ultrasound features of pancreatic fluid collections and their impact on therapeutic decisions: an interobserver agreement study.

BACKGROUND: A validated classification of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) morphological characteristics and consequent therapeutic intervention(s) in pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is lacking. We performed an interobserver agreement study among expert endosonographers assessing EUS-related PFC features and the therapeutic approaches used. METHODS: 50 EUS videos of PFCs were independently reviewed by 12 experts and evaluated for PFC type, percentage solid component, presence of infection, recognition of and communication with the main pancreatic duct (MPD), stent choice for drainage, and direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) performance and timing. The Gwet's AC1 coefficient was used to assess interobserver agreement. RESULTS: A moderate agreement was found for lesion type (AC1, 0.59), presence of infection (AC1, 0.41), and need for DEN (AC1, 0.50), while fair or poor agreements were stated for percentage solid component (AC1, 0.15) and MPD recognition (AC1, 0.31). Substantial agreement was rated for ability to assess PFC-MPD communication (AC1, 0.69), decision between placing a plastic versus lumen-apposing metal stent (AC1, 0.62), and timing of DEN (AC1, 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver agreement between expert endosonographers regarding morphological features of PFCs appeared suboptimal, while decisions on therapeutic approaches seemed more homogeneous. Studies to achieve standardization of the diagnostic endosonographic criteria and therapeutic approaches to PFCs are warranted.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Combined endoscopic retrograde and endosonography-guided (CERES) cholangiography for interventional repair of transected bile ducts after cholecystectomy: treatment approaches and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Post-cholecystectomy transected bile ducts (TBDs) are not amenable to standard endoscopic management. Combined ERCP and endosonography (CERES) including EUS-guided hepaticoenterostomy enhance therapeutic biliary endoscopy. CERES treatment of post-cholecystectomy TBDs is evaluated. METHODS: Among 165 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP for post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury (Amsterdam A/B/C/D grades [%] = 47/30/7/16) between January 2009-November 2020 at a tertiary-care center, 10/26 (38%) with TBDs (6 female; 32-92 years old) underwent CERES before attempted endoscopic repair (staged CERES, n = 7) or surgical repair (preoperative CERES, n = 1), or as destination therapy (definitive CERES, n = 2). Short-term clinical success rate, final clinical success rate and comprehensive complication index (CCI) were retrospectively determined. Additionally, number of follow-up procedures, adverse events, recurrences, final patency grades and definitive cure rate were determined in patients with staged CERES. RESULTS: Index CERES (hepaticogastrostomy, 60%; hepaticoduodenostomy, 40%) achieved bile leak and jaundice resolution in 10 patients (100% short-term clinical success rate). Overall, 9/10 patients maintained good/excellent biliary drainage over a median 3.2 years without any unplanned percutaneous/surgical procedures (90% final clinical success rate; median CCI = 8.7). Staged CERES using recanalization (n = 6) or diversion (n = 1) strategies achieved Grade A patency in 5/7 (71%) patients after a median of 2 follow-up procedures over a median 12-month treatment period; 2 failed recanalization patients were salvaged by indefinite hepaticoenterostomy stent or elective surgery, respectively. Among staged CERES, 2 treatment-related cholangitis occurred (29%) and 2 recurring strictures (29%) developed over a median 8.4 year follow-up; recurring strictures were endoscopically remodeled (n = 1) or indefinitely stented (n = 1); final Grade A/B biliary patency was achieved in 5/7 (71%) and definitive cure in 4/7 (57%). CONCLUSIONS: CERES controls acute symptoms in selected post-cholecystectomy TBD patients allowing subsequent staged endoscopic therapy. Definitive cure or long-term biliary drainage is possible in most cases and elective surgery can be facilitated in the remainder.

Findings in the distal and proximal colon in colonoscopy screening after positive FIT and related pre-procedure factors.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the gold standard method for the early diagnosis and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). Screening programs include immune determination of blood in feces. Regardless of the method used, proximal colon lesions appear to be detected less frequently. OBJECTIVE: Analyze the characteristics of proximal and distal lesions and possible predisposing factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed of 692 patients from the CRC screening program with FIT ≥ 100ngHb/ml (October 2017 - October 2018). The right colon was examined twice as patients were participating in a randomized clinical trial to re-evaluate the right colon by forward-viewing endoscope or proximal retroflexion. The adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced neoplasia (AN) and CRC in the proximal and distal colon, the histological and morphological characteristics in each section were analyzed. RESULTS: 52.9% of the patients were male, with a mean age of 59.5 years (SD: 7.6). 1490 polyps were found and the ADR was 57.7% (distal 42% and proximal 37%). Detection rates were 45.8% for AN, 40.9% for advanced adenomas, 5.2% for advanced SSL and CRC was diagnosed in 4.8% of patients. Males had more AN than females. The mean age of patients with AN was significantly higher. AN were associated with smoking and alcohol consumption (p=0.0001). Globally, FIT levels were higher in patients with AN (p=0.003). Sixty-six per cent of cancers were distally located and 61.3% of CRC were diagnosed in the early stages. CONCLUSIONS: In an average-risk asymptomatic population undergoing colonoscopy after positive FIT, AN were more common in the distal colon in males, older patients, smokers and those with alcohol intake.

Reply to: "Does it matter which plastic stents we use for the treatment of post-surgical leaks? Or is it a one-size-fits-all?"

We appreciate the interest of Sánchez-Luna et al. in our article "Endoscopic internal drainage using transmural double-pigtail stents in leaks following upper gastrointestinal tract surgery", and find their suggestion about using softer urological double pigtail stents (DPS) for endoscopic internal drainage (EID) interesting.

The role of endoscopic ultrasound guidance for biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage to overcome the limitations of ERCP: a retrospective evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ductal access and drainage (EUS-DAD) of biliary/pancreatic ducts after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is less invasive than percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). The actual need for EUS-DAD remains unknown. We aimed to determine how often EUS-DAD is needed to overcome ERCP failure. METHODS: Consecutive duct access procedures (n = 2205; 95 % biliary) performed between June 2013 and November 2015 at a tertiary-care center were reviewed. ERCP was used first line, EUS-DAD as salvage after ERCP, and PTBD when both had failed. Procedures were defined as "index" in patients without prior endoscopic duct access and "combined" when EUS-DAD followed successful ERCP. The main outcomes were the EUS-DAD and PTBD rates. RESULTS: EUS-DAD was performed in 7.7 % (170/2205) of overall procedures: 9.1 % (116/1274) index and 5.8 % (54/931) follow-up. Most index EUS-DADs were performed following (46 %) or anticipating (39 %) ERCP failure, whereas 15 % followed successful ERCP (combined procedures). Among index procedures, the EUS-DAD rate was higher in surgically altered anatomy (58.2 % [39 /67)] vs. 6.4 % [77/1207]); PTBD was required in 0.2 % (3/1274). Among follow-up procedures, ERCP represented 85.7 %, cholangiopancreatography through mature transmural fistulas 8.5 %, and EUS-DAD 5.8 %; no patient required PTBD. The secondary PTBD rate was 0.1 % (3/2205). Six primary PTBDs were performed (overall PTBD rate 0.4 % [9/2205]). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-DAD was required in 7.7 % of ERCPs for benign and malignant biliary/pancreatic duct indications. Salvage PTBD was required in 0.1 %. This high EUS-DAD rate reflects disease complexity, a wide definition of ERCP failure, and restrictive PTBD use, not poor ERCP skills. EUS-DAD effectively overcomes the limitations of ERCP eliminating the need for primary and salvage PTBD in most cases.

A new minimally invasive porcine model for the study of intrahepatic bile duct dilatation.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures are becoming more frequent nowadays and novel techniques are on the rise. These procedures require high technical experience and complex endoscopic skills. The goal of this study was to develop a new minimally invasive animal model of bile duct dilatation in the pig, in order to offer a new tool for endoscopic and surgical therapy training and to test new therapeutic strategies. METHODS: Twenty-five female pigs underwent laparoscopic surgery in order to perform a common hepatic duct ligation. A pre- and postoperative biochemical analyses were performed: glucose, albumin, total bilirubin (TBil), gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase, and alanine aminotransferase were measured. Surgical time and intra- and postoperative complications were registered. Five to six days after surgery, an EUS was performed to measure intrahepatic duct size (mm). Distance from the bile duct to the EUS transductor was also recorded (mm). T-student for quantitative variables was applied. Statistical significance was defined as p value ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: The mean surgical time was 29.5 ± 14.9 min. In five pigs (20%), some mild intraoperative problems occurred. A severe postoperative complication occurred in one animal (4%). No postoperative mortality was registered. Postoperative serum analyses showed an increase in total bilirubin (p = 0.005) and gamma glutamyl transferase levels (p = 0.001). Postoperative EUS showed dilatation of the intrahepatic bile duct in 76% of pigs, with a mean diameter of 9.6 ± 3.6 mm (distance from the gastric wall of 17.0 ± 6.4 mm). CONCLUSION: The surgical procedure described here is a safe technique to induce dilatation of the intrahepatic bile ducts in the pig, with a minimally invasive approach and a high efficacy rate. This animal model might be useful for EUS techniques training and for evaluating new therapeutic approaches.

Lumen apposing metal stents versus tubular self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy in malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is an effective option for biliary drainage in malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) are increasingly been used for EUS-CDS. It is unknown how LAMS compare to tubular self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for EUS-CDS. Our aim is to compare the clinical outcomes of LAMS versus SEMS for EUS-CDS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS after failed ERCP for initial biliary drainage between 2011 and 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients who had conventional covered SEMS and LAMS placed for EUS-CDS. Outcome measures included unplanned procedural events, technical success, clinical success, adverse events and reinterventions. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: During the study period 57 patients met inclusion criteria (37 LAMS, 20 SEMS). All EUS-CDS were technically successful (LAMS group 95% CI 90.3-100%, SEMS group 95% CI 83.2-100%). There were no differences between groups in unplanned procedural events (4 LAMS deployment issues, 2 mild bleeding in SEMS group; 10 vs 10.8%), clinical success (37/37 [100%] vs 19/20 [95%]), and short-term adverse events (5/37 [13.5%] vs 4/20 [20%], p = 0.71). Complete follow-up data were available in 41 patients for a mean of 376 ± 145 days. Endoscopic reintervention was required for duodenal stent placement (n = 9) or biliary stent dysfunction (n = 4), with no difference between LAMS and SEMS group (6/37 [16.2%] vs 7/20 [35%]). There were no differences in overall survival between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy after failed ERCP has equally high technical and clinical success rates with either LAMS or SEMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. No differences in adverse events, reinterventions and survival were seen with either type of stent. The cost-effectiveness of LAMS vs SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy remains to be proven.

The safety and efficacy of a new 20-mm lumen apposing metal stent (lams) for the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections: a large international, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) allows an easy access to peripancreatic fluid collections (PPFCs) and the possibility of performing direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new 20-mm LAMS in the management of PPFCs. This novel stent represents the largest diameter LAMS available on the market to date. METHODS: This is an international, multicenter retrospective study involving 20 centers. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided PPFC drainage using a 20-mm LAMS were included. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success. Secondary outcomes were rate and the severity of adverse events. RESULTS: A total 105 patients underwent PPFC drainage using the new 20-mm LAMS and 106 LAMS were placed. Technical success was 100% (106/106). 7/105 patients died due to causes not related to the stent. Clinical success was achieved in 92/98 patients (93.9%). Significant adverse events occurred in 8/98 patients (8.16%): 4 cases (4.08%) of bleeding, 3 cases (3.06%) of suprainfection, 1 case of gastric outlet obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study demonstrated acceptable rates of technical and clinical success using a new 20-mm LAMS for PPFC, including walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). The results of our study suggest that a new 20-mm LAMS is non-inferior in terms of safety, efficacy, and adverse events as compared to smaller diameter LAMS in the management of PPFCs, including pancreatic psuedocysts (PP) and WOPN. Randomized controlled studies will be needed to determine the ideal size of LAMS need to achieve the greatest clinical benefit with the minimized risk exposure for this high-risk patient population.

Endoscopic internal drainage using transmural double-pigtail stents in leaks following upper gastrointestinal tract surgery.

INTRODUCTION: different endoscopic procedures have been proposed for the management of surgical leaks. Endoscopic internal drainage using trans-fistulary double-pigtail plastic stents has emerged as an alternative strategy, especially in fistulae presenting after laparoscopic gastric sleeve. METHODS: a retrospective case series was performed at a single tertiary care center including all upper gastrointestinal post-surgical leaks primarily managed with endoscopic trans-fistulary insertion of double-pigtail plastic stents. Clinical success was defined as the absence of extravasation of oral radiographic contrast and radiological resolution of the collection with adequate oral intake Results: nine patients were included, six (66.6 %) females with a median age of 52.6 years (IQR 47-60). Five cases presented after laparoscopic gastric sleeve, two cases after distal esophagectomies, one after a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and another one after a pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fistulae measured < 10 mm in five patients (55.6 %) and 10-20 mm in four patients (44.4 %). Six were early leaks. Technical and clinical success was achieved in nine (100 %) and seven (77.8 %) cases, respectively. Seven (77.8 %) patients required ≤ 3 endoscopic procedures. The median hospital stay after the first endoscopic procedure was 12 days (IQR 6.5-17.5 days), while the overall median time until leak healing was 118.5 days (IQR 84.5-170). One patient with a post-esophagectomy intrathoracic leak developed an esophageal-tracheal fistula 37 days after stent deployment. CONCLUSIONS: our results support the use of endoscopic internal drainage in postsurgical abdominal leaks, regardless of the type of surgery. Although only two patients with intrathoracic dehiscence were included.