Impact and assessment of training models in interventional endoscopic ultrasound.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound (IEUS) has gained significant popularity in recent years because of its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. The proper training of endoscopists is critical to ensure safe and effective procedures. This review study aims to assess the impact of different training models on the competence of trainees performing IEUS. Eight studies that evaluated simulators for IEUS were identified in the medical literature. Various training models have been used, including the EASIE-R, Mumbai EUS, EUS Magic Box, EndoSim, Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy model, and an ex vivo porcine model (HiFi SAM). The trainees underwent traditional didactic lectures, hands-on training using simulators, and direct supervision by experienced endoscopists. The effectiveness of these models has been evaluated based on objective and subjective parameters such as technical proficiency, operative time, diagnostic success, and participant feedback. As expected, the majority of skills were improved after the training sessions concluded, although the risk of bias is high in the absence of external validation. It is difficult to determine the ideal simulator among the existing ones because of the wide variation between them in terms of costs, reusability, design, fidelity of anatomical structures and feedback, and types of procedures performed. There is a need for a standardized approach for the evaluation of IEUS simulators and the ways skills are acquired by trainees, as well as a clearer definition of the key personal attributes necessary for developing a physician into a skilled endoscopist capable of performing basic and advanced therapeutic EUS interventions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis: Are we there yet?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is increasingly used as a therapeutic approach for gastrointestinal diseases, especially with the advent of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS). This has led to a rise in of EUS-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis procedures. Due to the reliability of intestinal conduits with LAMS, indications for EUS-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis are becoming more common and trend to potentially be standard care for gastric outlet obstruction, afferent loop syndrome, and EUS-directed transgastric interventions such as EUS-directed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Retrospective and prospective data indicate that the procedure is becoming widely adopted with promising outcomes. This article aims to review the existing literature on EUS-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis and predict its future developments.

Partially covered versus uncovered pyloro-duodenal stents for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction: Randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to compare the efficacy of partially covered duodenal stent (PCDS) vs. uncovered duodenal stent (UCDS) in patients suffering from unresectable primary malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). METHODS: This was a prospective international randomized controlled study conducted in 10 high-volume institutions. Consecutive patients suffering from malignant GOO were recruited. The primary outcome measurement was the reintervention rate. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality, causes of stent dysfunction, and the duration of stent patency. RESULTS: Between March 2017 and October 2020, 115 patients (59 PCDS, 56 UCDS) were recruited. The 1-year reintervention was not significantly different (PCDS vs. UDCS = 12/59, 20.3% vs. 14/56, 25%, P = 0.84). There was a trend to fewer patients with tumor ingrowth in the PCDS group (6/59 [10.2%]) vs. 13/56 [23.2%], P = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the technical success (100% vs. 100%, P = 1), clinical success (91.5% vs. 98.2%, P = 0.21), procedural time (21.5 [interquartile range [IQR] 17-30] vs. 20.0 [IQR 15-34.75], P = 0.62), hospital stay (4 [IQR 3-12] vs. 5 [IQR 3-8] days, P = 0.81), 30-day adverse events (18.6% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.62), or 30-day mortality (6.8% vs. 5.2%, P = 1.00). CONCLUSION: The use of PCDS was associated with a lower risk of tumor ingrowth but did not improve on reintervention rates or stent patency. Both kinds of stents could be used in this group of patients.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass, duodenal stent or laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

OBJECTIVES: Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) can be relieved by either laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (LGJ), endoscopic stenting (SEMS) or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (endoscopic ultrasound-guided balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass; EPASS). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the three treatment methods. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who suffered from malignant GOO between January 2012 to November 2020 that received either EPASS, LGJ or SEMS. The outcomes included the technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events and mortality, pre and post stenting GOO scores (GOOSs), stent patency and causes of stent dysfunction. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients were included (30 EPASS, 35 LGJ, 49 SEMS). The technical success of EPASS, LGJ and SEMS were 93.3%, 100%, 100% (P = 0.058) and clinical success rates were 93.3%, 80%, 87.8% (P = 0.276), respectively. Procedural time was longest for the LGJ group (P < 0.001). The EPASS group had the shortest hospital stay (EPASS 1.5 [1-17], LGJ 7 [2-44], SEMS 5 [2-46] days, P < 0.001). EPASS group also had the lowest rates of recurrent obstruction (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 36.7%, P = 0.002) and re-intervention (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 26.5%, P = 0.031). The 1-month GOOS was highest in the EPASS group (EPASS 3 [1-3], LGJ 3 [0-3], SEMS 2 [0-3], P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy was associated with better clinical outcomes then the other two procedures. The procedure may be the best option provided that the expertise is available.

Defining the endoscopic ultrasound features of chronic pancreatitis in Asians: a multicenter validation study.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features and criteria have been described in chronic pancreatitis, challenges remain with interoperator variability and ease of adoption. The aim of this study was to define and validate the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis in a multicenter prospective study in Asia. METHOD: The study was divided into two parts: the first part was conducted to derive the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis with adequate interoperator agreement; the second was to prospectively evaluate these features in a multicenter cross-sectional study and determine the optimal combination of features for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Prospectively enrolled cases had standard internationally validated radiologic or histologic features of chronic pancreatitis, and controls were patients without chronic pancreatitis who underwent EUS examination. RESULTS: The top six EUS features that had good interobserver agreement (mean kappa 0.73, range 0.60 - 0.90) were selected to be further evaluated in part II of the study. These included: hyperechoic foci with shadowing, lobularity with honeycombing, cysts, dilated main pancreatic duct, dilated side branches, and calculi in the main pancreatic duct. A total of 284 subjects (132 cases, 152 controls) were enrolled from 12 centers in Asia. All six features had high accuracy ranging from 63.3 % to 89.1 %. Two or more of these six EUS features accurately defined chronic pancreatitis (sensitivity 94.7 %, specificity 98.0 %), with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.986. CONCLUSION: This multicenter Asian study characterized and defined the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis. This provides a useful tool in clinical practice and further research in pancreatic cancer surveillance.

Periampullary Diverticula and ERCP Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Periampullary diverticulum (PAD) is most often asymptomatically found in elderly population. ERCP in the presence of PAD is technically challenging since the location and orientation of the ampulla could be altered. Various studies have reported differing results on the technical success and safety outcomes of ERCP in the presence of PAD. We aimed at a meta-analysis of such studies to assess the technical success and the occurrence of complications during ERCP in patients with PAD. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (earliest inception to October 2017). The search was done in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to identify studies. Studies that reported on the ERCP outcomes based on the presence of PAD were included. Both prospective and retrospective studies, manuscripts and abstracts were included. Only articles in English literature were included. The primary analysis focused on the overall technical success of ERCP in the presence of PAD, and the secondary analysis was to estimate the risk of occurrence of complications. RESULTS: Our search resulted in 16 studies that were included for final analysis. These 16 studies reported on 2794 patients, who had PAD, and the control group included 13,032 patients, who did not have a PAD during ERCP. Our meta-analysis of this data showed an Odd's ratio estimate of having a successful ERCP procedure in patients with PAD to be 0.51 [95% C.I. (0.35-0.72)] when compared to patients without it. This was statistically significant, with a p value 0.00. Considerable heterogeneity was noted among the studies. The heterogeneity proportion was quantified at 74.6% based on I2 statistic. The secondary outcomes measured were complications. We analyzed the pooled Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP), cholangitis, perforation, and bleeding. Only those studies that had the data for these complications in both the study and the control groups were selected. PEP: The pooled Odd's estimate of having PEP was 1.28, [95% C.I (0.88-1.87)] from 12 studies reporting on 1863 patients with PAD in comparison with 7803 patients without it. The risk of PEP occurrence tended to be more in the group without PAD, though it was not statistically significant, with a p value 0.20. There was some heterogeneity observed between the studies, with the quantification I2 statistic being 28.6%. Our analysis shows that having PAD does not put a patient at increased risk for PEP. Bleeding: The pooled Odds estimate was 1.69, 95% C.I. 0.88-3.25 from nine studies reporting on 1816 patients with PAD in comparison with 5327 patients without it. This was not statistically significant, p value 0.11. Considerable heterogeneity was noted, with I2 being 55.7%. The risk of having a bleed was noted to be more in control group, and having PAD did not put patients at increased risk for bleeding during an ERCP procedure. Perforation: Patients with PAD undergoing ERCP were not at increased risk for perforation. Seven studies reported on this complication. This was noted in seven patients out of 1245 in study group, and 19 patients out of 4912 in control group. The pooled Odd's estimate was 1.24, 95% C.I. 0.54-2.87. There was no statistical significance, p value 0.61. No heterogeneity was noted among the studies included in this analysis. Cholangitis: Only four studies reported on this complication. In a total of 778 patients in study group, four had cholangitis and eight had this complication out of 3886 patients in the control group. The pooled Odd's was 2.12, 95% C.I. 0.61-7.33. There was no statistical significance, p value 0.24. No heterogeneity was noted. CONCLUSION: ERCP is technically feasible and increasingly successful when performed by experts in the presence of PAD. The risk of complications such as PEP, bleeding, perforation and cholangitis does not differ between ERCP done in patients with and without PAD.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel.

OBJECTIVES: Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures. METHODS: Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question. RESULTS: A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required. CONCLUSIONS: The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Feasibility of a complete pancreatobiliary linear endoscopic ultrasound examination from the stomach.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Linear endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) evaluation of the pancreaticobiliary system usually requires scanning from both the stomach and the duodenum. The feasibility of assessing the complete pancreaticobiliary system from the stomach alone has not been studied. We aimed to conceptualize a system-based approach (the railroad approach) for linear pancreaticobiliary EUS (PB-EUS) and evaluate whether the pancreaticobiliary anatomy could be assessed from the stomach alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three maneuvers were conceptualized and evaluated (the alpha maneuver in the stomach, and sigma and xi maneuvers in the duodenum). The maneuvers were prospectively evaluated in 100 consecutive patients requiring PB-EUS.  RESULTS: The median procedure time for the three maneuvers was significantly higher than that for the alpha maneuver alone (12 vs. 6 minutes; P ≤ 0.001). The visualization rate of the hilum and common hepatic duct was significantly higher from the stomach than from the duodenum (100 % vs. 83.5 %; P ≤ 0.001), while rates for the head of the pancreas (100 % vs 100 %) and uncinate process (100 % vs 100 %) did not differ. The suprapancreatic common bile duct (CBD; 92 % vs 100 %; P = 0.006), retropancreatic CBD (95 % vs 100 %; P = 0.06), and pancreatic duct in the head (94 % vs 100 %; P = 0.03) were not completely visualized from the stomach, because of pancreatic calcification or shadow from the ligaments. The EUS diagnosis made from the stomach and duodenum did not differ after excluding body and tail lesions (pancreatic head neoplasms, 100 % vs 100 %; CBD stone, 100 % vs 84.6 %; pancreatic cysts in the head, 83.3 % vs 83.3 %, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Adequate anatomical and diagnostic information on the pancreaticobiliary system may be acquired by EUS scanning from the stomach alone and with a shorter procedure time.

Early removal of biflanged metal stents in the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Dedicated stents placed under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance have shown promise for the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). A long duration of stent placement may increase the risk of adverse events. We prospectively evaluated the effects of (i) early removal of biflanged metal stents (BFMSs) and (ii) additional stenting of the pancreatic duct with plastic stents in patients with ductal leaks, on the risk of WON recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Symptomatic patients with pancreatic WON underwent EUS-guided BFMS placement, followed by necrosectomy, when required, from Day 3. A 5 Fr plastic stent was placed in patients with ductal leak. BFMS was removed when the WON cavity had collapsed completely. Patients were followed up at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: BFMS placement was successful in all 88 patients. A total of 64 patients (72.7 %) underwent necrosectomy (median 3 sessions). All BFMSs were removed at a median of 3.5 weeks (range 3 - 17 weeks). Ductal disconnection and leak occurred in 53/87 (60.9 %) and 61/87 (70.1 %) patients, respectively. A 5 Fr stent was placed in 56/61 patients (91.8 %) with ductal leak. Overall, 22 patients (25.0 %) had adverse events (17 mild, 1 moderate, 3 severe, 1 fatal). Recurrence was noted in 8/88 (9.1 %) at a median follow-up of 22 months. The recurrence rate was higher in patients with ductal disconnection than in those without (13.2 % vs. 2.9 %; P = 0.08), and was similar in patients with vs. without pancreatic duct stenting (7.1 % vs. 12.9 %; P = 0.44). Seven recurrences (87.5 %) partially regressed on follow-up and did not require therapy; in one case, drainage with a plastic stent was performed. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term BFMS placement is an effective therapy for pancreatic WON. The majority of recurrences developed in patients with ductal disconnection and did not require therapy. Additional pancreatic duct stents probably do not influence the recurrence rate.

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.

Technical review of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy in 2017.

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) can be caused by benign and malignant diseases and often leads to a reduction in patient quality of life. Lately, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has emerged. At the present time, there are three types of EUS-GE using lumen-apposing biflanged metal stents (LAMS): (i) direct EUS-GE; (ii) assisted EUS-GE using retrieval/dilating balloon, single balloon overtube, nasobiliary drain and ultraslim endoscope; and (iii) EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass (EPASS). Overall technical success rate is approximately 90% regardless of technique used, although this is based on two retrospective studies only. In the EPASS procedure, the success rate of the one-step procedure was higher than that of the two-step procedure (100% vs 82%). Clinical success was almost uniform when stent placement was technically successful. Although there have been no-stent induced procedural deaths, adverse events were seen in several cases. One technically failed case carried out using balloon-assisted EUS-GE was converted to laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy. Two failed cases in EPASS procedure improved with conservative treatment. In the present review, we show the feasibility and outcomes using novel EUS-GE using LAMS. Clinical prospective trials with comparison to luminal enteral stents and surgical GE are warranted.

EUS-guided pseudocyst drainage: prospective evaluation of early removal of fully covered self-expandable metal stents with pancreatic ductal stenting in selected patients.

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided pseudocyst drainage with fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) was recently described. The appropriate period for stent removal is not known. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided FCSEMS placement for 3 weeks, along with pancreatic ductal stenting in selected patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-center evaluation. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Symptomatic pseudocysts in the body and tail region of the pancreas. INTERVENTIONS: EUS-guided transgastric placement of FCSEMS. MRCP was performed after 3 weeks. Patients with a suspected pancreatic duct leak underwent ERCP and plastic stent placement. The FCSEMSs were removed at 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Success of FCSEMS placement, adverse events, and recurrence rate. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients met the eligibility criteria. Technical and functional success was achieved in 43 patients (intention to treat, 91.48% and 95.34% patients [per protocol, 41/43, respectively]). Adverse events occurred in 2 patients (cyst infections, 4.6%). Follow-up of 42 patients at 3 weeks was performed. MRCP detected a ductal leak in 3 patients (7.1%) and a disconnected duct in 2 patients (4.7%). ERCP and stenting were successful in all 3 patients with a ductal leak. During a median follow-up of 306 days in 42 patients, 2 recurrences (4.7%) were detected, both in patients with disconnected duct. Multivariate analysis showed that pancreatic ductal leak or disconnection was an independent factor affecting pseudocyst resolution at 3 weeks (P = .0001). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSION: Short-term placement of FCSEMSs with pancreatic ductal stenting in selected patients appears safe and effective for the treatment of pseudocysts.

Multicenter comparative evaluation of endoscopic placement of expandable metal stents for malignant distal common bile duct obstruction by ERCP or EUS-guided approach.

BACKGROUND: A single session of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) may be a viable alternative to ERCP in patients with malignant distal common bile duct (CBD) obstruction. There is no study comparing EUS-BD and ERCP for the relief of distal malignant biliary obstruction. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for malignant distal biliary obstruction by using ERCP and EUS-BD. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective analysis. SETTING: Tertiary referral centers. PATIENTS: Patients with malignant distal CBD obstruction requiring SEMS placement. INTERVENTIONS: Patients in the EUS-BD group underwent EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or EUS-guided antegrade (EUS-AG) procedures after 1 or more failed ERCP attempts. Patients in the ERCP group underwent retrograde SEMS placement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Composite success (the ability to complete the intended therapeutic procedure in a single session and resulting in a greater than 50% decrease in bilirubin over 2 weeks). RESULTS: The study included 208 patients, 104 treated with ERCP and 104 treated with EUS-BD (68 EUS-CDS, 36 EUS-AG). SEMS placement was successful in 98 patients in the ERCP group and 97 in the EUS-BD group (94.23% vs 93.26%, P = 1.00). The frequency of adverse events in the ERCP and EUS-BD groups was 8.65% and 8.65%, respectively. Postprocedure pancreatitis rates were higher in the ERCP group (4.8% vs 0, P = .059). The mean procedure times in the ERCP and EUS-BD groups were similar (30.10 and 35.95 minutes, P = .05). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with malignant distal CBD obstruction requiring SEMS placement, the short-term outcome of EUS-BD is comparable to that of ERCP.

Novel ex vivo model for hands-on teaching of and training in EUS-guided biliary drainage: creation of "Mumbai EUS" stereolithography/3D printing bile duct prototype (with videos).

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative rescue method in patients with failed ERCP. Opportunities for teaching and training are limited because of a low case volume at most centers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a stereolithography/3-dimensional (3D) printing bile duct prototype for teaching and training in EUS-BD. DESIGN: Prospective observational feasibility study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. SUBJECTS: Twenty endosonographers attending an interventional EUS workshop. INTERVENTION: A prototype of a dilated biliary system was prepared by computer-aided design and 3D printing. The study participants performed guidewire manipulation and EUS-BD procedures (antegrade procedure and/or choledochoduodenostomy) on the prototype. Participants were scored with the device on a scale of 1 to 5 via a questionnaire. Participants' success rate for various steps of the EUS-BD procedure was noted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Subjective and objective evaluation of the prototype regarding its overall applicability, quality of radiographic and EUS images, and 4 steps of EUS-BD procedure (needle puncture, guidewire manipulation, tract dilation, stent placement). RESULTS: Fifteen participants returned the questionnaire, and 10 completed all 4 steps of EUS-BD. The median score for overall utility was 4, whereas that for EUS and US views was 5. Participants with experience in performing more than 20 EUS-BD procedures scored the prototype significantly lower for stent placement (P = .013) and equivalent for needle puncture, tract dilation, and wire manipulation. The success rate of various steps was 100% for needle puncture and tract dilation, 82.35% for wire manipulation, and 80% for stent placement. The mean overall procedure time was 18 minutes. LIMITATIONS: Small number of participants. CONCLUSION: The 3D printing bile duct prototype appears suitable for teaching of and training in the various steps of EUS-BD. Further studies are required to elucidate its role.

Structured endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) training program improved knowledge and skills of trainees: Results from the Asian EUS Group.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: A major reason impeding the growth of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in Asia is the lack of training availability. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the effectiveness of a short-term structured EUS training program in improving the knowledge and skill of EUS among trainees. METHODS: The study was conducted in six workshops in six countries including Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore and Philippines, within a year. Trainees were evaluated using written and skill tests before and after completion of the training. RESULTS: Pre- and post-workshop written tests from a total of 62 trainees were analyzed. Compared with pre-training, the trainees improved significantly in the overall mean (± SD) scores after the training (66.0 ± 0.3% to 77.5 ± 0.2%, P < 0.0001). Thirty-one trainees were randomly selected to undergo a skill test before and after the course. Compared with pre-training, the proportions of trainees who succeeded in locating each structure post-training were: celiac axis (36-80.5%), pancreatic body (51.5-80.5%), pancreatic body and tail (42-77.5%), splenic vein and artery (48.5-84%), left kidney (60-83%), and spleen (47-83%). Overall, there was a significant improvement in the proportion of trainees' successful localization of structures post-training compared to before training (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Following a structured training program, trainees' knowledge and skills in EUS improved significantly. Structured training courses appear to be an effective way of imparting EUS knowledge and skills to aspiring endosonographers in the Asian region.

Multicenter study on endoscopic ultrasound-guided expandable biliary metal stent placement: choice of access route, direction of stent insertion, and drainage route.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) using expandable biliary metal stents has emerged as an acceptable alternative in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for malignant biliary obstruction. However, there is no consensus over the preferred access route (transhepatic or extrahepatic), direction of stent insertion (antegrade or retrograde) or drainage route (transluminal or transpapillary) in patients potentially suitable for multiple methods. The present study compares success and complication rates in patients undergoing EUS-BD via different methods. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective analysis. Records of patients who underwent EUS-BD for malignant obstructive jaundice at four centers were entered in a standard database. Success and complications were compared for different techniques. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were analyzed. EUS-BD was successful in 65 patients (95.6%). There was no significant difference in the success rates of different techniques. Complications were seen in 14 patients (20.6%) and mortality in three patients (4.4%). Complications were significantly higher for the transhepatic route compared to the transduodenal route (30.5% vs 9.3%, P=0.03). There was no significant difference in complication rates among transluminal and transpapillary stent placements, or direct and rendezvous stenting. Logistic regression analysis showed transhepatic access to be the only independent risk factor for complications (P=0.031, t=2.2). CONCLUSION: EUS-BD can be carried out with high success rates regardless of the choice of access route, stent direction or drainage route. However, complications are significantly higher with transhepatic access. The transduodenal route should be chosen for EUS-guided and rendezvous stent placements, when both routes are available.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus uncovered duodenal metal stenting for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction (DRA-GOO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic method to palliate malignant gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to assess whether the use of EUS-GE with a double balloon occluder for malignant gastric outlet obstruction could reduce the need for reintervention within 6 months compared with conventional duodenal stenting. METHODS: The was an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted at seven sites in Hong Kong, Belgium, Brazil, India, Italy, and Spain. Consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with malignant gastric outlet obstruction due to unresectable primary gastroduodenal or pancreatobiliary malignancies, a gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) of 0 (indicating an inability in intake food or liquids orally), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or lower were included and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either EUS-GE or duodenal stenting. The primary outcome was the 6-month reintervention rate, defined as the percentage of patients requiring additional endoscopic intervention due to stent dysfunction (ie, restenosis of the stent due to tumour ingrowth, tumour overgrowth, or food residue; stent migration; or stent fracture) within 6 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified secondary outcomes were technical success (successful placement of a stent), clinical success (1-point improvement in gastric outlet obstruction score [GOOS] within 3 days), adverse events within 30 days, death within 30 days, duration of stent patency, GOOS at 1 month, and quality-of-life scores. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03823690) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 185 patients were screened and 97 (46 men and 51 women) were recruited and randomly allocated (48 to the EUS-GE group and 49 to the duodenal stent group). Mean age was 69·5 years (SD 12·6) in the EUS-GE group and 64·8 years (13·0) in the duodenal stent group. All randomly allocated patients completed follow-up and were analysed. Reintervention within 6 months was required in two (4%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 14 (29%) in the duodenal stent group [p=0·0020; risk ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·04-0·61]). Stent patency was longer in the EUS-GE group (median not reached in either group; HR 0·13 [95% CI 0·08-0·22], log-rank p<0·0001). 1-month GOOS was significantly better in the EUS-GE group (mean 2·41 [SD 0·7]) than the duodenal stent group (1·91 [0·9], p=0·012). There were no statistically significant differences between the EUS-GE and duodenal stent groups in death within 30 days (ten [21%] vs six [12%] patients, respectively, p=0·286), technical success, clinical success, or quality-of-life scores at 1 month. Adverse events occurred 11 (23%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 12 (24%) in the duodenal stent group within 30 days (p=1·00); three cases of pneumonia (two in the EUS-GE group and one in the duodenal stent group) were considered to be procedure related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction, EUS-GE can reduce the frequency of reintervention, improve stent patency, and result in better patient-reported eating habits compared with duodenal stenting, and the procedure should be used preferentially over duodenal stenting when expertise and required devices are available. FUNDING: Research Grants Council (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China) and Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva.

Current status on the diagnosis and evaluation of pancreatic tumor in Asia with particular emphasis on the role of endoscopic ultrasound.

In Asia, the incidence of pancreatic cancer in some countries has been increasing. Owing to most cases being diagnosed late, prognosis for pancreatic cancer remains dismal. It is clear that the future for pancreatic cancer lies in early detection. While the possible presence of pancreatic masses is often first raised by non-invasive abdominal imaging, such as computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, smaller lesions and locoregional lymph node metastases are often not detectable by these means. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) offers a higher sensitivity (93-100%) for detection of small potentially curable pancreatic masses than other existing imaging modalities. It is also recommended for the evaluation of portal vein confluence, portal vein, celiac axis, and superior mesentric artery origin, and exclusion of resectability. Due to the closer proximity of EUS to the target structure, and lower rate of needle tract seeding, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic mass is considered the most suitable tissue acquisition technique. Lastly, EUS also enables the performance of endoscopic interventions. Its performance can be further enhanced with newer techniques, including contrast-enhanced ultrasound and elastrography. It is anticipated that in the near future, molecular technologies may make it possible to detect microscopic amounts of cancer in tissue or blood, predict relapse and survival after therapy, as well as determine optimal therapy.