The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Interventional Management of Mediastinal Collections: A Narrative Review.

The numerous causes underlying mediastinal lesions require different diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, including conservative, minimally invasive, and surgical interventions. Solid lesions of a malignant nature, mostly located in the anterior mediastinum, are properly treated with surgical resection either with or without adjuvant schemes. In contrast, a surveillance program is usually recommended with solid benign tumors, depending on their size and related symptomatology. In the management of mediastinal collections, when a drainage intervention is required (suspicion of infection and symptomatology), a minimally invasive nonsurgical procedure or thoracic surgery is considered. The minimally invasive nonsurgical procedures that can be available are percutaneous radiology-guided imaging (abdominal ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT) scan), complete single-aspiration guided by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS), and transmural drainage guided by EUS. Surgical debridement is feasible to treat collections, but as this entails considerable risk of postoperative complications, it is chosen only when other minimally invasive therapies are not possible. The published literature related to the interventional endoscopic approach to mediastinal lesions is scarce. Nevertheless, reports in this field reveal that interventional EUS may have a role in both the diagnosis of and therapeutic approach to mediastinal lesions, mainly in the management of mediastinal collections.

Is a coaxial plastic stent within a lumen-apposing metal stent useful for the management of distal malignant biliary obstruction?

BACKGROUND: There are uncertainties concerning the possible benefits derived from the insertion of double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) within lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) in EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDS). The aim of this study was to determine whether a DPS within a biliary LAMS offers a potential benefit in EUS-guided CDS for the palliative management of malignant biliary obstruction. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective study at three tertiary institutions. PERIOD: May 2015 to August 2020. Two interventional strategies (LAMS alone and LAMS plus DPS) were compared. The choice was the endoscopist's discretion. Inclusion: unresectable/inoperable biliopancreatic tumours with previous failed ERCP. Clinical success: bilirubin decrease > 30% at 4 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-one consecutive cases of EUS-CDS using biliary LAMS were treated (22 women; mean age, 72.3 years) during the study period. The procedure was technically successful in 39 (95.1%), who were managed using the two strategies (22 LAMS alone; 17 LAMS plus DPS). No differences between the groups, in terms of clinical success (77.3 vs 87.5%, p = 0.67), adverse events (AEs, 13.6 vs 11.8%, p = 0.99), recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO, 13.6 vs 23.5%, p = 0.67), or survival rate (p = 0.67) were encountered. The LAMS alone group had a shorter length of procedure (50 min vs 66 min, p = 0.102). No risk factors related to clinical success, AEs, RBO, or survival were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The technical variant of adding a coaxial DPS within LAMS in EUS-CDS seems not to be enough to prevent biliary morbidities, and it is a time-consuming strategy. Although prospective studies are needed, these results do not support its routine use.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis Is Not Required for Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions, Based on a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines recommend routine antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic cysts, but there is conflicting evidence for its necessity. We investigated whether performing the procedure without antimicrobial prophylaxis increases the incidence of infection. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial to compare prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin vs placebo in patients with a pancreatic cyst requiring EUS-FNA at multiple centers in Spain. From September 2014 to June 2018, patients were randomly assigned to groups that received the prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin (n = 112) or saline solution (n = 114, placebo). We recorded patients' demographic data, lesion characteristics, and procedure data and followed patients for 21 days. A total of 205 patients completed the trial (90.7%), receiving ciprofloxacin or the control, with no statistically significant differences in demographics, baseline data, or procedure characteristics between groups. The primary outcome was FNA-related infection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of fever, procedure complications, and medication-related adverse events. RESULTS: The only case of FNA-related infection (0.44%) occurred in a patient in the placebo group (0.87%); this patient developed acute pancreatitis and bacteremia after the procedure. Prevention of infection was not inferior in the control group; the difference between proportions was 0.87% (95% confidence interval, -0.84% to 2.59%). There were no differences between groups in fever (2 patients in each group: 1.78% vs 1.76%; P = 1.00) or other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of patients undergoing EUS-FNA for pancreatic cyst evaluation, we found the risk of infection to be low. The incidence of infections did not differ significantly with vs without ciprofloxacin prophylaxis. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02261896).

Endoscopic biliary drainage in unresectable biliary obstruction: the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guidance in a cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has increased in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and there are some concerns. The main aim of the study was to determine the role of EUS-BD in a palliative case cohort. The secondary aim was to compare the efficacy, safety and survival of EUS-BD and ERCP procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: this was an observational study at a single tertiary institution, with a consecutive inclusion from January 2015 to December 2016. The inclusion criteria were unresectable tumors of the biliopancreatic region with an indication of BD. Statistical comparison analysis was performed between the ERCP and EUS-BD groups. The incidence between groups was compared using the Chi-square and Fisher exact tests. The log rank test was used to compare the risk of death. RESULTS: fifty-two cases with an indication of palliative BD were included in the study. Transpapillary drainage via ERCP was possible in 44 procedures and EUS-BD was required in eight cases; 15.4% of the cohort and seven using lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS). The technical and clinical success of global endoscopic BD was 100% and 88.5% (ERCP: 84.6% and 78.9%; EUS-BD: 100% and 62.5%, respectively). Pancreatitis was the most frequent adverse event (AE) in the ERCP group (9.62%) and bleeding in the EUS-BD (25%). There were fatal AEs in ERCP (1.9%) and EUS-BD (25%) cases. Patient survival was higher with ERCP transpapillary stents compared to EUS-guided stents, which was statistically significant (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: the requirement of EUS-BD in palliative biliopancreatic pathology is not marginal. EUS-BD is associated with a lower survival rate and a higher rate of fatal AE, which argues against its use as a first choice procedure.