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.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous.

BACKGROUND: The use of fully covered metal stents (FCSEMS) and specifically designed lumen apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has become widespread. A systematic review published in 2015 did not support the routine use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. However, recent studies have shown conflicting data; therefore a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. METHOD: We conducted a database search for original comparative studies between plastic and metal stents. The random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Outcomes analysed were clinical success, adverse events and requirement of further intervention. RESULTS: The search identified 936 studies, 7 studies with 681 (340 metal, 341 plastic) patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Clinical success was achieved in 93.8% versus 86.2% in the metal and plastic groups, respectively, RR 1.08 [95% CI 1.02-1.14]; p = 0.009. Adverse events were reduced for metal stents when compared with plastic (10.2% vs. 25.0%), RR 0.42 [95% CI 0.22-0.81]; p = 0.010. Metal stent usage reduced bleeding (2.8% vs. 7.9%), RR 0.37; [95% CI 0.18-0.75]; p = 0.006. Further intervention was required in 12.4% of patients in the metal stent group versus 26.7% for plastic stents, RR 0.54; [95% CI 0.22-1.29]; p = 0.165. CONCLUSIONS: The use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections is associated with improved clinical success, fewer adverse events and reduced bleeding compared to plastic stents.

The diagnostic value of Rosemont and Japanese diagnostic criteria for 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible' and 'early' chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal data are lacking to support consensus criteria for diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Retrospective single centre study of the initial evidence for chronic pancreatitis (CP), with reassessment after follow-up (January 2003-November 2016). RESULTS: 807 patients were previously diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis. This diagnosis was rejected in 118 patients: 52 had another pathology altogether, the remaining 66 patients formed the study population. 38 patients with 'normal' imaging were reclassified as chronic abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS), and 28 patients had minimal change features of CP on EUS (MCEUS) but never progressed. Strict application of the Japanese diagnostic criteria would diagnose only two patients with early CP and eleven as possible CP. Patients were more likely to have MCEUS if the EUS was performed within 12 months of an attack of acute pancreatitis. 40 patients with MCEUS were identified, including an additional 12 who progressed to definite CP after a median of 30 (18.75-36.5) months. Those continuing to consume excess alcohol and/or continued smoking were significantly more likely to progress. Those who progressed were more likely to develop pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, require pancreatic surgery and had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: There needs to be more stringent application of the systems used for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis with revision of the current terminology 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible', and 'early' chronic pancreatitis. All patients with MCEUS features of CP require ongoing clinical follow up of at least 30 months and all patients with these features should be strongly counselled regarding smoking cessation and abstinence from alcohol.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided transmural drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: Comparison between a specially designed fully covered bi-flanged metal stent and multiple plastic stents.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) may be carried out by placement of multiple plastic stents (MPS) or specially designed fully covered bi-flanged metal stents (BFMS). Comparative data on efficacy of these two stent types for WON drainage are limited. This retrospective study compares outcomes of WON drainage using BFMS and MPS. METHODS: During a 10-year period, 133 patients underwent EUS-guided WON drainage. MPS or BFMS were placed in a WON cavity through a single puncture, and direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) was carried out whenever clinically necessary. Data in the two cohorts were retrospectively compared for primary outcomes - clinical success, adverse events and mortality; and secondary outcomes - DEN requirement, mean DEN sessions, need for salvage surgery and hospital stay. RESULTS: MPS were placed in 61 and BFMS in 72 patients. Patients undergoing BFMS drainage required fewer DEN sessions (mean 1.46 vs 2.74, P < 0.05), had fewer adverse events (5.6% vs 36.1%, P < 0.05), needed salvage surgery less often (2.7% vs 26.2%, P < 0.05), and had significantly shorter hospital stay (4.1 vs 8 days, P < 0.05) compared to those undergoing MPS drainage. There was no difference in DEN requirement (P = 0.217) and mortality (P = 0.5) in both groups. Overall clinical success with BFMS was superior to MPS (94% vs 73.7%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: BFMS appear to be superior to MPS for EUS-guided WON drainage in terms of clinical success, number of DEN sessions, adverse events, need for salvage surgery and hospital stay.

Endoscopic ultrasonography is not required for staging malignant esophageal strictures that preclude the passage of a diagnostic gastroscope.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered the most sensitive modality for local staging of esophageal cancer (ECA) and current guidelines recommend EUS in all patients with non-metastatic disease. Our aim was to identify a subset of patients with stenotic, non-metastatic ECA who will not benefit from staging EUS. METHODS: This multicenter study evaluated consecutive patients with newly diagnosed non-metastatic ECA referred for local staging by EUS. All patients had endoscopic evaluation of malignant strictures with 9.8/9.9-mm diagnostic gastroscope prior to EUS. Main outcome measure was to evaluate the relationship between degree of malignant stenosis and tumor staging by EUS. RESULTS: Of 100 patients (median age, 65 years; male 81%), gastroscope could not be advanced past the stricture in 46, all of whom (100%) had locally advanced disease at EUS: T3N0/N+ in 39 and T4N0/N+ in seven. Echoendoscope could not traverse the stricture in any of these patients. Gastroscope could be advanced through the stricture in 54 patients in whom EUS staging was T1N0 in five, T2N0/N+ in eight and T3N0/N+ in 41; echoendoscope could not pass through the stricture in 24 of these 54 (44.4%) patients, all of whom had T3N0/N+ disease. On logistic regression analysis, inability to pass a gastroscope through the stricture was significantly associated with advanced (T3/4) tumor stage (OR = 28.7, 95% CI = 1.64-501.2; P = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Routine EUS examination may not be required in all patients with ECA as the inability to advance a diagnostic gastroscope past a malignant stricture correlates 100% with locally advanced disease on EUS.

Impact of pancreatic stent caliber on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram pancreatitis rates in patients with confirmed sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Despite proven clinical benefit, there are no studies that have examined the relationship between pancreatic stent caliber and its impact on PEP [post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram (ERCP) pancreatitis] in high-risk patients. AIM: To study the relationship between stent caliber and PEP rates in patients with confirmed sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of ERCP's in patients with SOD from 2002 to 2012 from a prospectively maintained, Institutional Review Board approved database. RESULTS: A total of 243/7659 (3.2%) patients underwent 3Fr or 5Fr pancreatic stent placement following sphincterotomy for manometry-proven SOD. Of these, 133 (54.7%) underwent 3Fr stent placement, while 110 (45.3%) underwent 5Fr stent placement. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics, demographics, and previous cholecystectomy. Cannulation and stent placement success rates were 100% in both groups. There was no significant difference in rates of PEP and overall complications, 12% versus 12.7%; P = 0.89 and 13.5% versus 15.5%; P = 0.54, between the 3Fr and 5Fr cohorts, respectively. There were more mild PEP rates recorded in 5Fr group (93% vs 56% P = 0.0549) that was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be no relationship between stent characteristics and the risk or severity of PEP in patients with manometrically proven SOD.

Prevalence of normal liver tests in patients with choledocholithiasis undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Abnormal liver chemistry tests are a hallmark of common bile duct (CBD) stones. There is little information, however, on the prevalence of and predictors for normal liver chemistry tests in such patients. METHODS: Over an 11-year period, all patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) at our Center were prospectively identified. Patients in this study were those with CBD stones found at ERCP and where the indication for ERCP was CBD stones seen on imaging studies or when CBD stones were highly suspected based upon clinical presentation and radiographic and laboratory findings. Liver chemistry tests were recorded from those taken at the time of initial presentation as well as the time closest to ERCP. RESULTS: Of a total of 5,133 patients undergoing ERCP during the study period, the indication was suspicion for CBD stones or for radiographically identified CBD stones in 476 and 593, respectively, with 115 patients having both indications. Of these 1184 patients, 765 had CBD stones of whom 541 had liver tests. Of these 541, 29 patients (5.4%) were found to consistently have normal liver chemistry tests. Multivariate analysis identified two factors predictive of normal liver tests including age >55 years and the presence of abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Although rare, liver tests can be normal in patients with CBD stones. Patients most likely to have normal liver tests included older patients and those with abdominal pain.

Relationship between stent characteristics and treatment outcomes in endoscopic transmural drainage of uncomplicated pancreatic pseudocysts.

BACKGROUND: Transmural stents are placed at endoscopy to drain pancreatic fluid collections. This study evaluated the relationship between stent placement and treatment outcomes in patients undergoing endoscopic transmural drainage of uncomplicated pancreatic pseudocysts. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all patients who underwent endoscopic drainage of uncomplicated pancreatic pseudocysts over a 10-year period. After dilating the transmural tracts in the range of 8-15 mm, single or multiple, 7 or 10Fr double-pigtail plastic stents were deployed. The main outcome measure was to evaluate the relationship between stent characteristics and the number of endoscopic interventions required to achieve resolution of the pancreatic pseudocyst (treatment success). RESULTS: Of 122 patients, 45 (36.9%) had 10Fr stents of which 30 patients (66.7%) had more than one stent; the remaining 77 (63.1%) patients had 7Fr stents of which 56 (72.7%) had more than one stent. The overall treatment success was 94.3%. Treatment was successful in 102 patients (83.6%) with one intervention; 13 patients (10.7%) required re-intervention for successful drainage and 7 patients (5.7%) failed endoscopic treatment. There was no significant difference in the number of interventions required for treatment success between patients with 7 or 10Fr stents (one intervention required in 87.7 vs. 90.5%, respectively; p = 0.766) and between patients with 1 or >1 stent (one intervention required in 88.9 vs. 88.6%, respectively; p = 0.999). On multiple logistic regression analysis, the stent size (OR 1.54; 95% CI 0.23-10.4) and number (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.25-5.25) were not associated with the number of interventions required for treatment success when adjusted for pseudocyst size, location, drainage modality, the presence or absence of pancreatic duct stent and luminal compression. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be no relationship between the number of interventions required for treatment success and stent characteristics in patients undergoing endoscopic transmural drainage of uncomplicated pancreatic pseudocysts.

Biliary sphincterotomy is not required for bile duct stent placement.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to assess the success and outcome of bile duct stent placement without the use of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over a period of 10 years and 9 months, all patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) were prospectively identified. Bile duct stent placement was routinely done without EBS unless additional therapy (stone removal, multiple stenting) was anticipated. RESULTS: Of 5020 patients who underwent ERCP, bile duct stents were placed in 1668 patients. After excluding those requiring additional endoscopic therapy, 1112 patients (89.5%) had ERCP and stent placement without a sphincterotomy and 130 patients (10.5%) had ERCP and stent placement with asphincterotomy. Deployed endoprostheses were self-expandable metallic stents in 15.7% and plastic in 77.5%. Caliber of plastic stents was 10 Fr in 78.9% and <10 Fr in 21.1%. All stents were successfully placed in these 1112 patients without the need for EBS. Comparing patients undergoing bile duct stenting with and without sphincterotomy, no difference was seen in rates of pancreatitis (1.54% vs 2.07%, P > 0.9999). CONCLUSION: Single bile duct stents, both plastic and metal, can be deployed without EBS.

Multipurpose use of the 'bear claw' (over-the-scope-clip system) to treat endoluminal gastrointestinal disorders.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The 'bear-claw' or over-the-scope-clip system (OTSC; Ovesco Endoscopy, Tübingen, Germany) is a new clipping device developed for closure of large luminal gastrointestinal (GI) defects. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients treated with the OTSC. METHODS: The present study was an observational, open-label, retrospective, single-arm case series conducted at two hospitals with tertiary care endoscopy. It involved 20 clip applications in 16 patients (median age 65.8 years [range 51-90 years], seven women) with GI defects from fistulas and anastomotic dehiscence and peptic ulcer bleeding. RESULTS: The range of indications included gastrointestinal bleeding (n=6), gastrocutaneous fistulas (n=3), esophagotracheal and/or esophagopleural fistulae (n=3), resection ofsubmucosal tumor (n=2), stent fixation (n=1), and anastomotic leak after esophagectomy (n=1). The overall success rate for the OTSC device was 75% (12 out of 16 patients). The overall per case success rate was 70% (14 of 20 applications). Mean follow up was 10 months (range 1-10). There were no complications (0%) related to endoscopy, sedation or application of the clipping device. CONCLUSIONS: The OTSC system is a useful device in a variety of clinical scenarios including the management of larger GI leaks and fistulas, GI bleeding, full-thickness resection of tumors, and stent anchoring, even in very old and frail patients.

Objective assessment of an algorithmic approach to EUS-guided FNA and interventions.

BACKGROUND: Despite an increasing number of procedures being performed, there is no consensus on an optimal approach to EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) or interventions. OBJECTIVE: Validate an algorithmic approach to EUS-FNA/interventions with the objective of improving technical outcomes and resource use. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNA and/or interventions. INTERVENTION: Phase I was a retrospective analysis of EUS-FNA/interventions performed in 548 patients. The 19-gauge needle was used for interventions, and the 22- or 25-gauge needle was used interchangeably for performing FNAs. At phase I, the technical failure rate was 11.5%. Based on these observations, an algorithm was proposed by which all transduodenal FNAs were performed by using a 25-gauge needle and other FNAs with a 22-gauge needle. All transduodenal interventions were performed with a Flexible 19-gauge needle and others with a standard 19-gauge needle. This algorithm was tested prospectively in phase II on 500 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Compare technical failure, diagnostic adequacy, procedural complications, and average needle costs between both phases. RESULTS: The technical failure rate was significantly less in phase II compared with that of phase I (1.6% vs 11.5%; P < .001) for both FNA (1.8% vs 10.9%; P < .001) and therapeutic interventions (0% vs 16.4%; P = .001). Although there was no difference in diagnostic adequacy (97.1% vs 98.4%; P = .191) or complications (0.4% vs 0.2%; P = 1.0) between phases I and II, the average cost per case was significantly less in phase II ($199.59 vs $188.30; P = .008). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSION: An algorithmic approach to EUS-FNA/interventions yielded better technical outcomes and cost savings without compromising diagnostic adequacy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections in children.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) has evolved as the standard of care in adults, its role as a single-step drainage modality in children is unclear. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-step EUS-guided drainage of PFCs in children. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all of the children who underwent single-step EUS-guided drainage of PFCs during a 4-year period at 1 institution. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was attempted before EUS-guided drainage to evaluate the pancreatic duct and bridge any ductal disruption. RESULTS: A total of 7 children (4 boys; mean age 8.4 years [standard deviation 2.1]) underwent EUS-guided drainage of PFCs. The etiology was blunt abdominal trauma in 5, hereditary pancreatitis in 1, and idiopathic pancreatitis in 1. Both technical and treatment success rates were 100% with median procedural duration of 12 minutes (interquartile range 12-20 minutes). Two patients underwent repeat EUS-guided drainage due to lack of adequate resolution of PFC on follow-up computed tomography. There were no immediate or delayed complications. At a median follow-up of 1033 days (interquartile range 193-1167 days), all of the children were doing well with no PFC recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Single-step EUS-guided drainage of PFC in children is technically feasible, safe, clinically effective, and when available, should be the first-line treatment modality.

Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic ultrasound-guided transcolonic and transrectal drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pelvic abscess drainage has been reported, but data on transcolonic drainage are scant. AIM: To compare outcomes in patients undergoing transcolonic and transrectal drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses. METHODS: Retrospective study of all patients who underwent EUS-guided drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses over a 7-year period. Abscesses were drained by a standard single-step EUS-guided technique with deployment of double-pigtail stents ± catheters. Technical success was defined as successful placement of stents or drainage catheters within the abscess cavity. Treatment success was defined as resolution of abscess on follow-up computed tomography at 2 weeks with symptom improvement. RESULTS: Of 38 patients, 11 underwent transcolonic and 27 transrectal drainages. There was no difference in patient demographics, laboratory values, and median abscess size (65 vs 70 mm, P = 0.85) between the two cohorts. Etiology of abscess was postsurgical in 65.7%, diverticulitis in 13.1%, perforated viscus in 10.5%, and other causes in 10.5%. There was no difference in rates of technical success (100% in each cohort), treatment success (70% vs 96.3%, P = 0.052), or complications (none). Three patients in the transcolonic and one in the transrectal cohort underwent surgery for failed endoscopic drainage (27.3% vs 3.7%, P = 0.06). When evaluated by etiology, treatment success for diverticular abscess was significantly lower compared with others (25% vs 97%, P = 0.002). At a median follow-up of 1228.5 days (interquartile range = 131-1660), all patients with treatment success were doing well with no recurrence. CONCLUSION: Except for patients with diverticular etiology, treatment of abdominopelvic abscess under EUS guidance is highly effective and safe for both routes.

Factors impacting treatment outcomes in the endoscopic management of walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment outcomes are suboptimal for patients undergoing endoscopic treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). The objective of this study is to identify factors that impact treatment outcomes in this patient subset. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients with WOPN treated endoscopically over 10 years. Patients underwent placement of stents and nasocystic catheters within the necrotic cavity. In select patients, the multiple transluminal gateway technique (MTGT) was adopted to create several openings in the stomach or duodenum to facilitate drainage of necrosis. In patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS), the transmural stents were left in place indefinitely to decrease pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) recurrence. RESULTS: Endoscopic treatment was successful in 53 of 76 (69.7%) patients. Treatment success was higher in patients undergoing MTGT than in those in whom conventional drainage was used (94.4% vs. 62.1%, P = 0.009). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, only MTGT (OR 15.8, 95% CI 1.77-140.8; P = 0.01) and fewer endoscopic sessions being needed (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.16-14.0; P = 0.03) predicted treatment success. PFC recurrence was significantly lower in patients with indwelling transmural stents than in patients in whom the stents were removed (0 vs. 20.8%; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Creating multiple gateways for drainage of necrotic debris improves treatment success, and not removing the transmural stents decreases PFC recurrence in patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of WOPN.

Impact of biliary stents on EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic mass lesions.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the impact of biliary stents on EUS-guided FNA. AIM: To compare diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA in patients with or without biliary stents. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients with obstructive jaundice secondary to solid pancreatic mass lesions who underwent EUS-FNA over 5 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in patients with or without biliary stents and between patients with plastic stents or self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs). Secondary objectives were to assess the technical difficulty of EUS-FNA by comparing the number of passes required to establish diagnosis and to identify predictors of a false-negative diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 214 patients who underwent EUS-FNA, 150 (70%) had biliary stents and 64 (30%) had no stents in place. Of 150 patients with biliary stents, 105 (70%) were plastic and 45 (30%) were SEMSs. At EUS-FNA, the diagnosis was pancreatic cancer in 155 (72%), chronic pancreatitis in 17 (8%), other cancer in 31 (14%), and indeterminate in 11 (5%). There was no difference in rates of diagnostic accuracy between patients with or without stents (93.7% vs 95.3%; P = .73) and between plastic or SEMSs (95.2% vs 95.5%, P = .99), respectively. Median number of passes to diagnosis was not significantly different between patients with or without stents (2 [interquartile ratio range (IQR) = 1-3] vs 2 [IQR = 1-4]; P = .066) and between plastic or SEMS (2.5 [IQR = 1-4] vs 2 [IQR = 1-4], P = .69), respectively. On univariate analysis, EUS-FNA results were false-negative in patients with large pancreatic masses (>3 cm vs <3 cm, 9.35% vs 0.93%, P = .005) that required more FNA passes (<2 vs >2 passes, 0% vs 11.8%, P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: The presence or absence of a biliary stent, whether plastic or metal, does not have an impact on the diagnostic yield or technical difficulty of EUS-FNA.

Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needles for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions.

BACKGROUND: To overcome limitations of cytology, biopsy needles have been developed to procure histologic samples during EUS. OBJECTIVE: To compare 22-gauge (G) FNA and 22G biopsy needles (FNB) for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. DESIGN: Randomized trial. SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center. PATIENTS: This study involved 56 patients with solid pancreatic masses. INTERVENTION: Sampling of pancreatic masses by using 22G FNA or 22G FNB devices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Compare the median number of passes required to establish the diagnosis, diagnostic sufficiency, technical performance, complication rates, procurement of the histologic core, and quality of the histologic specimen. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were randomized to the FNA group and 28 to the FNB group. There was no significant difference in median number of passes required to establish the diagnosis (1 [interquartile range 1-2.5] vs 1 [interquartile range 1-1]; P = .21), rates of diagnostic sufficiency (100% vs 89.3%; P = .24), technical failure (0 vs 3.6%; P = 1.0), or complications (3.6% for both) between FNA and FNB needles, respectively. Patients in whom diagnosis was established in passes 1, 2, and 3 were 64.3% versus 67.9%, 10.7% versus 17.9%, and 25% versus 3.6%, respectively, for FNA and FNB cohorts. There was no significant difference in procurement of the histologic core (100% vs 83.3%; P = .26) or the presence of diagnostic histologic specimens (66.7% vs 80%; P = .66) between FNA and FNB cohorts, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Only pancreatic masses were evaluated. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic sufficiency, technical performance, and safety profiles of FNA and FNB needles are comparable. There was no significant difference in yield or quality of the histologic core between the 2 needle types.

Long-term success of colonic stent insertion is influenced by indication but not by length of stent or site of obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Stent insertion plays an important part in the management of acute colonic obstruction. There are limited data on factors influencing short- and long-term success. AIMS AND METHODS: We investigated indications, technical and clinical success rates, complication rates and the factors influencing them. Patients were identified from our prospective colonic stent database (2000-2008). RESULTS: One hundred and four stents were attempted in 96 patients (technical success rate, 83.3%). Clinical short-term success was observed in 74 (77.1%) patients. Follow-up data available for 57 patients showed clinical long-term success in 77% (44/57). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed a significant decline in technical success over the study period (p = 0.041). Patients with colonic malignancy had significantly higher long-term success rates (81%), compared to those with extra-colonic malignancies (43%) (p = 0.049). Length of stent and site of obstruction were not significant factors. Early complications occurred in 10%, and late complications, in 26.3% of cases. CONCLUSION: Colonic stent insertion provides symptom relief in over 70% when used as a long-term solution. Complication rates are high, and a significant minority of patients requires re-intervention. Obstruction caused by extra-colonic malignancy is far less likely to be permanently palliated by a stent, in comparison to colonic malignancy.

Cost analysis and outcomes of endoscopic, minimal access and open pancreatic necrosectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess both individual patient and institutional costs as well as outcomes in patients with pancreatic necrosis who underwent either endoscopic, minimal access or open pancreatic necrosectomy. These data can be used to evaluate clinical effectiveness with a view to informing local health care providers. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Intervention for infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with a high morbidity, mortality and long hospital stays. Minimal access surgical step-up approaches have been the gold standard of care, however endoscopic approaches are now offered preferentially. METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic (EN), minimal access retroperitoneal (MARPN) and open (OPN) necrosectomy at a single institution from April 2015-March 2017 were included. Patients were selected for intervention based on morphology and position of the necrosis and on clinical factors. Patient level costing systems were used to determine inpatient and outpatient costs. RESULTS: 86 patients were included: 38 underwent EN, 35 MARPN and 13 OPN. Pre-operative APACHEII was 6 vs 9 vs 9 (p=0.017) and CRP 107 vs 204 vs 278, (p=0.012), respectively. Post-operative stay was 19 days for EN vs. 41 for MARPN vs. 42 for OPN (p=0.007). Complications occurred in 68.4%, 68.6% and 46.2% (p=0.298) while mortality was 10.5%, 22.9% and 15.4% (p=0.379) respectively. Mean total cost was £31,364 for EN, £52,770 for MARPN (p=0.008) and £60,346 for OPN. Ward and critical care costs for EN were lower than for MARPN (ward: £9,430 vs. £14,033, p=0.024; critical care: £5,317 vs. £16,648, p=0.056).