Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage using lumen-apposing metal stent of malignant afferent limb syndrome in patients with previous Whipple surgery: Multicenter study (with video).

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided digestive anastomosis (EUS-A) is a new alternative under evaluation in patients presenting with afferent limb syndrome (ALS) after Whipple surgery. The aim of the present study is to analyze the safety and effectiveness of EUS-A in ALS. METHODS: This is an observational multicenter study. All patients ≥18 years old with previous Whipple surgery presenting with ALS who underwent an EUS-A using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) between 2015 and 2021 were included. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as resolution of the ALS or ALS-related cholangitis. Furthermore, technical success, adverse event rate, and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (mean age: 65.5 ± 10.2 years; 44.4% male) were included. The most common underlying disease was pancreatic cancer (68.9%). EUS-A was performed at a median of 6 weeks after local tumor recurrence. The most common approach used was the direct/freehand technique (66.7%). Technical success was achieved in 95.6%, with no differences between large (≥15 mm) and small LAMS (97.4% vs. 100%, P = 0.664). Clinical success was retained in 91.1% of patients. A complementary treatment by dilation of the stent followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography through the LAMS was performed in three cases (6.7%). There were six recurrent episodes of cholangitis (14.6%) and two procedure-related adverse events (4.4%) after a median follow-up of 4 months. Twenty-six patients (57.8%) died during the follow-up due to disease progression. CONCLUSION: EUS-A is a safe and effective technique in the treatment of malignant ALS, achieving high clinical success with an acceptable recurrence rate.

Comparison of cold biopsy forceps vs cold snare for diminutive colorectal polyp removal: A multicenter non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: European guidelines recommends the use of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for removal of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCP). However, for DCP < 4 mm cold biopsy forceps (CBF) may be optional. We aimed to compare the efficacy of CSP with CBF for removal of DCP in routine colonoscopy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter non-inferiority randomized controlled trial. After screening, 123 patients were prospectively included and 180 DCPs were removed by either CBF or CSP after randomization (1:1). The primary end-point was the histological complete resection rate defined by negative additional biopsies taken from the edge of the polypectomy ulcer site. RESULTS: Among DCPs, 121 (67.2%) adenomas or sessile serrated lesions were considered for the analysis. Polyps were 4 [1-5] mm in size, mostly flat (55.4%) and located in the proximal colon (44.6%). The en bloc resection rate was higher in the CSP group than the CBF group (91.7% vs. 42.6%, p < 0.001). The histological complete resection rate was comparable in the two groups (93.33% vs 90.16%; p = 0.527), even for polyps < 4 mm (91.30% vs 91.30%; p = 1). All specimens were retrieved and there was no difference in terms of procedure times and adverse events. Finally, univariate analysis did not identify any potential factor associated with complete resection rate. CONCLUSION: In this study, CSP was comparable to CBF for the removal of DCP. Therefore, CBF may be considered as an alternative technique for resection of DCP, together with CSP, ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT04727918).

Safety of different electrocautery modes for endoscopic sphincterotomy: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography acute pancreatitis (PAP) and post-sphincterotomy hemorrhage are known adverse events of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Various electrosurgical currents can be used for endoscopic sphincterotomy. The extent to which this influences adverse events remains unclear. We assessed the comparative safety of different electrosurgical currents, through a Bayesian network meta-analysis of published studies merging direct and indirect comparison of trials. METHODS: We performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared the safety of different electrocautery modes for endoscopic sphincterotomy. RESULTS: Nine studies comparing four electrocautery modes (blended cut, pure cut, endocut, and pure cut followed by blended cut) with a combined enrollment of 1615 patients were included. The pooled results of the network meta-analysis did not show a significant difference in preventing post-sphincterotomy pancreatitis when comparing electrocautery modes. However, pure cut was associated with a statistically significant increased risk of bleeding compared with endocut [relative risk = 4.30; 95% confidence interval (1.53-12.87)]. On the other hand, the pooled results of the network meta-analysis showed no significant difference in prevention of bleeding when comparing blended cut versus endocut, pure cut followed by blended cut versus endocut, pure cut followed by blended cut versus blended cut, pure cut versus blended cut, and pure cut versus pure cut followed by blended cut. The results of rank probability found that endocut was most likely to be ranked the best. CONCLUSION: No electrocautery mode was superior to another with regard to preventing PAP. Endocut was superior with respect to preventing bleeding. Therefore, we suggest performing endoscopic sphincterotomy with endocut.

Drastic decrease of urgent endoscopies outside regular working hours during the Covid-19 pandemic in the paris area.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly affected medical care. We surmise that the number of urgent endoscopies outside regular working hours in the Paris area decreased as a result. The objective of this study was to describe the observed number of acts during the 2020 mandatory period of home isolation, compared to the values in prior years and the expected value for 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a multicenter cohort study to investigate the practice of urgent endoscopy acts, outside regular working hours, in Paris and its surrounding suburbs, in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected the number of endoscopies performed between January 17th and April 17th 2018, 2019 and 2020. We then collected clinical, endoscopic and outcome variables from the patients of years 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: From March 17th to April 17th (during home isolation), the number of acts was respectively of 147 in 2018, 137 in 2019, and 79 in 2020, lower that the expected number of 142 (-44.0%). In 2020, the number of endoscopies for suspected gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and findings of variceal and non-variceal bleeding decreased by 52.1%, 69.2% and 43.1% respectively, after a month of home isolation. In-hospital death rate were similar. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the urgent endoscopy caseload outside regular hours decreased nearly by half during the pandemic. Our results suggest a decreased number of endoscopies for suspected gastrointestinal bleeding, and findings of variceal and non-variceal bleeding.

Gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with pancreatic cancer: Causes and haemostatic treatments.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal bleeding is a rare but severe complication of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the causes and treatments of non-postoperative gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and explore the parameters associated with therapeutic effectiveness. METHODS: This was a single-centre observational retrospective study (2000-2017) with data collected from the prospectively coded diagnostic hospital's database system including patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had a gastrointestinal bleeding episode. Effectiveness of haemostatic treatment was assessed according to transfusion requirements and immediate and long-term haemostatic efficacy; the latter defined as no bleeding recurrence. RESULTS: The population included 72 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had 94 episodes of gastrointestinal bleeding. The main causes of gastrointestinal bleeding were gastroduodenal tumour invasion (56.4%) and oesophageal variceal bleeding due to left-sided portal hypertension (19.1%). In cases of gastrointestinal bleeding caused by tumour invasion, the main treatment was therapeutic endoscopy (41.5%). Among patients who had gastrointestinal bleeding by tumour invasion treated by endoscopy or radiation therapy, haemostatic immediate efficacy rates were 70.6% and 100%, respectively. Bleeding recurrence rates were 35.3% and 25.0%, for patients treated by endoscopy or radiation therapy, respectively, for a first episode of gastrointestinal bleeding by tumour invasion. Transfusion requirements, before and after treatment, were not different in patients treated by haemostatic radiation therapy for gastrointestinal bleeding by tumour invasion compared to other treatments (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI (0.06-1.59); p = 0.16). The median survival after all-cause gastrointestinal bleeding was 2.72 months (1.43-4.01). CONCLUSION: Gastroduodenal tumour invasion was the main cause of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; haemostatic radiation therapy is a potential interesting option for gastrointestinal bleeding treatment in this context.