UK and Ireland Joint Advisory Group (JAG) consensus statements for training and certification in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: International endoscopy societies vary in their approach for credentialing individuals in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to enable independent practice; however, there is no consensus in this or its implementation. In 2019, the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) commissioned a working group to examine the evidence relating to this process for EUS. The aim of this was to develop evidence-based recommendations for EUS training and certification in the UK. METHODS: Under the oversight of the JAG quality assurance team, a modified Delphi process was conducted which included major stakeholders from the UK and Ireland. A formal literature review was made, initial questions for study were proposed and recommendations for training and certification in EUS were formulated after a rigorous assessment using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool and subjected to electronic voting to identify accepted statements. These were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholder societies before consensus on the final EUS certification pathway was achieved. RESULTS: 39 initial questions were proposed of which 33 were deemed worthy of assessment and finally formed the key recommendations. The statements covered four key domains, such as: definition of competence (13 statements), acquisition of competence (10), assessment of competence (5) and postcertification mentorship (5). Key recommendations include: (1) minimum of 250 hands-on cases before an assessment for competency can be made, (2) attendance at the JAG basic EUS course, (3) completing a minimum of one formative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) every 10 cases to allow the learning curve in EUS training to be adequately studied, (4) competent performance in summative DOPS assessments and (5) a period of mentorship over a 12-month period is recommended as minimum to support and mentor new service providers. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based certification pathway has been commissioned by JAG to support and quality assure EUS training. This will form the basis to improve quality of training and safety standards in EUS in the UK and Ireland.

The role of intraoperative pancreatoscopy in the surgical management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The type and the extent of surgery is still debatable for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN). Intraoperative pancreatoscopy (IOP) allows the visualization of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) in its entire length and could help determine the extent of MPD involvement and the type and extent of pancreatic resection. However, current guidelines do not advise its routine use as there is a lack of evidence supporting its safety and feasibility. The present study aims to perform a scoping review of published evidence on the safety and feasibility of IOP in IPMN surgical management. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, Medline and EMbase to identify studies reporting the use of IOP in IPMN surgical management. The research was completed in June 2023. Data extracted included patient selection criteria, demographics, safety of the procedure, intraoperative findings, impact on surgical strategy, histology results and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Four retrospective and one prospective study were included in this scoping review. A total of 142 patients had IOP. The selection criteria for inclusion were heterogenous, with one out of five studies including branch duct (BD), main duct (MD) and mixed type IPMN. Indications for IOP and surgical resection were only reported in two studies. A median of seven outcomes (range 5-8) was described, including the type of surgical resection, additional lesions and change of surgical plan, and complications after IOP. IOP showed additional lesions in 48 patients (34%) and a change of surgical plan in 48(34%). No IOP-related complications were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review suggests IOP is safe and identifies additional lesions impacting the surgical strategy for IPMN. However, the included studies were small and heterogeneous regarding IPMN definition and indications for surgery and IOP. There is a need for a large multi-centre prospective study to determine the role of IOP and its impact on surgical strategy for IPMN.

EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy with electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: multicenter collaboration from the United Kingdom and Ireland.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDD) with an electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent (EC-LAMS) has emerged as a viable method of establishing biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Our aim was to assess the efficacy, safety, and outcomes in patients with MDBO who underwent EUS-CDD with an EC-LAMS. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients with MDBO who underwent EUS-CDD with EC-LAMSs at 8 tertiary institutions across the United Kingdom and Ireland between September 2016 and November 2020 was undertaken. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients (55% men) with a median age of 73 years (interquartile range, 17; range, 43-94) were included. The median follow-up period in 117 patients was 70 days (interquartile range, 169; range, 3-869), and 23 patients (19.2%) were alive at the end of the follow-up. Three patients were lost to follow-up. Technical success was achieved in 109 patients (90.8%). Clinical success (reduction of serum bilirubin to ≤50% of original value within 14 days) was achieved in 94.8% of patients (92/97). The adverse event rate was 17.5% (n = 21). Biliary reintervention after initial technical success was required in 9 patients (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-CDD with EC-LAMSs at tertiary institutions within a regional hepatopancreatobiliary network for treatment of MDBO was effective in those where ERCP was not possible or was unsuccessful. When technical failures or adverse events occur, most patients can be managed with conservative or endoscopic therapy.

Rate of pancreatic cancer following a negative endoscopic ultrasound and associated factors.

BACKGROUND : Data are limited regarding pancreatic cancer diagnosed following a pancreaticobiliary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) that does not diagnose pancreatic cancer. We have studied the frequency of, and factors associated with, post-EUS pancreatic cancer (PEPC) and 1-year mortality. METHODS : Between 2010 and 2017, patients with pancreatic cancer and a preceding pancreaticobiliary EUS were identified in a national cohort using Hospital Episode Statistics. Patients with a pancreaticobiliary EUS 6-18 months before a later pancreatic cancer diagnosis were the PEPC cases; controls were those with pancreatic cancer diagnosed within 6 months of pancreaticobiliary EUS. Multivariable logistic regression models examined the factors associated with PEPC and a Cox regression model examined factors associated with 1-year cumulative mortality. RESULTS : 9363 pancreatic cancer patients were studied; 93.5 % identified as controls (men 53.2 %; median age 68 [interquartile range (IQR) 61-75]); 6.5 % as PEPC cases (men 58.2 %; median age 69 [IQR 61-77]). PEPC was associated with older age (≥ 75 years compared with < 65 years, odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95 %CI 1.15-1.76), increasing co-morbidity (Charlson co-morbidity score > 5, OR 1.90, 95 %CI 1.49-2.43), chronic pancreatitis (OR 3.13, 95 %CI 2.50-3.92), and diabetes mellitus (OR 1.58, 95 %CI 1.31-1.90). Metal biliary stents (OR 0.57, 95 %CI 0.38-0.86) and EUS-FNA (OR 0.49, 95 %CI 0.41-0.58) were inversely associated with PEPC. PEPC was associated with a higher cumulative mortality at 1 year (hazard ratio 1.12, 95 %CI 1.02-1.24), with only 14 % of PEPC patients (95 %CI 12 %-17 %) having a surgical resection, compared with 21 % (95 %CI 20 %-22 %) of controls. CONCLUSIONS : PEPC occurred in 6.5 % of patients and was associated with chronic pancreatitis, older age, more co-morbidities, and specifically diabetes mellitus. PEPC was associated with a worse prognosis and lower surgical resection rates.

Analgesia in the Initial Management of Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The optimal analgesic strategy for patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of different analgesic modalities trialled in AP. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science conducted up until June 2021, identified all randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing analgesic modalities in AP. A pooled analysis was undertaken of the improvement in pain scores as reported on visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 0, day 1 and day 2. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were identified including 542 patients. Seven trial drugs were compared: opiates, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), metamizole, local anaesthetic, epidural, paracetamol, and placebo. Across all modalities, the pooled VAS scores showed global improvement from baseline to day 2. Epidural analgesia appears to provide the greatest improvement in VAS within the first 24 h but is equivalent to opiates by 48 h. Within 24 h, NSAIDs offered similar pain-relief to opiates, while placebo also showed equivalence to other modalities but then plateaued. Local anaesthetics demonstrated least overall efficacy. VAS scores for opiate and non-opiate analgesics were comparable at baseline and day 1. The identified RCTs demonstrated significant statistical and methodological heterogeneity in pain-relief reporting. CONCLUSIONS: There is remarkable paucity of level 1 evidence to guide pain management in AP with small datasets per study. Epidural administration appears effective within the first 24 h of AP although infrequently used and featured in only a single RCT. NSAIDs are an effective opiate sparing alternative during the first 24 h.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute pancreatitis increases disease severity and 30-day mortality: COVID PAN collaborative study.

OBJECTIVE: There is emerging evidence that the pancreas may be a target organ of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: A prospective international multicentre cohort study including consecutive patients admitted with AP during the current pandemic was undertaken. Primary outcome measure was severity of AP. Secondary outcome measures were aetiology of AP, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay, local complications, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), persistent organ failure and 30-day mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to compare the two groups. RESULTS: 1777 patients with AP were included during the study period from 1 March to 23 July 2020. 149 patients (8.3%) had concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were older male patients and more likely to develop severe AP and ARDS (p<0.001). Unadjusted analysis showed that SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with AP were more likely to require ICU admission (OR 5.21, p<0.001), local complications (OR 2.91, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 7.32, p<0.001), prolonged hospital stay (OR 1.89, p<0.001) and a higher 30-day mortality (OR 6.56, p<0.001). Adjusted analysis showed length of stay (OR 1.32, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 2.77, p<0.003) and 30-day mortality (OR 2.41, p<0.04) were significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 co-infection. CONCLUSION: Patients with AP and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection are at increased risk of severe AP, worse clinical outcomes, prolonged length of hospital stay and high 30-day mortality.

Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement of digital single-operator cholangioscopy for indeterminate biliary strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Digital single-operator cholangioscopy (d-SOC) with cholangioscopic biopsy sampling has shown promise in the evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures. Some studies have suggested higher sensitivity for visual impression compared with biopsy sampling, although assessors were not blinded to previous investigations. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement (IOA) of d-SOC in the visual appraisal of biliary strictures when blinded to additional information. METHODS: A multicenter, international cohort study was performed. Cholangioscopic videos in patients with a known final diagnosis were systematically scored. Pseudonymized videos were reviewed by 19 experts in 2 steps: blinded for patient history and investigations and unblinded. RESULTS: Forty-four high-quality videos were reviewed of 19 benign and 25 malignant strictures. The sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of malignancy was 74.2% and 46.9% (blinded) and 72.7% and 62.5% (unblinded). Cholangioscopic certainty of a malignant diagnosis led to overdiagnosis (sensitivity, 90.6%; specificity, 33%), especially if no additional information was provided. The IOA for the presence of malignancy was fair for both assessments (Fleiss' κ = .245 [blinded] and κ = .321 [unblended]). For individual visual features, the IOA ranged from slight to moderate for both assessments (κ = .059-.400 vs κ = .031-.452). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed low sensitivity and specificity for blinded and unblinded d-SOC video appraisal of indeterminate biliary strictures, with considerable interobserver variation. Although reaching a consensus on the optical features of biliary strictures remains important, optimizing visually directed biopsy sampling may be the most important role of cholangioscopy in biliary stricture assessment.

Endoscopic transmural drainage is associated with improved outcomes in disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is a complication of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in the neck and body of the pancreas often manifesting as persistent pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) or external pancreatic fistula (EPF). This systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis aimed to review the definitions, clinical presentation, intervention, and outcomes for DPDS. METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS databases were systematically searched until February 2020 using the PRISMA framework. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the success rates of endoscopic and surgical interventions for the treatment of DPDS. Success of DPDS treatment was defined as long-term resolution of symptoms without recurrence of PFC, EPF, or pancreatic ascites. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included in the quantitative analysis comprising 1355 patients. Acute pancreatitis was the most common etiology (95.3%, 936/982), followed by chronic pancreatitis (3.1%, 30/982). DPDS commonly presented with PFC (83.2%, 948/1140) and EPF (13.4%, 153/1140). There was significant heterogeneity in the definition of DPDS in the literature. Weighted success rate of endoscopic transmural drainage (90.6%, 95%-CI 81.0-95.6%) was significantly higher than transpapillary drainage (58.5%, 95%-CI 36.7-77.4). Pairwise meta-analysis showed comparable success rates between endoscopic and surgical intervention, which were 82% (weighted 95%-CI 68.6-90.5) and 87.4% (95%-CI 81.2-91.8), respectively (P = 0.389). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic transmural drainage was superior to transpapillary drainage for the management of DPDS. Endoscopic and surgical interventions had comparable success rates. The significant variability in the definitions and treatment strategies for DPDS warrant standardisation for further research.

Fork-tip needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration in endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study.

BACKGROUND: A novel fork-tip fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle has recently been introduced for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of fork-tip FNB histology and standard fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. METHODS: A randomized crossover study was performed in patients referred for EUS-guided sampling. Three passes were taken with each needle in a randomized order. Only samples reported as diagnostic of malignancy were considered positive. The primary end point was the sensitivity of diagnosis of malignancy. Secondary end points included the amount of sample obtained, ease of diagnosis, duration of tissue sampling, pathologist viewing time, and cost. RESULTS: 108 patients were recruited. Median age was 69 years (range 30 - 87) and 57 were male; 85.2 % had a final diagnosis of malignancy. There were statistically significant differences in sensitivity (82 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 72 % to 89 %] vs. 71 % [95 %CI 60 % to 80 %]), accuracy (84 % [95 %CI 76 % to 91 %] vs. 75 % [95 %CI 66 % to 83 %]), proportion graded as a straightforward diagnosis (69 % [95 %CI 60 % to 78 %] vs. 51 % [95 %CI 41 % to 61 %]), and median pathology viewing time (188 vs. 332 seconds) (P < 0.001) between FNB and FNA needles, respectively. There was no significant difference in cost between an FNB or FNA strategy. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of the fork-tip FNB needle was significantly better than that of FNA; it was associated with ease of diagnosis, shorter pathological viewing times, and was cost neutral.

Impact of metal and plastic stents on endoscopic ultrasound-guided aspiration cytology and core histology of head of pancreas masses.

BACKGROUND: Stents are frequently placed in patients with biliary obstruction due to a mass in the head of the pancreas. The impact of plastic or self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling is unclear. This study aimed to assess, using strict pathological criteria, whether stents impair fine-needle aspiration (FNA) or fine-needle biopsy (FNB). METHODS: All patients with a solid mass in the head of the pancreas who underwent EUS-guided tissue sampling between 2010 and 2016 at our unit were included. Factors with possible impact on diagnostic performance were analyzed using logistic regression. Analysis was performed using both strict (malignant only) and less strict (suspicious for malignancy) cutoffs. RESULTS: Of 631 individuals undergoing 698 procedures, 535 (84.8 %) had a final diagnosis of malignancy, 141 had SEMS, 149 had plastic stents, and 341 had no stent. Using strict criteria, SEMS were associated with an increased occurrence of incorrect diagnosis of EUS tissue sampling, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.96 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.24 - 3.10). Increasing tumor size (OR 0.72, 95 %CI 0.59 - 0.87), increasing number of passes (OR 0.84, 95 %CI 0.72 - 0.99), and fork-tip biopsy needle (OR 0.52, 95 %CI 0.31 - 0.86) were independently associated with a decrease in incorrect diagnosis. Repeat tissue sampling was more common with SEMSs (10.2 %) than with plastic stents (2.9 %) or no stents (4.5 %) (P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: SEMS use had a negative impact on tissue diagnosis in pancreatic head masses, whereas use of a fork-tip biopsy needle and increasing number of passes were independently associated with improved accuracy.

Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults: A summary of guidelines from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

To enable standardisation of care of pancreatic cancer patients and facilitate improvement in outcome, the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults. Systematic literature searches, systematic review and meta-analyses were undertaken. Recommendations were drafted on the basis of the group's interpretation of the best available evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness. There was patient involvement and public consultation. Recommendations were made on: diagnosis; staging; monitoring of inherited high risk; psychological support; pain; nutrition management; and the specific management of people with resectable-, borderline-resectable- and unresectable-pancreatic cancer. The guideline committee also made recommendations for future research into neoadjuvant therapy, cachexia interventions, minimally invasive pancreatectomy, pain management and psychological support needs. These NICE guidelines aim to promote best current practice and support and stimulate research and innovation in pancreatic cancer.

Performance measures for ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative.

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We recommend that endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key and one minor performance measures for EUS and ERCP, for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at center and endoscopist level: 1: Adequate antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP (key performance measure, at least 90 %); 2: Antibiotic prophylaxis before EUS-guided puncture of cystic lesions (key performance measure, at least 95 %); 3: Bile duct cannulation rate (key performance measure, at least 90 %); 4: Tissue sampling during EUS (key performance measure, at least 85 %); 5: Appropriate stent placement in patients with biliary obstruction below the hilum (key performance measure, at least 95 %); 6: Bile duct stone extraction (key performance measure, at least 90 %); 7: Post-ERCP pancreatitis (key performance measure, less than 10 %). 8: Adequate documentation of EUS landmarks (minor performance measure, at least 90 %).This present list of quality performance measures for ERCP and EUS recommended by ESGE should not be considered to be exhaustive: it might be extended in future to address further clinical and scientific issues.

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of 2 core biopsy needles for EUS-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A new core biopsy needle with a novel tip, opposing bevel, and sheath design has recently been introduced for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). The diagnostic utility of this needle for differentiating solid pancreatic masses is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance and yield for tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions of the opposing bevel needle with those of a reverse bevel EUS-FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-FNB using the opposing bevel (n = 101) and the reverse bevel (n = 100) core biopsy needles were included in the study. Final diagnosis was based on positive histology or at least 12 months of follow-up in cases with a negative biopsy. The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of the 2 needles for malignant pancreatic masses. A secondary outcome was the diagnostic yield. RESULTS: Compared with the reverse bevel needle, using strict criteria the opposing bevel needle provided significantly higher sensitivity (71.1% vs 90.1%; P = .0006) and overall accuracy (74% vs 92%; I = 0.0006) for discriminating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses. The proportion of samples classified as adequate for histologic analysis was 87% for the reverse bevel needle versus 99% for the opposing bevel needle (p = 0.002) Multivariate analysis controlling the needle gauge and site did not show any significant difference in accuracy and sensitivity between the 2 groups. There were no adverse events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this first, large, single-center preliminary cohort study, an EUS core biopsy needle with a novel tip, opposing bevel, and sheath design afforded substantially superior tissue yield and diagnostic performance compared with a reverse-bevel needle. If replicated by randomized controlled trials, our findings suggest that similarly designed needles could become the standard of care for EUS-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic masses.

Endoscopic drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis using a novel self-expanding metal stent.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: This report describes the use of a novel, fully covered, self-expanding metal stent (FCSEMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with WON, as defined by the revised Atlanta Criteria, were included in this open-lable, two-center, observational study. The WON was punctured using a cystotome, and the FCSEMS was inserted under fluoroscopic guidance. Necrosectomy procedures were performed as necessary. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included. The median maximum collection size was 15 cm with a median of 50 % necrosis. A total of 14/19 patients underwent necrosectomy, requiring a median of 4 procedures. Resolution or reduction in the size of collection by at least 80 % was achieved in all patients. Percutaneous or surgical drainage was required in three patients. Five stents migrated or dislodged. One patient had abdominal pain post-procedure. Five patients died during follow-up (three from multi-organ failure, and two unrelated to pancreatitis). CONCLUSIONS: Use of this stent is feasible and safe for drainage of WON. However, stent displacement rates were high, and improvements to the stent design are required before it can be advocated for routine use in WON.

Diagnostic utility of single-user peroral cholangioscopy in sclerosing cholangitis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of single-operator peroral cholangioscopy (SOC) in patients with sclerosing cholangitis. METHODS: All patients with sclerosing cholangitis who underwent SOC procedures due to suspicious biliary strictures, in one Swedish and four UK tertiary centers in 2008-2012, were retrospectively enrolled. For each SOC procedure in sclerosing cholangitis, another one attempted due to a single biliary stricture in the same center and calendar year was randomly selected as control. Patients were followed up until death or last clinic visit until November 2012. RESULTS: Fifty-four SOC procedures were attempted in 52 sclerosing cholangitis patients (48 with primary sclerosing cholangitis, 4 with IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis). Cannulation with the SOC system failed more frequently in sclerosing cholangitis (15% vs. 2% in controls; p = 0.015). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of SOC (including tissue sampling) for cancer diagnosis were similar in sclerosing cholangitis and controls (50% vs. 55%, 100% vs. 97%, and 88% vs. 80%, respectively) with largely overlapping confidence intervals. Adverse events were more common in sclerosing cholangitis, due to an increased frequency of cholangitis (11% vs. 2% in controls; p = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: SOC is equally accurate in cancer diagnosis in sclerosing cholangitis and patients with single biliary strictures. However, cholangioscope insertion may be hampered by bile duct narrowing and post-SOC cholangitis is more common in sclerosing cholangitis.