Outcomes of a single-step endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections using an electrocautery-enhanced coaxial lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent with and without fluoroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopy is often used during the endoscopic drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections (PFCs). An electrocautery-enhanced coaxial lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent (ELAMS) facilitates a single-step procedure and may avoid the need for fluoroscopy. This study compares the treatment outcomes using ELAMS with and without fluoroscopy. METHODS: Patients with PFCs who had cystogastrostomy from January 2014 to February 2017 were enrolled. Two groups were studied based on fluoroscopy use. Technical success was defined as uneventful insertion of ELAMS at time of procedure. Clinical success was defined as (i) clinical resolution of symptoms after the procedure and (ii) >75% reduction in cyst size on computed tomography 8 weeks after stent placement. Adverse events including bleeding, stent migration, and infection were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients (13 males) had PFCs drainage with ELAMS in the study period. The mean age was 51.6 ± 14.2 years. Thirteen patients had walled-off necrosis while eight had a pancreatic pseudocyst. The mean size of the PFCs was 11.3 ± 3.3 cm. Fluoroscopy was used in seven cases (33%) and was associated with a longer procedure time compared to non-fluoroscopy (43.1 ± 10.4 vs 33.3 ± 10.5 min, P = 0.025). This association was independent of the size, location, or type of PFCs. Fluoroscopy had no effect on the technical success rates. In fluoroless procedures, the clinical resolution was 91% as compared to 71% in fluoroscopy procedures (P = 0.52) and the radiologic resolution was 57% as compared to 71% in fluoroscopy procedures (P = 0. 65). Three cases of stent migration/displacement occurred in the fluoroless procedures. CONCLUSIONS: ELAMS may avoid the need for fluoroscopy during cystogastrostomy. Procedures without fluoroscopy were significantly shorter and fluoroscopy use had no impact on the technical or clinical success rates.

Current Status of Endoscopic Resection of Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.

Most gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs) are identified incidentally during endoscopic examination and are located in the stomach. Some SETs are malignant or have the potential to become malignant. Tumors originating from deeper layers, such as the muscularis propria or serosa, are not easy to diagnose and resect. Current guidelines recommend yearly endoscopic surveillance of SETs smaller than 2 cm. This recommendation may not be cost-effective in managing GI SETs. Endoscopic resection results not only in obtaining sufficient tissue for pathological diagnosis but also in resection and curing the tumor. Many different endoscopic methods for resection of GI SETs have been published in the literature. To avoid confusion, we have divided these methods into standard endoscopic submucosal dissection, modified endoscopic submucosal dissection, submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection, and nonexposed and exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection. These procedures offer less invasive approaches than surgery for resection of GI SETs and may be the most cost-effective in taking care of patients with GI SETs.

Diabetic Gastroparesis and Nondiabetic Gastroparesis.

Gastroparesis can be divided into diabetic and nondiabetic, and the 3 main causes of gastroparesis are diabetic, postsurgical, and idiopathic. Delayed gastric emptying is the main manifestation of motility disorders for gastroparesis. Symptoms of gastroparesis are nonspecific and severity can vary. Nausea and vomiting are more common in diabetic gastroparesis whereas abdominal pain and early satiety are more frequent in idiopathic gastroparesis. Medication is still the mainstay of treatment of gastroparesis; however, the development of gastric electric stimulation and gastric peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy brings more options for the treatment of diabetic and nondiabetic gastroparesis.