The Attitude of Practitioners Towards Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Despite widespread adoption and encouraging results seen over the last 5 years, no consensus exists regarding the endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) technique, training, or preprocedure and postprocedure management of the patient. The aim of our survey was to assess practice trends and preferences of bariatric endoscopists with respect to ESG. METHODS: Using a digital platform, we conducted a worldwide survey by emailing a link with an electronic questionnaire to 1200 bariatric endoscopists trained to perform endoscopic suturing using the Apollo Overstitch suturing device (Apollo Endosurgery). RESULTS: We received 221 responses that were included in the analysis. Fifty-one responders (36.4%) required 1 to 10 procedures, and 37 (26.4%) needed 11 to 20 procedures to become proficient at ESG. Ninety-six (68.6%) stated that lower body mass index thresholds should be adopted for Asian and Arab patients. There was no consensus on the ideal number of sutures, with 45 (32.1%), 42 (30%), 36 (25.7%), 13 (9.3%), and 4 (2.9%) recommending 4 to 6, 5 to 7, 6 to 8, 7 to 9, and 8 to 12 sutures, respectively. The primary barriers to establishing an endobariatric program were the inability to establish a cash pay model, 77 (95.1%); lack of institutional support, 61 (75.3%); and difficulty in establishing an ambulatory surgical center/hospital to perform ESG, 73 (90.1%). CONCLUSIONS: ESG practice trends remain heterogenous among practitioners in regard to indication, technique, and preprocedure and postprocedure management. Specific ESG guidelines are warranted, and this survey will assist in providing the framework for these guidelines to be written.

Endoscopic gastrointestinal anastomosis: a review of established techniques.

Technologic advancements in the field of therapeutic endoscopy have led to the development of minimally invasive techniques to create GI anastomosis without requiring surgery. Examples of the potential clinical applications include bypassing malignant and benign gastric outlet obstruction, providing access to the pancreatobiliary tree in those who have undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, and relieving pancreatobiliary symptoms in afferent loop syndrome. Endoscopic GI anastomosis is less invasive and less expensive than surgical approaches, result in improved outcomes, and therefore are more appealing to patients and providers. The aim of this review is to present the evolution of luminal endoscopic gastroenteric and enteroenteric anastomosis dating back to the first compression devices and to describe the clinical techniques being used today, such as magnets, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, and EUS-guided techniques. Through continued innovation, endoscopic interventions will rise to the forefront of the therapeutic arsenal available for patients requiring GI anastomosis.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: suturing the gastric fundus does not confer benefit.

BACKGROUND : There is heterogeneity regarding the technical aspects of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), such as applying fundal sutures. Our aim was to determine whether ESG with fundal suturing (ESG-FS) affects weight loss and the serious adverse event (SAE) rate when compared with ESG with no fundal suturing (ESG-NFS). METHODS: We conducted a two-center retrospective analysis of 247 patients who underwent ESG with or without fundal suturing. The primary outcome was percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) at 3, 6, and 12 months post-ESG. The secondary outcomes included the SAE rate and procedure duration. RESULTS: At 3, 6, and 12-months, ESG-NFS had a significantly greater mean %EWL compared with ESG-FS (38.4 % [standard deviation (SD) 15.3 %] vs. 31.2 % [SD 13.9 %], P = 0.001; 54.7 % [SD 19.2 %] vs. 37.7 % [SD 17.3 %], P < 0.001; 65.3 % [SD 21.1 %] vs. 40.6 % [SD 23.5 %], P < 0.001, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in the SAE rates for ESG-NFS (n = 2; 2.0 %) and ESG-FS (n = 4; 2.6 %; P > 0.99). The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the ESG-NFS group at 59.1 minutes (SD 32.7) vs. 93.0 minutes (35.5; P < 0.001), and a lower mean number of sutures were used, with 5.7 (SD 1.1) vs. 8.4 (SD 1.6; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION : ESG-NFS demonstrated greater efficacy and shorter procedure duration. Therefore, fundal suturing should not be performed.

Impedance planimetry values for predicting clinical response following peroral endoscopic myotomy.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in developing impedance planimetry as a tool to enhance the clinical outcomes for endoscopic and surgical management of achalasia. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether impedance planimetry measurements can predict clinical response and reflux following peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). METHODS: A multicenter cohort study of patients with achalasia undergoing POEM was established from prospective databases and retrospective chart reviews. Patients who underwent impedance planimetry before and after POEM were included. Clinical response was defined as an Eckardt score of ≤ 3. Tenfold cross-validated area under curve (AUC) values were established for the different impedance planimetry measurements associated with clinical response and reflux development. RESULTS: Of the 290 patients included, 91.7 % (266/290) had a clinical response and 39.4 % (108/274) developed reflux following POEM. The most predictive impedance planimetry measurements for a clinical response were: percent change in cross-sectional area (%ΔCSA) and percent change in distensibility index (%ΔDI), with AUCs of 0.75 and 0.73, respectively. Optimal cutoff values for %ΔCSA and %ΔDI to determine a clinical response were a change of 360 % and 272 %, respectively. Impedance planimetry values were much poorer at predicting post-POEM reflux, with AUCs ranging from 0.40 to 0.62. CONCLUSION: Percent change in CSA and distensibility index were the most predictive measures of a clinical response, with a moderate predictive ability. Impedance planimetry values for predicting reflux following POEM showed weak predictive capacity.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bariatric surgery is the most successful treatment for obesity. However, many patients avoid surgery due to its perceived invasive nature and fear of complications. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a seemingly less invasive option for patients with obesity. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESG in adults. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library through July 2019. Investigated outcomes included the percent total body weight loss (TBWL), body mass index reduction, percent excess weight loss (EWL), and adverse events. RESULTS: We extracted data from 8 original studies, published from 2016 through 2019, which included a total of 1772 patients. At 6 months, mean TBWL was 15.1% (95% CI, 14.3-16.0), mean decrease in body mass index was 5.65 kg/m2 (95% CI, 5.07-6.22), and mean excess weight loss was 57.7% (95% CI, 52.0-63.4). Weight loss was sustained at 12 months and 18-24 months with a TBWL of 16.5% (95% CI, 15.2-17.8) and 17.2% (95% CI, 14.6-19.7), respectively. The pooled post-ESG rate of severe adverse events was 2.2% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%), including pain or nausea requiring hospitalization (n = 18, 1.08%), upper gastrointestinal bleeding (n=9, 0.56%), and peri-gastric leak or fluid collection (n = 8, 0.48%). CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found ESG to produce clinically significant weight loss that was reproducible among independent centers and to have a low rate of severe adverse events. ESG appears to be an effective intervention for patients with obesity, although comparative studies and randomized controlled trials are necessary. PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42019121921.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus high-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy: a case-matched study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a safe and effective minimally invasive bariatric procedure. This study compared weight loss in patients undergoing ESG with that of matched patients undergoing high-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy (HIDLT). METHODS: In this case-matched study, patients were matched 2/3:1 (HIDLT/ESG) by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). One hundred five patients (30 men) who underwent ESG + low-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy (LIDLT) between 2016 and 2018 were compared with 281 patients (92 men) who underwent HIDLT at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions from 2013 to 2014. Weight was evaluated 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after beginning HIDLT or post-ESG to determine the mean percent total body weight loss (%TBWL). RESULTS: Mean age across both cohorts was 48.0 ± 12.1, and baseline BMI was 40.0 ± 7.7 kg/m2. In multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, and baseline BMI, the mean %TBWL at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was significantly higher in patients undergoing ESG than matched patients undergoing HIDLT. Specifically, at 3 months, the mean %TBWL in the ESG cohort was 14.0% compared with 11.3% in the HIDLT cohort (P <.011), and at 12 months the mean %TBWL in the ESG cohort was 20.6% versus 14.3% in the HIDLT cohort (P < .001). ESG patients with baseline BMI ≤40 kg/m2 continued to show significantly greater %TBWL than those of the same BMI group in the HIDLT group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after intervention (3 months, coefficient = 3.43 [P < .001]; 12 months, coefficient = 8.14 [P < .001]). CONCLUSIONS: Through 12 months of follow-up, patients who underwent ESG achieved significantly greater weight loss than patients enrolled in HIDLT. ESG appears to be a valuable alternative for patients who experience difficulty complying with HIDLT.

Endoscopic full-thickness suturing plus argon plasma mucosal coagulation versus argon plasma mucosal coagulation alone for weight regain after gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic transoral outlet reduction (TORe) has been used to manage weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. We conducted a meta-analysis to summarize the efficacy and safety of the two most commonly used techniques: full-thickness suturing plus argon plasma mucosal coagulation (ft-TORe) and argon plasma mucosal coagulation alone (APMC-TORe). METHODS: A literature search of publication databases was performed from their inception to February 2020 for relevant studies. The outcomes of interest were percentage total body weight loss, gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) diameter, and adverse events (AEs). The pooled effect estimates were analyzed using a random-effects model. Meta-regression was conducted to identify associations between GJA diameter and weight loss. RESULTS: Nine ft-TORe (n = 737) and 7 APMC-TORe (n = 888) studies were included. APMC-TORe was performed as a series of sessions (mean number of sessions ranging from 1.2 to 3), whereas ft-TORe was mostly performed as a single session. Percentage total body weight loss was 8.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3%-9.7%), 9.5% (95% CI, 8.1%-11.0%), and 5.8% (95% CI, 4.3%-7.1%) after ft-TORe and 9.0% (95% CI, 4.1%-13.9%), 10.2% (95% CI, 8.4%-12.1%), and 9.5% (95% CI, 5.7%-13.2%) after APMC-TORe at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, with no weight-loss difference at 3 and 6 months (P > .05). Only one severe AE was observed after APMC-TORe and none after ft-TORe. Stricture formation was the most common AE (ft-TORe 3.3% and APMC-TORe 4.8%, P = .38). All were successfully treated by endoscopic dilation or conservative treatment. Smaller aperture of the post-TORe GJA and greater change in the GJA diameter correlated with greater weight loss in APMC-TORe and numerical trends in ft-TORe. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that both ft-TORe and APMC-TORe offer significant and comparable weight-loss outcomes with a high and comparable safety profile. However, APMC-TORe typically required multiple endoscopic sessions. Identifying a goal for the final and change in GJA diameter could be useful treatment targets.

Cryoballoon ablation for gastric pouch and/or outlet reduction in patients with weight regain post Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation could induce stricture formation to achieve outlet and pouch reduction in patients regaining weight after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This pilot study aimed to assess technical feasibility and short-term efficacy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review (January - November 2018) at two academic centers identified patients with weight regain post-RYGB, treated with cryoablation if pouch > 4 cm and/or outlet > 15 mm. Patients were scheduled for surveillance endoscopies at 8 weeks. RESULTS: 22 patients presented 10.5 years (SD 4.42) post-RYGB with weight regain of 30.9 kg (SD 13.7). Technical success was 89.5 % for outlet ablation and 93.0 % for pouch ablation. From baseline to 8 weeks, the outlet was reduced from 24.1 mm (95 % confidence interval [CI] 19.8 to 28.5) to 17.1 mm (95 %CI 13.1 to 21.1; P < 0.001), and pouch from 5 cm (95 %CI 4.1 to 5.9) to 3.9 cm (95 %CI 2.6 to 5.1; P < 0.05). Total body weight loss at 8 weeks was 8.1 % (SD 12.8 %). CONCLUSION: Cryoablation appears technically feasible and effective for outlet and/or pouch reduction in the short term.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a case-matched study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) reduces the gastric lumen to a size comparable with that of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). However, there is a paucity of research comparing outcomes between the 2 procedures. Our study compared the 6-month weight loss outcomes and adverse events of ESG with LSG in a case-matched cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data for patients undergoing ESG or LSG at a single academic center. Weight was recorded at 1 and 6 months postprocedure, and percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) was calculated. Adverse events and new-onset Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 54 ESG patients were matched with 83 LSG patients by age, sex, and body mass index. The proportion of patients with GERD at baseline was similar in the 2 groups (16.7% in ESG group vs 25.3% in LSG group, P = .27). At the 6-month follow-up, %TBWL (compared with baseline) was significantly lower in the ESG group compared with the LSG group (17.1% ± 6.5% vs 23.6% ± 7.6%, P < .01). ESG patients had significantly lower rates of adverse events compared with LSG patients (5.2% vs 16.9%, P < .05). New-onset GERD was also significantly lower in the ESG group compared with the LSG group (1.9% vs 14.5%, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: ESG, a minimally invasive same-day procedure, achieved less weight loss at 6 months than LSG, with the caveat that LSG caused more adverse events and new-onset GERD than ESG.

An international study on the use of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in the management of esophageal diverticula: the first multicenter D-POEM experience.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to report a novel, multicenter experience with the diverticular peroral endoscopic myotomy (D-POEM) technique in the management of esophageal diverticula. METHODS: This is a multicenter, international, retrospective study involving three centers. D-POEM was performed using the principles of submucosal endoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 11 patients with an esophageal diverticulum (Zenker's 7, mid-esophagus 1, epiphrenic 3) were included. The mean size of the esophageal diverticula was 34.5 mm. The overall technical success rate of D-POEM was 90.9 %, with a mean procedure time of 63.2 minutes. There were no adverse events. Clinical success was achieved in 100 % (10 /10), with a decrease in mean dysphagia score from 2.7 to 0.1 (P < 0.001) during a median follow-up of 145 days (interquartile range 126 - 273). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic management of esophageal diverticula using the novel technique of D-POEM appears promising. This first case series on D-POEM suggests that the procedure is feasible, safe, and effective in the management of esophageal diverticula. D-POEM offers the distinct advantage of ensuring a complete septotomy. Larger studies are needed to confirm these intriguing results.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus intragastric balloon insertion: efficacy, durability, and safety.

BACKGROUND: Intragastric balloon (IGB) placement and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) are reported to be safe and effective endoscopic bariatric therapies. This study aimed to compare the patient demographics and therapeutic outcomes between the IGB and ESG procedures. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients between December 2015 and October 2017 who underwent IGB or ESG at a single academic center. Fluid-filled IGBs implanted for a 6-month duration were used. IGB and ESG patients were subjected to identical post-procedure dietary instructions and follow-up protocols. Body weight was recorded at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-procedure. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients underwent IGB insertion and 58 underwent ESG. The IGB cohort had a lower baseline body mass index (BMI) than the ESG (34.5 vs. 41.5 kg/m2; P < 0.001) and a significantly lower proportion of men (2.1 % vs. 41.4 %; P < 0.001). IGB patients showed a mean (standard deviation [SD]) percentage total body weight loss (%TBWL) that was significantly lower than ESG patients at 1 month (6.6 % [2.6 %] vs. 9.9 % [2.4 %]; P < 0.001), 3 months (11.1 % [4.4 %] vs. 14.3 % [4.6 %]; P = 0.004), 6 months (15.0 % [7.6 %] vs. 19.5 % [5.7 %]; P = 0.01), and 12 months (13.9 % [9.0 %] vs. 21.3 % [6.6 %]; P = 0.005). The IGB cohort also experienced significantly more adverse events compared with the ESG (17 % vs. 5.2 %; P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: IGB placement and ESG result in clinically meaningful weight loss. However, ESG appears to provide clinically superior and more enduring weight loss with fewer adverse events compared with an IGB.

Lumen-apposing stents versus plastic stents in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts: a large, comparative, international, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Larger caliber lumen-apposing stents (LAMSs) have been increasingly used in the management of pancreatic fluid collections, specifically when solid debris is present; however, their advantages over smaller caliber plastic stents in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts are unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of LAMS specifically in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts compared with double-pigtail plastic stents (DPPSs). METHODS: We performed a multicenter, international, retrospective study between January 2012 and August 2016. A total of 205 patients with a diagnosis of pancreatic pseudocysts were included, 80 patients received LAMSs and 125 received DPPSs. Measured outcomes included clinical success, technical success, adverse events, stent dysfunction, pancreatic pseudocyst recurrence, and need for surgery. RESULTS: Technical success was similar between the LAMS and the DPPS groups (97.5 % vs. 99.2 %; P = 0.32). Clinical success was higher for LAMSs than for DPPSs (96.3 % vs. 87.2 %; P = 0.03). While the need for surgery was similar between the two groups (1.3 % vs. 4.9 %, respectively; P = 0.17), the use of percutaneous drainage was significantly lower in the LAMS group (1.3 % vs. 8.8 %; P = 0.03). At 6-month follow-up, the recurrence rate was similar between the groups (6.7 % vs 18.8 %, respectively; P = 0.12). The rate of adverse events was significantly higher in the DPPS group (7.5 % vs. 17.6 %; P = 0.04). There was no difference in post-procedure mean length of hospital stay (6.3 days [standard deviation 27.9] vs. 3.7 days [5.7]; P = 0.31). CONCLUSION: When compared to DPPSs, LAMSs are a safe, feasible, and effective modality for the treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts and are associated with a higher rate of clinical success, shorter procedure time, less need for percutaneous interventions, and a lower overall rate of adverse events.

Real-World Safety and Efficacy of Fluid-Filled Dual Intragastric Balloon for Weight Loss.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Reshape Duo is a saline-filled dual, integrated intragastric balloon (IGB) approved by the Food and Drug Administration for weight loss in patients with obesity. In a prospective, randomized trial, obese patients who received the balloon had significantly greater percent excess weight loss (%EWL) compared with patients treated with diet and exercise alone. However, there are limited data on the real-world efficacy of the Reshape balloon. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of data collected from 2 academic centers and 5 private practices in which all patients paid for the IGB and follow-up visits out of pocket. The IGB was removed after 6 months. We collected data (demographic, medical, and laboratory) from 202 adults (mean age 47.8 ± 10.8 years; 83% female) with a baseline mean body mass index of 36.8 + 8.4 kg/m2 who had IGB insertion for weight loss therapy, along with counselling on lifestyle modifications focused on diet and exercise. Primary outcomes were percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) and %EWL at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the procedure. RESULTS: Mean %TBWL at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months was 4.8 ± 2.4%, 8.8 ± 4.3%, 11.4 ± 6.7%, 13.3 ± 7.8%, and 14.7 ± 11.8%, respectively. Data were available from 101 patients at 6 months and 12 patients at 12 months; 60.4% of patients achieved more than 10% TBWL and 55.4% had more than 25% EWL. Seventeen patients (8.4%) had esophageal tears during balloon insertion, with no intervention required. Thirteen patients (6.4%) had their IGB removed before the end of the 6-month treatment period. Nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain were the most common adverse effects, occurring in 149 (73.8%), 99 (49%), and 51 (25.2%) patients. In one patient, the IGB migrated distally leading to small intestinal obstruction requiring surgical removal. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective analysis of real-world patients who received the Reshape Duo IGB, we found it to be a safe and efficacious endoscopic method for producing weight loss, with most patients achieving greater than 10% TBWL at 6 months.

Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing lumen-apposing metal stents with plastic stents in the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided transmural drainage is effective in the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). A lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has recently been developed specifically for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections that shows promising results. However, no cost-effectiveness data have been published in comparison with endoscopic drainage with traditional plastic stents (PSs). Our aim here was to compare the cost-effectiveness of LAMSs to PSs in the management of WON. METHODS: A decision tree was developed to assess both LAMSs and PSs over a 6-month time horizon. For each strategy, after the insertion of the respective stents, patients were followed for subsequent need for direct endoscopic necrosectomy, adverse events requiring unplanned endoscopy, percutaneous drainage (PCD), or surgery using probabilities obtained from the literature. The unit of effectiveness was defined as successful endoscopic drainage without the need for PCD or surgery. Costs in 2016 U.S.$ were based on inpatient institutional costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed. An a priori willingness-to-pay threshold of U.S.$50,000 was established. RESULTS: LAMSs were found to be more efficacious than PSs, with 92% and 84%, respectively, of the patients achieving successful endoscopic drainage of WON. LAMSs, however, were more costly: the average cost per patient of U.S.$20,029 compared with U.S.$15,941 for PSs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio favored LAMSs at U.S.$49,214 per additional patient successfully treated. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: LAMSs are more effective but also more costly than PSs in managing WON. Data from high-quality, adequately controlled, prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings.

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy: a multicenter study comparing the direct and balloon-assisted techniques.

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 74 patients (44.6% women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2% and 33.8% of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2% of the direct and 90.9% of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3% for the direct technique and 90.9% for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8% with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.

EUS-guided Gastrojejunostomy Versus Laparoscopic Gastrojejunostomy: An International Collaborative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) with placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent is a minimally invasive and efficacious procedure for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) patients not amenable to surgery. Laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (Lap-GJ) has traditionally been the standard of care. No direct comparison between EUS-GJ and Lap-GJ has been described. Our aim was to compare the clinical outcomes, success rate, and adverse events (AE) of EUS-GJ with Lap-GJ. METHODS: Patients with GOO from 4 academic centers in 3 countries were included. Technical success was defined as successful creation of a gastrojejunostomy. Clinical success was defined as the ability to tolerate a diet postprocedure. RESULTS: Data were collected on 54 patients. A total of 25 patients underwent EUS-GJ (male n=11, mean age 63.9 y) and 29 patients underwent Lap-GJ (male n=22, mean age 75.8 y). Technical success was achieved in 29 (100%) Lap-GJ group patients and 23 (88%) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.11). AEs occurred in 41% (n=12) of patients in the Lap-GJ group and 12% (n=3) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.0386). According to the Clavien-Dindo Classification, the Lap-GJ group AEs were grade I (n=4), grade II (n=5), grade III (n=2), and grade V (n=1); the EUS-GJ AEs were grade II (n=2) and grade V (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: Although the EUS-GJ group contained more complex patients, efficacy was similar between the groups. AEs were significantly lower in the EUS-GJ group. EUS-GJ is a safe and efficacious, minimally invasive option for patients with GOO.