International Consensus Recommendations for Safe Use of LAMS for On- and Off-Label Indications Using a Modified Delphi Process.

INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications. METHODS: Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round. RESULTS: Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events. DISCUSSION: Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS.

Safety and efficacy of a novel resection system for direct endoscopic necrosectomy of walled-off pancreas necrosis: a prospective, international, multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) lacks dedicated instruments and requires repetitive and cumbersome procedures. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a new powered endoscopic debridement (PED) system designed to simultaneously resect and remove solid debris within WOPN. METHODS: This was a single-arm, prospective, multicenter, international device trial conducted from November 2018 to August 2019 at 10 sites. Patients with WOPN ≥6 cm and ≤22 cm and with >30% solid debris were enrolled. The primary endpoint was safety through 21 days after the last DEN procedure. Efficacy outcomes included clearance of necrosis, procedural time, adequacy of debridement, number of procedures until resolution, hospital stay duration, and quality of life. RESULTS: Thirty patients (mean age, 55 years; 60% men) underwent DEN with no device-related adverse events. Of 30 patients, 15 (50%) achieved complete debridement in 1 session and 20 (67%) achieved complete debridement within 2 or fewer sessions. A median of 1.5 interventions (range, 1-7) were required. Median hospital stay was 10 days (interquartile range, 22). There was an overall reduction of 91% in percent necrosis within WOPN from baseline to follow-up and 85% in collection volume. Baseline WOPN volume was positively correlated with the total number of interventions (ρ = .363, P = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The new PED system seems to be a safe and effective treatment tool for WOPN, resulting in fewer interventions and lower hospital duration when compared with published data on using conventional instruments. Randomized controlled trials comparing the PED system with conventional DEN are needed. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03694210.).

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review.

1: ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Safety and efficacy of EUS-guided coil and glue injection for the primary prophylaxis of gastric variceal hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. EUS-guided coil and cyanoacrylate (CYA) injection (EUS-CCI) has been shown to be an effective therapy in acute bleeding and secondary prophylaxis; however, there is a paucity of data on primary prophylaxis. METHODS: In this single-center observational study, adult patients with high-risk gastric varices (GV; size >10 mm or cherry red spot) without prior bleeding underwent EUS-CCI for the primary prophylaxis of GVB between June 2009 and December 2019. The primary outcome was post-treatment GVB. RESULTS: Eighty patients with a mean variceal size of 22.5 ± 9.4 mm and a mean length of follow-up of 3.0 ± 2.4 years were included. The etiology of portal hypertension was cirrhosis in 71 patients (88.7%) and noncirrhotic in 9 (11.3). The mean model for end-stage liver disease score was 12.3 ± 3.7 in patients with cirrhosis. The mean coil number was 1.5 (range, 1-3) and mean glue volume injected 2 mL (range, .5-5). Technical success was achieved in 100%, 96.7% had EUS confirmation of GV obliteration, and 67.7% were obliterated with 1 treatment session. Post-treatment GVB occurred in 2 patients (2.5%) and adverse events in 4 (4.9%). No deaths related to GVB occurred, and emergent transjugular intrahepatic shunts were not needed during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk GV, EUS-CCI for primary prophylaxis is highly effective at preventing GVB with a low rate of adverse events. Primary prophylaxis of high-risk GV with coil and CYA glue injection should be considered in centers with the appropriate expertise.

Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 2008, a plethora of research studies has compared the efficacy of water-assisted (aided) colonoscopy (WAC) and underwater resection (UWR) of colorectal lesions with standard colonoscopy. We reviewed and graded the research evidence with potential clinical application. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus among experienced colonoscopists on definitions and practice of water immersion (WI), water exchange (WE), and UWR. METHODS: Major databases were searched to obtain research reports that could potentially shape clinical practice related to WAC and UWR. Pertinent references were graded (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Extracted data supporting evidence-based statements were tabulated and provided to respondents. We received responses from 55 (85% surveyed) experienced colonoscopists (37 experts and 18 nonexperts in WAC) from 16 countries in 3 rounds. Voting was conducted anonymously in the second and third round, with ≥80% agreement defined as consensus. We aimed to obtain consensus in all statements. RESULTS: In the first and the second modified Delphi rounds, 20 proposed statements were decreased to 14 and then 11 statements. After the third round, the combined responses from all respondents depicted the consensus in 11 statements (S): definitions of WI (S1) and WE (S2), procedural features (S3-S5), impact on bowel cleanliness (S6), adenoma detection (S7), pain score (S8), and UWR (S9-S11). CONCLUSIONS: The most important consensus statements are that WI and WE are not the same in implementation and outcomes. Because studies that could potentially shape clinical practice of WAC and UWR were chosen for review, this modified Delphi consensus supports recommendations for the use of WAC in clinical practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy using an oroenteric catheter-assisted technique: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND : This study evaluated an oroenteric catheter (OEC)-assisted technique to distend the enteric loop for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) in patients with gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). METHODS : Patient outcomes were reviewed. Proximal enteric loops were filled with water via an OEC (7 Fr or 8 Fr), providing a target for EUS-GE using a lumen-apposing metal stent (15-mm caliber). Clinical success was defined as toleration of a non-liquid diet by Day 3. RESULTS : 42 patients (mean age 73.1 [SEM 2.8] years; 23 male) underwent EUS-GE for malignant (n = 37) and benign (n = 5) duodenal strictures. EUS-GE creation was successful in 41/42 (98 %), with mean procedure time of 36 (SEM 3) minutes and no serious complications. Clinical success was achieved in 39/42 (93 %) at 5.7 (SEM 2.6) months' follow-up. Of 14 patients who died, 13 (93 %) maintained oral intake until death. EUS-GE provided good symptom relief in all 28 surviving patients until follow-up. CONCLUSIONS : OEC-assisted EUS-GE provided satisfactory relief of GOO symptoms, with high technical success (98 %) and no serious complications.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy versus open surgical gastrojejunostomy: clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early data suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a safe and efficacious option for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). However, there is a scarcity of data comparing outcomes with open gastrojejunostomy (OGJ). METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study of adult patients hospitalized with GOO who underwent EUS-GE or OGJ between January 1, 2014 and February 28, 2020. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included of which 40 (60.0%) underwent EUS-GE and 26 (40.0%) underwent OGJ. Baseline characteristics were similar with respect to age (70.5 vs 69.7, p = 0.81), sex (42.5% vs 42.3% female, p = 0.99), median length of follow-up (98.0 vs 166.5 days, p = 0.8), prior failed intervention for GOO (22.5% vs 26.9%, p = 0.68), and the presence of altered anatomy (12.5% vs 30.8%, p = 0.07) between EUS-GE and OGJ, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 37 (92.5%) of EUS-GE and 26 (100%) of OGJ patients (p = 0.15). EUS-GE was associated with faster resumption of oral intake (1.3 vs 4.7 days, p < 0.001) and shorter length of stay (5 vs 14.5 days, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in symptom recurrence (17.5% vs 19.2%, HR 1.85, CI 0.52-6.65, p = 0.34), reintervention (20% vs 11.5%, HR 0.82, CI 0.22-3.15, p = 0.78), death within 30 days (12.5% vs 3.8%, HR 0.80, CI 0.09-6.85, p = 0.84), or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 24.1%, HR 1.69, CI 0.53-5.41, p = 0.37) between EUS-GE and OGJ, respectively. EUS-GE patients initiated chemotherapy sooner (17.7 vs 31.3 days, p = 0.033) and had lower overall costs as compared to OGJ ($49,387 vs $124,192, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in technical or clinical success, symptom recurrence, reintervention, 30-day readmission, or 30-day mortality between EUS-GE and OGJ. EUS-GE patients experienced shorter delays to resumption of oral intake and chemotherapy, had shorter lengths of stay, and reduced hospital costs. Further prospective comparative studies are warranted to verify our results.

Effectiveness of combination endoscopic therapy for colonic anastomotic leaks.

BACKGROUND: Colonic anastomotic leaks are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Whereas small case series suggest that fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) are effective, no larger studies have examined the impact of combination endoscopic therapy on colonic anastomotic leaks. METHODS: Our retrospective cohort study reviewed 51 patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for colonic anastomotic leaks between 2011 and 2018. Patients receiving combination therapy involving FCSEMS plus local closure (n = 24) were compared with patients receiving FCSEMS alone (n = 18) or endoscopic suturing alone (n = 9). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success (resolution of leak, removal of percutaneous drains, avoidance of surgical reoperation, and reversal of temporary diversion). RESULTS: Clinical success was achieved in 55 % of patients. Clinical success was achieved in 18/24 patients (75 %) with combination therapy compared with 6/18 patients receiving FCSEMS alone (33 %, adjusted risk ratio [RR] 2.16, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.10 - 4.24; P = 0.02) and 4 /9 patients undergoing endoscopic suturing alone (44 %, RR 1.91, 95 %CI 0.84 - 4.31; P = 0.10). Stent migration occurred in 40 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This large series demonstrates that combination therapy was associated with a higher rate of clinical success, and future prospective studies are warranted.

EUS-Guided Choledochoduodenostomy for Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction Using Electrocautery-Enhanced Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents: First US, Multicenter Experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided biliary drainage has emerged as a technique to enable endobiliary drainage in failed ERCP. A newer model, lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), with a cautery-enhanced delivery system became available in the USA in late 2015. This cautery-tipped version may facilitate EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD), but data using this model are lacking. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes of attempted EUS-CD using cautery-enhanced LAMS from 6, US centers. The following data were collected: patient and procedure details, technical success, adverse events, clinical success (resolution of jaundice or improvement in bilirubin > 50%), and biliary re-interventions. RESULTS: EUS-CD was attempted in 67 patients (mean age 68.8) with malignant obstruction after failed ERCP between September 2015 and April 2018. EUS-CD was technically successful in 64 (95.5%). A plastic or metal stent was inserted through the lumen of the deployed LAMS in 50 of 64 (78.1%) patients to maintain a non-perpendicular LAMS axis into the bile duct. Adverse events occurred in 4 (6.3%) and included: abdominal pain (n = 2), peritonitis that responded to antibiotics (n = 1), and bleeding requiring transfusion (n = 1). Among 40 patients with follow-up of > 4 weeks, clinical success was achieved in 100%. Biliary re-interventions for obstruction were needed in 7(17.5%), in 3 of 6 (50.0%) that underwent EUS-CD with LAMS alone versus 4 of 34 (5%) with LAMS plus an axis-orienting stent (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: EUS-CD using LAMS with cautery-enhanced delivery systems has high technical and clinical success rates, with a low rate of adverse events. Inserting an axis-orienting stent through the lumen of the LAMS may reduce the need for biliary re-interventions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary access versus precut papillotomy in patients with failed biliary cannulation: a retrospective study.

Background and aims Precut papillotomy is widely used after failed biliary cannulation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary access techniques are newer methods to facilitate access and therapy in failed cannulation. We evaluated the impact of EUS-guided biliary access on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) success and compared these techniques to precut papillotomy. Patients and methods We retrospectively compared two ERCP cohorts. One cohort consisted of biliary ERCPs (n = 1053) attempted in patients with native papillae and surgically unaltered anatomy in whom precut papillotomy and/or EUS-guided biliary access were routinely performed immediately after failed cannulation. This cohort was compared with a similar ERCP cohort (n = 1062) in which only precut papillotomy was available for failed cannulation. The following outcomes were compared: conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access techniques (precut or EUS), precut success, EUS-guided biliary access success, and ERCP failure rates. Results Although conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access technique (precut or EUS), and precut success were similar, the ERCP failure rate was lower when both EUS-guided biliary access and precut were available (1.0 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.4 - 1.6]), compared with when only precut was possible for failed access (3.6 % [95 %CI 2.5 - 4.7]; P < 0.001). Success for EUS-guided biliary access (95.1 % [95 %CI 89.7 - 100]) was significantly higher than for precut (75.3 % [95 %CI 68.2 - 82.4]; P < 0.001), and mainly due to superiority in malignant obstruction (93.5 % vs. 64 %; P < 0.001). Conclusions EUS-guided biliary access decreases the rate of therapeutic biliary ERCP failure. Our results support the use of EUS-guided biliary access to optimize single-session ERCP success. In experienced hands, these techniques appear as effective, if not more so, than precut papillotomy.

New Endoscopic Technologies and Procedural Advances for Endoscopic Hemostasis.

Endoscopic interventions are first-line therapy for upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Injection therapy in combination with a second endoscopic modality has reduced re-bleeding, need for surgery and mortality in non-variceal bleeding. For variceal bleeding endoscopic banding or cyanoacrylate injection techniques are recommended interventions. However, despite ease of application and general acceptance of these techniques, there is an ongoing re-bleeding rate associated with significant in-hospital mortality. We discuss current literature on new advances in endoscopic technologies and procedural techniques that have emerged to improve patient outcomes.

Cyanoacrylate glue for gastrointestinal bleeding.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cyanoacrylate (CYA) therapy has become an important component of the therapeutic toolbox of the interventional endoscopists with direct endoscopic injection accepted as first-line therapy of gastric varices. However, its generalized use has been cautioned by its serious adverse event profile. RECENT FINDINGS: Endoscopic ultrasound guided therapy has several conceptual advantages over free-hand injection, particularly as it ensures intravascular delivery of therapy. This has allowed innovation with the use of vascular coils with or without CYA therapy, and very encouraging long-term results are now published showing reduced serious adverse events and low rebleeding rates. SUMMARY: Direct endoscopic ultrasound guided intravascular injection of CYA is gaining widespread acceptance and offers reduced complication rates and significantly lower rebleeding rates. Data are supportive of CYA use both for primary and secondary prophylaxis of gastric varices.

Feasibility of nonradiation EUS-based ERCP in patients with uncomplicated choledocholithiasis (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: ERCP inherently involves radiation exposure. Nonradiation ERCP has been described in pregnancy. Theoretically, the same techniques could be applied to the general population. We prospectively assessed the feasibility of nonradiation, EUS-based ERCP in nonpregnant patients with choledocholithiasis. METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for ERCP for choledocholithiasis were recruited over a 1-year period. Patients providing study consent underwent the following procedural protocol. First, EUS was performed to verify the presence, size, and number of stones. Second, biliary cannulation was attempted without fluoroscopy for a maximum of 10 minutes. Selective cannulation was based on deep insertion with visible bile in the catheter on aspiration. Third, for stone removal, sphincterotomy was performed and stones were removed using a basket or balloon. The number of stones exiting the papilla was matched to the number seen on EUS. Finally, once the duct was deemed clear by the endoscopist, a final occlusion cholangiogram and ductal sweep served as the reference standard for confirmation of stone clearance. RESULTS: Nonradiation ERCP was attempted in 31 patients. Cannulation without fluoroscopy was successful in 26 patients (84%). Complete stone removal without fluoroscopy was achieved in all 26 of these cases. The 5 patients with failed nonfluoroscopic cannulation required double guidewire (n = 2) or precut papillotomy (n = 3) for deep biliary access and subsequent stone clearance. One patient who required precut papillotomy for access developed moderate post-ERCP pancreatitis (3%). CONCLUSIONS: Nonradiation, EUS-based ERCP for uncomplicated choledocholithiasis appears to be successful and safe. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01678391.).

Underwater EMR of adenomas of the appendiceal orifice (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EMR of adenomas involving the appendiceal orifice (AO) is controversial because of a high risk of perforation and incomplete resection. We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of underwater EMR (UEMR) without submucosal injection for the treatment of adenomas involving the AO. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study of a standardized UEMR technique without submucosal injection for adenomas involving the AO in 27 consecutive patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria. Surveillance colonoscopy included biopsy sampling of the EMR site and base of the AO. Main outcome measurements include technical success, histology, resection time, adverse events, and follow-up data. RESULTS: Over 42 months, UEMR of adenomas involving the AO (rim, 5 patients; inside, 22 patients) was attempted in 27 consecutive patients. Median adenoma size was 15 mm (range, 8 to 50). UEMR was successful in 24 patients (89%). Four patients were referred to surgery, 3 with UEMR failure because of an inability to exclude the adenoma extending into the appendix at the index procedure and 1 with invasive adenocarcinoma in the UEMR specimen. The median resection time was 3 minutes (range, 1 to 75). Adverse events consisted of postpolypectomy syndrome in 2 patients (7%). There was no perforation, bleeding requiring transfusion, or appendicitis. Final histology was tubular adenoma (7), tubulovillous adenoma (4), sessile serrated adenoma (15), and invasive adenocarcinoma (1). Twenty-one of 23 patients (91%), not referred to surgery, had follow-up colonoscopy with biopsy sampling of the resection site after a median of 29 weeks (range, 12 to 139) after resection. Residual adenoma was found in 2 of 21 patients (10%). CONCLUSION: On an intention-to-treat basis, UEMR without submucosal injection enabled safe and complete endoscopic resection of AO lesions. Close surveillance for residual or recurrence is warranted. ( CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01750619.).

EUS-guided treatment of gastric fundal varices with combined injection of coils and cyanoacrylate glue: a large U.S. experience over 6 years (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Conventional endoscopic treatment of gastric fundal varices (GFV) with cyanoacrylate (CYA) glue may be complicated by embolization and rebleeding. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of EUS-guided injection of coils and CYA glue for therapy of GFV. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients treated for GFV was performed. The main outcomes measured were hemostasis, obliteration on surveillance EUS, post-treatment bleeding rate, and adverse events. RESULTS: From March 2009 to 2015, 152 patients with GFV were treated. Seven (5%) had active hemorrhage, 105 (69%) had recent bleeding, and 40 (26%) were treated for primary prophylaxis. Treatment was technically successful in 151 patients (>99%). Mean number of coils was 1.4 (range, 1-4 coils), and mean volume of CYA was 2 mL (range, 0.5-6). Follow-up was available for 125 patients with treated GFV (mean, 436 days; range, 30-2043). Among 100 patients with follow-up EUS examinations, complete obliteration (on Doppler study) of GFV was confirmed in 93 (93%). Post-treatment bleeding from obliterated GFV occurred in 3 of 93 patients (3%). Twenty-five patients who had clinical and/or EGD follow-up had 3 post-treatment bleeding episodes after a median follow-up of 324 days (range, 41-486). Among the 40 patients treated for primary prophylaxis, 28 underwent follow-up EUS and 27 (96%) had confirmed obliteration. Mild postprocedure abdominal pain occurred in 4 of 125 patients (3%), and clinical signs of pulmonary embolization were seen in 1 patient (1%). Another 4 of 125 patients (3%) presented with minor delayed upper GI bleeding from coil/glue extrusion. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided combined coil and CYA glue injection of high-risk GFV appears to be highly effective for hemostasis in active bleeding and primary and secondary bleeding prophylaxis. Once obliteration was achieved, post-treatment bleeding from GFV occurred in only 3% during long-term follow-up. Combination therapy appears safe and may reduce the risk of CYA embolization.

Ex vivo comparison of the lumen-apposing properties of EUS-specific stents (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several EUS-specific stents have become available. It has been claimed that some of these stents have lumen-apposing properties, but objective data measuring such properties are not available. The aim of this study is to measure the lumen-apposing force (LAF) of these stents. METHODS: The LAF of 3 EUS-specific metallic stents (stents A, N, and S) were compared in an ex vivo setting. Four types of anastomoses were performed with the stents including cholecysto-duodenal, cholecysto-gastric, gastro-gastric, and gastro-jejunal and compared with a hand-sewn (HS) equivalent of the anastomosis. The outcome parameter was the LAF created by each type of stent. RESULTS: Sixty-four anastomoses were created. The overall mean (standard deviation) LAFs were significantly higher for stents A and S (P < .001). This difference persisted regardless of the type of anastomosis: gastro-gastric (P = .002), gastro-jejunal (P = .005), cholecysto-gastric (P = .002), and cholecysto-jejunal (P = .003). The differences in LAF created by each type of stent across different types of anastomoses were also compared. A trend to significance was observed in the anastomoses created by stent N (P = .064) and stent A (P =.052); a significant difference in LAF was observed among different anastomoses created by stent S (P = .015). The LAF created by HS anastomosis was significantly higher than that for all stents across all anastomoses. CONCLUSIONS: Stents A and S had a higher LAF. The use of these stents should be considered when performing EUS-guided transmural luminal anastomoses in non-adherent organs. Further studies are required to confirm the clinical efficacies of these EUS-specific stents.

EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections and necrosis by using a novel lumen-apposing stent: a large retrospective, multicenter U.S. experience (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collection (PFC) (pancreatic pseudocyst [PP] or walled-off necrosis [WON]) by using a novel lumen-apposing, fully covered, self-expandable metal stent (LAMS) has been promising, but few of these data are from the United States. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and WON by using the LAMS. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study on 82 patients with symptomatic PFC who underwent EUS-guided drainage by using the LAMS at 4 U.S. tertiary care centers. Outcomes evaluated included successful placement of the LAMS, the number of patients in whom complete resolution of PPs or WON was achieved, the number of procedures performed per patient to achieve PFC resolution, and adverse events. RESULTS: The mean size of the PFC was 11.8 cm. LAMSs were successfully placed in 80 patients (97.5%). Twelve patients had PP and 68 had WON. The median stent in-dwelling time was 2 months (range 1-3 months). Endoscopic debridement with the LAMS in WON was performed in 54 patients. The patency of the stent was maintained in 98.7% of the patients (77/78). There was spontaneous dislodgment of 2 LAMSs. Successful endoscopic therapy by using the LAMS was successful in 12 of 12 patients (100%) with PP compared with 60 of 68 patients (88.2%) with WON. All stents were endoscopically removed from all patients after peripancreatic fluid collection (PFC) resolution. There was 1 PFC recurrence during the 3-month median follow-up period. Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 8 patients (9.8%), and included stent maldeployment (n = 2), and self-limited bleeding (n = 6). In 1 patient with stent maldeployment gastric perforation developed, and the patient underwent surgical repair. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided drainage of PFCs by using the novel LAMS has high technical and long-term success rates. Due to its ease of use, the LAMSs may simplify and streamline EUS-guided management of PFCs, particularly for the endoscopic debridement of WON, and may help in its widespread adoption as an alternative to surgery.