Efficacy and safety of long-term indwelling plastic stents after resolution of pancreatic fluid collections with endoscopic transmural drainage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) may recur after resolution with endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) and standard stent removal (SSR). Herein, we compared the efficacy and safety of leaving long-term indwelling plastic stents (LTIS) vs. standard stent removal after PFC resolution with ETD. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane databases from inception to September 2022. Full-text articles comparing long-term (> 6 months) outcomes of LTIS and SSR were eligible, as well as single-arm studies with ≥ 10 patients with LTIS. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Measured outcomes included the following: (A) PFC recurrence; (B) interventions for PFC recurrence; (C) technical success; and (D) adverse events (AEs). Meta-analysis was carried out using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 16 studies, encompassing 1285 patients. Compared to SSR after PFC resolution with ETD, LTIS was associated with significantly lower risk of PFC recurrence (3% vs. 23%; OR 0.22 [95%CI 0.09-0.52]; I2 = 45%) and need for interventions (2% vs. 14%; OR 0.35 [95%CI 0.16-0.78]; I2 = 0%). The superiority of LTIS on reducing PFC recurrence was found with walled-off necrosis, with or without disconnected pancreatic duct, and with placement of ≥ 2 LTIS. When using LTIS, the pooled proportion of AEs was 8% (95%CI 4-11%) and technical success was 93% (95%CI 86-99%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that LTIS after PFC resolution with ETD is feasible, safe, and superior to SSR in reducing the risk of PFC recurrence and need for interventions.

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

BACKGROUND: The outflow of pancreatic juice into the duodenum is often impaired in pancreatic inflammatory diseases. The basis of interventional treatment in these cases is anatomical transpapillary access of the main pancreatic duct during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which ensures the physiological outflow of pancreatic juice into the lumen of the digestive tract. However, in some patients, anatomical changes prevent transpapillary drainage of the main pancreatic duct. Surgery is the treatment of choice in such cases. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes of all patients with acute or chronic pancreatitis who underwent endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis under EUS guidance in 2018-2023 at the Department of General, Gastroenterological and Oncological Surgery, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland. RESULTS: In 9 patients [7 men, 2 women; mean age 53.45 (36-66) years], endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis under EUS guidance was performed because of the lack of transpapillary access during ERCP. Narrowing of the main pancreatic duct at the head of the pancreas was observed in 4/9 patients (44.44%). Pancreatic fragmentation (disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome) was diagnosed in 3/9 patients (33.33%). In 2/9 patients (22.22%), narrowing of the pancreatoenteric anastomosis was observed after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Technical success of endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy was observed in 8/9 patients (88.89%). Endotherapeutic complications were observed in 2/9 patients (22.22%). Clinical success was achieved in 8/9 patients (88.89%). The mean follow-up period was 451 (42-988) d. Long-term success of endoscopic pancreatogastric anastomosis was achieved in 7/9 patients (77.78%). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic pancreaticogastrostomy under EUS guidance is an effective and safe treatment method, especially in the absence of transpapillary access to the main pancreatic duct.

Disconnected Pancreatic Duct Syndrome: A Rare Complication of Pancreatitis.

Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is a rare complication of a common disease. Typically, DPDS occurs in acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP), chronic pancreatitis, abdominal surgery, or trauma. We present a case of DPDS from acute non-necrotizing pancreatitis (ANNP). A 41-year-old male with a history of alcohol use and prior AP presented with progressive, severe left-sided abdominal pain that was worse with movement. Labs revealed a lipase of 95 U/L (normal range 11-82 U/L). Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen/pelvis (A/P) with IV contrast demonstrated a large left-sided pleural effusion, non-necrotic pancreatic pseudocysts, and a large subdiaphragmatic fluid collection. Thoracentesis of the pleural effusion revealed an amylase of 601 U/L confirming pancreatic etiology. A subsequent magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) confirmed complex peripancreatic ascites, rapid subdiaphragmatic fluid accumulation, and a fistula from the pancreatic tail to retroperitoneum concerning for a rapidly dissecting pancreatic pseudocyst. He ultimately underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stent placement in the main pancreatic duct. His left-sided abdominal pain rapidly improved, and the patient was discharged. CT A/P one week after discharge showed a reduced size of subdiaphragmatic fluid collection. DPDS is usually seen in patients with a history of ANP. Our case demonstrates that it can also occur in ANNP, which has not previously been described in the literature. Therefore, a high index of clinical suspicion must be maintained for DPDS even in ANNP given its potential for severe complications.

Clinical outcomes of long-term transmural drainage with double pigtail stents in disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome.

Background: Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is a common cause of recurrent pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), often requiring repeat drainage. Following initial drainage with lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS), replacement with transmural double pigtail stents (DPS) has been shown to be a viable drainage modality mitigating the risk of recurrence. The sparsity of literature on the consequences of this strategy requires further investigation. We analyze our outcomes of long-term transmural drainage with DPS in patients with DPDS and assess the safety and efficacy of this technique. Methods: This retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database from November 2015-May 2022 included all patients with DPDS who underwent removal of LAMS and replacement with long-term transmural DPS. Patient demographics, collection characteristics, drainage technique and outcomes, as well as follow-up data was collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: There were 139 patients who underwent endoscopic drainage of PFCs with LAMS during the study period. Seventy-eight patients [walled-off necrosis (n=65) and pseudocysts (n=13)] were found to have DPDS. Of these, 44 patients underwent successful LAMS removal followed by replacement with DPS and were included in the analysis. The median age was 57 years and 14 (32%) were female. The median stent dwell time was 394 days [interquartile range (IQR) 245, 853 days]. Spontaneous stent migration was seen in seven patients (16%), one of whom developed a PFC recurrence which was managed conservatively. The second recurrence was seen in a patient with indwelling DPS which did not require further intervention. There were no locoregional adverse events secondary to long-term indwelling DPS. Among the 28 patients who were followed for a year, three patients developed new-onset diabetes, and chronic pancreatitis (CP) changes in the disconnected segment were seen in eight patients, five of whom required pancreatic enzyme supplementation. Conclusions: Placement of long-term transmural DPS is an effective modality for preventing collection re-accumulation with a favorable safety profile. Randomized prospective studies are essential to investigate the optimal removal timing of indwelling stents to prevent loco-regional complications. Given the realized risk of CP in the disconnected pancreas, follow-up cross sectional imaging may help guide further therapy.

Síndrome de desconexión del conducto pancreático

El síndrome del ducto pancreático desconectado (SDPD) consiste en la disrupción del ducto pancreático principal con pérdida de continuidad entre el remanente pancreático distal viable y el tracto gastrointestinal, generalmente causado por necrosis ductal secundaria a pancreatitis aguda grave. Esto resulta en fuga de fluido pancreático, provocando un curso de enfermedad prolongado y complicaciones. La literatura sobre este tema es limitada, con algoritmos de tratamiento poco claros. Hemos realizado una revisión de la literatura sobre el tema. Revisión en Pubmed y Scielo (2011-2021) de artículos en inglés y español utilizando términos «síndrome del conducto pancreático desconectado», «DPDS» y «páncreas desconectado» encontrando 16 artículos relevantes. Dadas las pocas citas, se revisaron las referencias de estos artículos. Finalmente, revisamos un total de 21 artículos. Entre las referencias encontradas existe 1 metaanálisis, 4 estudios prospectivos y no existen ensayos aleatorizados.

Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is characterized by disruption of the main pancreatic duct with a loss of continuity between the viable upstream pancreatic parenchyma and the gastrointestinal tract, generally caused by ductal necrosis after severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis. This compromised ductal integrity leads to extraductal leakage of pancreatic secretions, causing a prolonged disease course and complications. The existing literature is limited, with unclear therapeutic algorithms. We have performed a review of the literature on DPDS. Review in Pubmed and Scielo (2011-2021) of articles in English and Spanish using the terms "disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome", "DPDS" and "disconnected pancreas" finding 16 relevant articles. Given the few citations, the references of these articles was reviewed. Finally, we found 21 articles. Among them, there is one meta-analysis, 4 prospective studies and no randomized trials.