EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with obstructive jaundice after failed or impossible endoscopic retrograde drainage: A multicenter, randomized phase II Study.

Background and Objectives: Over the last two decades, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with biliary obstruction and failed ERCP. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) as the gold standard is associated with relevant morbidity and need for re-intervention. The aim of our work was to evaluate in a phase II study the safety and efficacy profile of EUS-HGS. A PTBD arm was considered a control group. Patients and Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, noncomparative phase II study in three French tertiary centers involving patients with benign or malignant obstructive jaundice after failure of ERCP. Patients were randomized to either PTBD or EUS-HGS. Results: Fifty-six patients (mean age 64 years) have been included between 2011 and 2015. Twenty-one underwent PTBD and thirty-five were drained using EUS-HGS. An interim analysis after the inclusion of 41 patients revealed an unexpected high 30-day morbidity rate for PTBD (13 out of 21 patients), justifying to stop randomization and inclusion in this control arm in 2013. The primary objective was reached with 10 out of the 35 EUS-HGS patients (28.6%) having observed complications (90%-level bilateral exact binomial confidence interval [CI] [16.4%-43.6%], left-sided exact binomial test to the objectified 50% unacceptable rate P = 0.0083). Both methods achieved comparable technical success rate (TSR) and clinical success rate (CSR) (TSR: PTBD 100% vs. EUS-HGS 94.3%, P = 0.28; CSR: PTBD 66.7% vs. EUS-HGS 80%, P = 0.35). Long-term follow-up showed EUS-HGS patients being at lower risk for re-intervention (relative risk = 0.47, 95% CI [0.27-0.83]). Conclusion: In cases of ERCP failure, EUS-HGS is a valuable alternative for biliary drainage with a high TSR and CSR. PTBD is associated with an unacceptable 30-day morbidity rate, whereas EUS-HGS seems to have a decent safety profile, suggesting that it may be the treatment of choice in appropriately selected patients.

Benefit of radiofrequency ablation after widespread endoscopic resection of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus in daily practice.

BACKGROUND: High-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal carcinoma (IMC) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) are now well-established indications for endoscopic resection (ER). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be combined with ER in case of flat or long-segment BE ablation. We report here our experience of complementary RFA after widespread ER of neoplastic BE in daily practice. METHOD: We retrospectively reviewed data of 89 patients, treated between 2006 and 2013 by ER alone (group 1) or by ER combined with RFA (group 2). RESULTS: Fifty-five patients in group 1 (7F/48M, mean age 68 years) underwent widespread ER with eradication of residual non-dysplastic BE. Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and intestinal metaplasia (IM) was achieved in 32/32 (100%) and 48/55 (87.3%) patients, respectively. Thirty-four patients in group 2 (3F/31M, mean age 67 years) had a multimodal treatment strategy, with widespread ER followed by RFA. Mean Prague classification of BE in this group was significantly longer (C4.4M6.6 vs. C2.7M4.5, P<0.001). Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and non-dysplastic BE was confirmed in 26/27 (96.3%) and 20/34 (58.8%) patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups concerning adverse events (16.4% vs. 23.5%, P=0.58) or recurrence rate of HGD/IMC (9.1% vs. 14.7%, P=0.42). The mismatch rate between preoperative and final histological diagnosis was high in both groups, at 45.5% and 26.5%. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of ER and RFA can treat significantly longer neoplastic BE than ER alone, with the same efficiency and safety. Widespread ER, in contrast, is the only method of obtaining a reliable histological diagnosis.

Hepaticogastrostomy versus choledochoduodenostomy: An international multicenter study on their long-term patency.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) offers minimally invasive decompression when conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography fails. Stents can be placed from the intrahepatic ducts into the stomach (hepaticogastrostomy [HG]) or from the extrahepatic bile duct into the small intestine (choledochoduodenostomy [CCD]). Long-term patency of these stents is unknown. In this study, we aim to compare long-term patency of CCD versus HG. METHODS: Consecutive patients from 12 centers were included in a registry over 14 years. Demographics, procedure info, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Student's t-test, Chi-square, and logistic regression analyses were conducted. Only patients with at least 6-month follow-up or who died within 6-month postprocedure were included. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighty-two patients were included (93% male; mean age: 70; HG n = 95, CCD n = 87). No significant difference in indication, diagnosis, dissection instrument, or stent type was seen between the two groups. Technical success was 92% in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 75/87 (86%) in the HG group and 80/80 (100%) in the CCD group. A trend toward higher adverse events was seen in the CCD group. A total of 25 patients out of 87 needed stent revision in the HG group (success rate 71%), while eight out of 80 were revised in the CCD group (success rate 90%). Chi square shows CCD success higher than HG (90% vs. 71%, P = 0.010). After adjusting for diagnosis, jaundice or cholangitis presentation, instrument used for dissection, and gender, CCD was 4.5 times more likely than HG to achieve longer stent patency or manage obstruction (odds ratio 4.5; 95% 1.1548-17.6500, P = 0.0302). CONCLUSION: CCD is associated with superior long-term patency than HG but with a trend toward higher adverse events. This is particularly important in patients with increased survival. Additional studies are required before recommending a change in practice.

Preoperative EUS evaluation of the response to neoadjuvant therapy for gastric and esophagogastric junction cancer is correlated with survival: A single retrospective study of 97 patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The European Society for Medical Oncology suggests performing EUS staging for esophagogastric junction and gastric cancers to further assess the T and N stages. The use of EUS after neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is still under debate. We aimed to evaluate the contribution of EUS after NT to staging, therapeutic choices, and prognosis prediction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In 97 patients with esophagogastric junction and gastric cancers who received NT (chemotherapy or radiochemotherapy) followed by carcinologic surgery, EUS was performed before (uT, uN) and after (yuT, yuN) NT. We compared the results of EUS staging after NT (yuT and yuN) and final histology (ypT and ypN). We analyzed the correlation between overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and the objective and subjective responses to NT evaluated by EUS (comparison of uT and yuT and uN and yuN with OS and DFS). RESULTS: EUS staging detected metastasis that went undetected by computed tomography in 16% of metastatic patients. The accuracy between EUS after NT and postoperative pathological findings was 44.4% (34.2%; 54.7%) for T stage and 49.3% (37.5%; 61.1%) for N stage. On multivariate analysis, OS had significantly correlated with the objective response to NT. In the case of a response to NT, the median OS was 64.77 months, and in the case of stable disease, the median OS was 22.9 months (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: EUS after NT can be used for staging. Despite its moderate accuracy, the evaluation of the response to NT by EUS seems to be correlated with patient prognosis.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of sporadic duodenal nonampullary adenoma: outcomes of 130 patients with a long-term follow up in two tertiary French centers.

BACKGROUND: The long-term outcomes and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of sporadic duodenal adenoma (SDA), and the management of adverse events need to be confirmed. METHODS: A bicentric retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent EMR for SDAs from 2003-2016. The primary aim was to evaluate the efficiency of EMR for SDA. The secondary objectives were to assess safety, recurrence management, predictive factors for treatment success, and adverse events. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients (134 procedures) were included (median age 65 years, 49.3% male). The mean SDA size was 20.7 (range 5-50) mm. Of the SDAs, 58.2% were category 3 of the Vienna classification, 35.8% were category 4, and 5.9% were category 5. The median follow up was 25.0 (range 2-120) months. Complete mucosal resection was achieved for 129/134 lesions (96.2%), with en bloc resection in 59/134 (44%). Recurrence occurred in 28.6% of cases (30/105 procedures). Recurrence was successfully treated by new endoscopic procedures in 72.2% (13/18) and by surgery in 27.8% (5/18). Delayed bleeding occurred in 13.4% of cases (18/134) and was successfully managed endoscopically. The perforation rate was 3.7% (5/134); perforations were managed without surgery in 60% (3/5 patients) of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic treatment of SDA appears to be effective and relatively safe in tertiary centers. All bleeding complications were endoscopically controlled, and perforation was rare. Recurrence was frequent but could be managed endoscopically. EMR is confirmed as a first-line treatment in cases of SDA, and surgery is useful only if repeated EMRs fail.

Feasibility of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for inoperable malignant hilar biliary strictures.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a complementary technique for primary drainage or as a rescue technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. The objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of EUS-BD for malignant hilar stenosis (MHS), both as an initial and rescue procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective work based on a prospective registry of patients with malignant drainage stenosis of the hilum. For this analysis, only patients who underwent EUS-BD drainage were included. The drainage procedure could be performed by EUS-BD alone or in combination with another technique, for initial drainage or reintervention. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and September 2018, 20 patients were included. The mean patient age was 68 years. Seven patients had primary liver tumors and 13 had obstructions caused by metastasis. Four patients had Type II stenosis, 7 had Type IIIA, 2 had Type IIIb, and 7 had Type IV stenosis. Sixteen patients underwent EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) for initial drainage and four as reintervention. For initial drainage, 2 patients underwent EUS-HGS alone and 14 underwent EUS-HGS in combination with another technique: 11 combined with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), 2 with percutaneous transhepatic drainage, and 1 with ERCP and percutaneous transhepatic drainage. The technical success rate for EUS-HGS in the drainage of MHS was 100%, and the clinical success rate was 95%. The mean percentage of liver drained was 84%, with an average 1.7 endoscopic sessions and an average 2.7 protheses. The early complication rate was 35% and the mortality rate was 5%. Five EUS-HGS/ERCP combination drainage procedures were performed in one session and six were performed in two sessions with similar complication rates and percentages of liver segments drained. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD is a feasible and safe technique for initial drainage and for reintervention procedures. The EUS-HGS/ERCP combination seemed to be useful in cases of complex stenosis and could be performed during the same session or in two sessions.

Is Piecemeal Endoscopic Resection Acceptable for Early Colorectal Cancers in Certain Situations? A Single-Center French Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The use of endoscopic treatment for early colorectal cancer (ECC) is increasing. The European guidelines suggest performing piecemeal endoscopic resection (pmR) for benign lesions and en bloc resection for ECC, especially for patients with favorable lymph node involvement risk evaluations. However, en bloc resections for lesions larger than two centimeters require invasive endoscopic techniques. Our retrospective single-center study aimed to determine the clinical impact of performing pmR for ECC rather than traditional en bloc resection. METHODS: A single-center study was performed between January 2012 and September 2017. All ECC patients were included. The main objective was to evaluate the number of patients who potentially underwent unnecessary surgery due to piecemeal resection. The secondary endpoints were as follows: disease-free survival (DFS), defined as the time from pmR to endoscopic failure (local recurrence not treatable by endoscopy), complication rate, number of patients who did not undergo surgery by default, and factors predictive of outcomes and complications. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-six ECC endoscopically treated patients were included. In total, 85 patients were excluded (71 who underwent en bloc resection, 14 with pending follow-up). Data from 61 patients (33 women and 28 men) were analyzed. Two patients underwent potentially unnecessary surgery [3.28% (0.9%- 11.2%)]. The DFS rate was 87% (75%-93%) at 6 months and 85% [72%-92%] at 12 months. The median follow- up time was 16.5 months (12.4-20.9). Three patients (4.9%) had complications. One patient did not undergo surgery by default. A Paris classification of 0-2c (HR=9.3 (2.4-35.9), p<0.001) and Vienna classification of 5 [HR=16.3 (3.3-80.4), p<0.001] were factors associated with poor DFS. CONCLUSION: Performing pmR in place of en bloc resection for ECC had a limited impact on patients. If the pathology (especially deep margins) is analyzable, careful monitoring could be acceptable in ECC patients who undergo pmR.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal endoscopy activity in France.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has majorly affected medical activity around the world. We sought to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy activity in France. METHODS: We performed a web-based survey, including 35 questions on the responders and their endoscopic practice, from 23 March to 27 March 2020, sent to the 3300 French gastroenterologists practicing endoscopy. RESULTS: 694 GI endoscopists (21 %) provided analyzable data; of these, 29.4 % (204/694) were involved in the management of COVID-19 patients outside the endoscopy department. During the study period, 98.7 % (685/694) of endoscopists had had to cancel procedures. There were 89 gastroenterologists (12.8 %) who reported symptoms compatible with COVID-19 infection, and a positive PCR test was recorded in 12/197 (6.1 %) vs. 3/497 (0.6 %) endoscopists in the high vs. low prevalence areas, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a major reduction in the volume of GI endoscopies performed in France in March 2020. The prolonged limited access to GI endoscopy could lead to a delay in the management of patients with GI cancers.

Clinical impact of strain histogram EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS for the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses: A prospective multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Recent advances in EUS techniques (real-time EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS) have allowed a better characterization of focal pancreatic masses. Mean strain histograms (SHs) are considered a good parameter for the semi-quantitative evaluation of focal pancreatic masses, alongside complementary contrast-enhanced EUS parameters which can be quantified during both the early arterial and late venous phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was prospective, blinded, and multicentric, assessing real-time EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS results for the characterization of focal pancreatic masses using parametric measurements, in comparison with pathology which is the gold standard. SHs were performed based on the embedded software of the ultrasound system, with the values being reversed as opposed to our initially published data on hue histograms. Consequently, a cutoff of 80 was derived from previous multicentric trials. Contrast-enhanced EUS also allowed the focal masses to be classified as hyper-, iso-, or hypoenhanced in comparison with the normal pancreatic parenchyma. EUS-FNA was then performed for all patients, with a positive cytological diagnosis taken as a final proof of malignancy for the pancreatic masses. The diagnoses obtained by EUS-FNA were verified further either by surgery or during a clinical follow-up of at least 6 months. RESULTS: A total number of 97 consecutive patients with focal pancreatic masses were included in the study. Based on previously defined cutoffs of 80, the values of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the mean SHs for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were 100%, 29.63%, 78.65%, 100%, and 80.41%, respectively. Corresponding values for contrast-enhanced EUS (taking into consideration hypoenhencement as a predictive factor of malignancy) were 98.57%, 77.78%, 92%, 95.45%, and 92.78%, respectively. Combining contrast enhancement-EUS (hypoenhencement) and semi-quantitative EUS elastography (SH cutoffs <80), the resulting values corresponding for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 98.57%, 81.48%, and 93.81%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The current study using objective parametric tools for both EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS confirmed the results of previous studies and meta-analyses that indicated a complementary role for the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses. Moreover, the best values for the receiver operating curves were obtained using a sequential clinical algorithm based on the initial use of elastography, followed by contrast enhancement.

Role of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the screening of digestive tract cancers in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement.

In Europe at present, but also in 2040, 1 in 3 cancer-related deaths are expected to be caused by digestive cancers. Endoscopic technologies enable diagnosis, with relatively low invasiveness, of precancerous conditions and early cancers, thereby improving patient survival. Overall, endoscopy capacity must be adjusted to facilitate both effective screening programs and rigorous control of the quality assurance and surveillance systems required. 1 : For average-risk populations, ESGE recommends the implementation of organized population-based screening programs FOR COLORECTAL CANCER: , based on fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), targeting individuals, irrespective of gender, aged between 50 and 75 years. Depending on local factors, namely the adherence of the target population and availability of endoscopy services, primary screening by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy may also be recommendable. 2 : In high-risk populations, endoscopic screening FOR GASTRIC CANCER: should be considered for individuals aged more than 40 years. Its use in countries/regions with intermediate risk may be considered on the basis of local settings and availability of endoscopic resources. 3 : For esophageal and pancreatic cancer, endoscopic screening may be considered only in high-risk individuals:- FOR SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA: , in those with a personal history of head/neck cancer, achalasia, or previous caustic injury; - FOR BARRETT'S ESOPHAGUS (BE)-ASSOCIATED ADENOCARCINOMA: , in those with long-standing gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms (i. e., > 5 years) and multiple risk factors (age ≥ 50 years, white race, male sex, obesity, first-degree relative with BE or esophageal adenocarcinoma [EAC]). - FOR PANCREATIC CANCER SCREENING: , endoscopic ultrasound may be used in selected high-risk patients such as those with a strong family history and/or genetic susceptibility.

EUS-guided biliary drainage for the management of benign biliary strictures in patients with altered anatomy: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The management of benign biliary stricture in patients with altered anatomy secondary to surgery is challenging. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (BD) represents the standard therapy for benign biliary stricture, but it is associated with nontrivial morbidity rates. Despite the increasing application of guided BD (EUS-BD) for the management of malignant obstruction, its role in patients with benign biliary stricture is limited. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical effectiveness of EUS-BD with multiple transanastomotic plastic stent treatment in patients with benign biliary stricture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-BD for benign biliary stenosis at our center. EUS-BD with fully covered self-expandable metal stent placement was performed first. When feasible, the stricture was treated by balloon dilation with the placement of a transanastomotic double-pigtail plastic stent. Scheduled procedures were repeated to remove the metal stent and replace the plastic stent to treat the stenosis. Technical success and adverse events (AEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Twelve patients underwent EUS-BD for benign biliary strictures. Procedural and clinical successes were achieved in all patients (100%). Multistenting treatment was performed in 10/12 patients (77%). The median number of stents inserted, maximum number of stents placed, and median time of retreatment were 2.4 (range: 1-4), 4, and 3.4 (range: 1-7), respectively. In total, 4/12 patients (33.3%) developed AEs that required endoscopic interventions (Clavien-Dindo Grade III). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-BD with the placement of multiple trans-stenosis plastic stents is a safe, feasible, and well-tolerated alternative for the management of benign biliary stricture in patients with surgery-altered anatomy. Long-term follow-up is necessary to support our results.

Outcomes of duodenal stenting: Experience in a French tertiary center with 220 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal outlet obstruction (MGOO) is described as ineffective and not long-lasting despite a few favorable studies. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a large series of patients in a tertiary center. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was performed using data collected from all patients who received palliative duodenal self-expandable metal stents between January 2011 and December 2016. The primary endpoints were patient diet after the first duodenal procedure (Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System, GOOSS) and clinical success. The secondary endpoints were the median patency duration (calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method) and the cumulative incidence of reintervention. RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty patients were included. The increase in the GOOSS score was significant (p < 0.001), and the clinical success rate was 86.3%. The median estimated patency duration was 9.0 months [6.5-29.1]. Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma had significantly longer patency durations (p = 0.02). The estimated cumulative probability of a second duodenal procedure after 4 months was 13%. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series of patients who underwent duodenal stenting for MGOO, we observed significant changes in GOOSS scores, a relatively long patency duration compared to findings in previous series, and a low probability of subsequent duodenal procedures, primarily due to a low median overall survival time (4 months).

Changes in tumor vascularity depicted by contrast-enhanced EUS as a predictor of prognosis and treatment efficacy in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer (PEACE): A study protocol.

Patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer have a poor prognosis. The analysis of prognostic factors before treatment may be helpful in determining the best therapeutic strategies. The aim of the PEACE study is to assess the vascularity of pancreatic malignant tumors using contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CEH-EUS) and to clarify the prognostic value of tumor vascularity in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. Hereby, we present the protocol of a prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm, multicenter study aiming to assess changes in tumor vascularity using CEH-EUS before and 2 months after treatment initiation in patients with unresectable, locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer and to examine the correlation between vascular changes and treatment response, progression-free survival, and overall survival.

Drainage of the right liver under EUS guidance: A bridge technique allowing drainage of the right liver through the left liver into the stomach or jejunum.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: EUS-guided biliary drainage is now comparable to percutaneous drainage. This technique can be used in cases of complex drainage of the hilum, mainly for salvage therapy to drain the left liver. In cases of inaccessible papilla or altered anatomy, EUS-guided biliary drainage for hilar stenosis of the liver could be used as the first approach. However, this technique has limited applicability for the right liver. In this feasibility study, we reported drainage of the right liver using the bridge technique and hepaticogastrostomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was based on a prospective registry from January 2013 to February 2017. Patients with inaccessible papilla due to altered anatomy or duodenal invasion and drainage under EUS guidance and bridge technique without previous biliary drainage were included in the study. The bridge technique was used to place an uncovered biliary stent between the right and left liver. The left liver was drained with a hepaticogastrostomy. RESULTS: Twelve patients were included in the study. Stenosis was Type II for nine, IIIA for two, and Type IV for one patient. Technical and clinical success was 100% and 83%, respectively. Morbidity was 33% (four patients), including three with abdominal pain managed conservatively and one with a percutaneous salvage drainage. Postoperative mortality was 8% (uncontrolled sepsis). The mean survival was 6 months. Chemotherapy could be administered in 70% (seven) patients in cases of clinical success. CONCLUSION: The bridge technique under EUS guidance could be a first alternative for draining malignant hilar stenosis in cases of the inaccessible papilla.

Palliative endoscopic drainage of malignant stenosis of biliary confluence: Efficiency of multiple drainage approach to drain a maximum of liver segments.

Background and aim: More than 50% of the liver should be drained in case of unresectable hilar liver stenosis; however, it remains unclear if the use of several types of drainage (endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and pancreatography, percutaneous-biliary drainage, endoscopic ultrasound biliary drainage (EUS-BD)), allowing better drainage, has an impact on survival. The aim of our study was to evaluate the percentage of liver drained and its correlation on survival whatever the drainage technique used. Patients and methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective registry of patients with malignant drainage stenosis of the hilum. The quality of drainage was evaluated based on the percentage of liver segments drained, which was calculated by dividing the number of liver segments drained by the total number of liver segments. Drainage could be achieved via an endoscopic, EUS-guided or percutaneous route not associated with the procedure. Results: Sixty patients (38 men) were included from January 2015 to July 2016. The mean patient age was 69.84 years. Stenosis was classified as type II for 17 (29%) patients, type III for 20 (34%) patients, and type IV for 22 (37%) patients. Histology revealed cholangiocarcinoma for 26 (43%) patients, metastatic disease from colorectal cancer for 15 (25%) patients and another cancer for 19 (32%) patients. The median survival time was five (2.3-12.3) months.The percentage of liver segments drained had a significant prognostic impact on overall survival regardless of the technique used to drain the liver. The percentage of liver segments drained was dichotomized based on a threshold value of 80%, resulting in two groups (<80% and ≥80%). Univariate analysis of overall survival revealed that the patients with <80% of liver segments drained had significantly worse prognoses (hazard ratio (HR) = 3.25 (1.66-6.36), p < 0.001) than the patients with ≥80% of liver segments drained. This effect was confirmed in multivariate analysis (HR = 2.46 (1.16-5.23), p = 0.02).The other factor that affected survival was invasion of <50% of the liver by the tumor.A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to establish a correlation between patients receiving chemotherapy and the percentage of liver drained (area under the curve = 0.77 (0.65-0.88)). Conclusion: The survival of patients with malignant stenosis of the biliary confluence is highly correlated with the percentage of liver segments drained, regardless of the technique used.

Fluid collection after partial pancreatectomy: EUS drainage and long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Postoperative fluid collection due to pancreatic leak is the most frequent complication after pancreatic surgery. EUS-guided drainage of post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection is the gold standard procedure; however, data on outcomes of this procedure are limited. The primary endpoint of our study was relapse over longterm followup, and the secondary endpoint was the efficiency and safety of EUS-guided drainage of post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at a single center from December 2008 to April 2016. Global morbidity was defined as the occurrence of an event involving additional endoscopic procedures, hospitalization, or interventional radiologic or surgical procedures. EUS-guided drainage was considered a clinical failure if surgery was required to treat a relapse after stent removal. RESULTS: Fortyone patients were included. The technical success rate was 100%. Drainage was considered a clinical success in 93% (39/41) of cases. Additionally, 19 (46%) complications were identified as global morbidity. The duration between surgery and EUS-guided drainage was not a significantly related factor for morbidity rate (P = 0.8); however, bleeding due to arterial injuries (splenic artery and gastroduodenal artery) from salvage drainage procedures occurred within 25 days following the initial surgery. There was no difference in survival between patients with and without complications. No relapse was reported during the followup (median: 44.75 months; range: 29.24 to 65.74 months). CONCLUSION: EUSguided drainage for post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection was efficient with no relapse during longterm followup. Morbidity rate was independent of the duration between the initial surgery and EUS-guided drainage; however, bleeding risk was likely more important in cases of early drainage.

Characterization of subepithelial lesions of the stomach and esophagus by contrast-enhanced EUS: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Subepithelial lesions (SELs) of the upper part of the digestive tract are rare, and it can be difficult to characterize them. Recently, contrast-enhanced endosonography (EUS) and elastometry have been reported as useful adjuncts to EUS and EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in cases of pancreatic mass and lymph node involvement. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate whether contrast-enhanced EUS can discriminate benign submucosal lesions from malignant ones. We describe our retrospective experience using the contrast agent SonoVue® (Bracco Imaging, Milan, Italy) in an attempt to increase the diagnostic yield. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 2011 and September 2014, 14 patients (5 men, 9 women; median age 64 years, range 31-80 years) with SELs of the stomach or esophagus underwent EUS with SonoVue® (low mechanical index). There were 3 esophageal lesions and 11 gastric lesions. Mean size of the lesions was 30 mm (range 11-50 mm). They were discovered after anemia (n = 5), dysphagia (n = 1), and pain (n = 4) and during follow-up for resected gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) (n = 1) and a standard upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (n = 3). On endoscopic sonograms, 10 of these lesions were hypoechoic and located in the fourth layer (muscularis), and 4 were in the second or third layer (mucosa and submucosa). Contrast enhancement was assessed in the early phase (after several seconds) and late phase (>30 seconds); a final diagnosis was made based on the findings of EUS-FNA using a 19-gauge ProCore (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) (n = 9) or 22-gauge FNA system (Cook Medical) (n = 1), the resected specimen (n = 3), or deep biopsy (n = 1). Different immunostaining was used in the pathologic studies (RNA was analyzed later using the C-kit, CD-117, CD-34, desmin, DOG-1, α-smooth actin, caldesmon, PS-100, and Ki-67 antibodies). RESULTS: Final diagnoses were leiomyoma (n = 4), GIST (n = 5), schwannoma (n = 1), inflammatory tumor of Helvig (n = 1), pancreas rest (n = 2), and fibrosis (n = 1). No complications occurred. All 5 GISTs showed enhancement in the early and late phases, whereas the 8 remaining lesions did not show any enhancement. Only 1 leiomyoma showed heterogeneous enhancement. LIMITATIONS: The monocentric and retrospective study design and small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In cases of SELs of the stomach or esophagus, SonoVue® could be a complementary tool to endosonography to differentiate GISTs (early and clear enhancement) from other SELs (few or no enhancement), such as leiomyomas or pancreatic rest. These results are similar to those of the few, small studies published on this topic, but more studies with a larger number of patients are needed to confirm these findings.

A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P = .043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P < .001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P = .002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P = .002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P = .004), and did not differ among centers (P = .836). CONCLUSION: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.).