Adverse events of self-expandable metal stent placement for malignant distal biliary obstruction: a large multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic placement of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) may be accompanied by several types of adverse events. The present study analyzed the adverse events occurring after SEMS placement for MDBO. METHODS: The present study retrospectively investigated the incidence and types of adverse events in patients who underwent SEMS placement for MDBO between April 2018 and March 2021 at 26 hospitals. Risk factors for acute pancreatitis, cholecystitis, and recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Of the 1425 patients implanted with SEMSs for MDBO, 228 (16.0%) and 393 (27.6%) experienced early adverse events and RBO, respectively. Pancreatic duct without tumor involvement (P = .023), intact papilla (P = .025), and SEMS placement across the papilla (P = .037) were independent risk factors for acute pancreatitis. Tumor involvement in the orifice of the cystic duct was an independent risk factor for cholecystitis (P < .001). Use of fully and partially covered SEMSs was an independent risk factor for food impaction and/or sludge. Use of fully covered SEMSs was an independent risk factor for stent migration. Use of uncovered SEMSs and laser-cut SEMSs was an independent risk factor for tumor ingrowth. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic duct without tumor involvement, intact papilla, and SEMS placement across the papilla were independent risk factors for acute pancreatitis, and tumor involvement in the orifice of the cystic duct was an independent risk factor for cholecystitis. The risk factors for food impaction and/or sludge, stent migration, and tumor ingrowth differed among types of SEMSs.

Risk factors for adverse events associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial pharyngeal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Superficial pharyngeal cancer can be treated with curative intent while preserving function using minimally invasive peroral endoscopic resection techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, severe adverse events occasionally occur, such as laryngeal edema requiring temporary tracheotomy and fistula formation. Therefore, we investigated the risk factors for adverse events associated with ESD for superficial pharyngeal cancer. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted at a single institution, and 63 patients who underwent ESD were enrolled. The primary outcome was the risk factors for adverse events associated with ESD. The secondary outcomes were adverse events associated with ESD and their frequency. RESULTS: The overall adverse event rate was 15.9% (10/63). The incidence of laryngeal edema requiring prophylactic temporary tracheotomy was 11.1%, while laryngeal edema requiring emergency temporary tracheotomy, postoperative bleeding, aspiration pneumonia, fistula, abscess, and stricture formation occurred in 1.6% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analyses showed that a history of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer was a risk factor for adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 16.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.04-91.34; p = 0.001). After adjusting the model for differences in the baseline risk factors using the inverse probability of treatment weighting method, the adverse events were found to increase in association with a history of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (OR, 39.66; 95% CI,5.85-268.72; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: History of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer is an independent risk factor for adverse events associated with ESD for superficial pharyngeal cancer. Among adverse events, laryngeal edema requiring prophylactic temporary tracheotomy was particularly high.

Comparison of 22-gauge standard and Franseen needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This large multicenter randomized controlled trial compared the diagnostic yields of 22-gauge standard and 22-gauge Franseen needles for EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) of solid pancreatic lesions. METHODS: Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions were prospectively randomized to EUS-TA using standard or Franseen needles. Samples obtained with the first needle pass and with second and subsequent passes were evaluated separately. The primary endpoint was the rate of accuracy for diagnosis of malignancy. Other endpoints were technical success rate, sample cellularity, adverse events, diagnostic accuracy in patient subgroups, and the diagnostic accuracy and numbers of second and subsequent needle passes. RESULTS: Of 523 patients undergoing EUS-TA, 260 were randomized to using standard 22-gauge needles and 263 to 22-gauge Franseen needles. The technical success rate in each group was 99.6%, with similar adverse event rates in the standard (1.5%) and Franseen (.8%) needle groups. First-pass EUS-TA using the Franseen needle resulted in significantly greater diagnostic accuracy (84.0% vs 71.2%, P < .001) and sensitivity (82.4% vs 66.7%, P < .001) than first-pass EUS-TA using a standard needle and also resulted in superior diagnostic accuracy in patients requiring immunostaining. Second and subsequent EUS-TA using Franseen needles showed significantly greater accuracy (94.7% vs 90.0%, P = .049) and sensitivity (94.0% vs 88.6%, P = .047) and required fewer needle passes (1.81 vs 2.03, P = .008) than using standard needles. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-TA with the Franseen needle is superior to EUS-TA with a standard needle with respect to diagnostic accuracy per pass, particularly in patients who require immunostaining, and number of passes when using macroscopic on-site evaluation. (Clinical trial registration numbers: UMIN000030634 and jRCTs052180062.).

Evaluation of long-term survival in patients with severe comorbidities after endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is becoming widely popular as a less invasive treatment option for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, data on long-term survival after esophageal ESD in patients with severe comorbidities are limited. This study aimed to evaluate long-term survival after ESD in such patients. METHODS: Altogether, 584 consecutive patients underwent esophageal ESD at our institution from May 2004 to September 2016. Based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system, patients were grouped according to severe (ASA-PS ≥ 3) or non-severe comorbidities (ASA-PS 1/2). The overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and risk factors for mortality were compared between the groups using a propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS: In a matched cohort of 69 pairs, the 5-year OS rate was poorer in ASA-PS 3 patients than in ASA-PS 1/2 patients (63.9% vs. 92.5%, P < 0.01), while the 5-year DSS rate was similar between the groups (100% vs. 100%). The mortality rate was significantly higher in ASA-PS 3 patients than in ASA-PS 1/2 patients (hazard ratio 3.47; 95% confidence interval 1.79-6.74; P < 0.01). Death due to exacerbation of comorbidities was significantly more frequent in ASA-PS 3 patients than in ASA-PS 1/2 patients (42.4% vs. 8.3%, P < 0.04). CONCLUSION: Because of the exacerbation of comorbidities, patients with severe comorbidities had poorer long-term outcomes after esophageal ESD than those with non-severe comorbidities. Further studies will be necessary to evaluate esophageal ESD in patients with severe comorbidities.

[Current real-world treatments for Japanese patients with eosinophilic esophagitis].

A total of 306 patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) were analyzed at our department. Proton pump inhibitors or potassium-competitive acid blockers were used as the first-line treatment in 286 (93.5%) patients. Fifty-five (18.0%) patients received topical steroid swallowing therapy. During 17.7-month mean follow-up, 46.4% of the patients were followed-up with no medications, 37.3% of the patients received maintenance or on-demand therapy using acid-suppressive drugs, and 9.8% of the patients received maintenance therapy with steroid swallowing. The majority of patients with EoE were treated using a therapeutic strategy similar to that used for gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, some patients were refractory to the treatment. Current real-world treatment strategies for Japanese patients with EoE are clarified.

A 25 mg rectal dose of diclofenac for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVES: A 50-100 mg rectal dose of diclofenac or indomethacin is recommended for prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP); however, limited data are available regarding the appropriate dose to prevent PEP in elderly patients. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 25 mg diclofenac in preventing PEP in elderly patients. Material and methods: Overall, 276 patients with naive papilla, aged over 75 years, were included in the present study between April 2013 and March 2020. We retrospectively evaluated the risk of PEP in patients over 75 years, administered with or without 25 mg diclofenac 30 min before ERCP using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Results: Patients were categorized into the diclofenac group (83 patients) or non-diclofenac group (193 patients). The incidence rate of PEP in the diclofenac group was significantly lower than that in the non-diclofenac group (4% vs. 14%, p = .01). Multivariate analysis revealed that 25 mg diclofenac was an independent protective factor against PEP in elderly patients aged over 75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.04-0.67; p = 0.01). This protective effect of diclofenac against PEP remained robust after IPTW analysis (OR = 0.11; 95% CI = 0.03-0.40; p = .001). No adverse events related to diclofenac were observed. Conclusion: Diclofenac (25 mg) was considered effective and safe for preventing PEP in elderly patients. Our results may provide a new strategy for preventing PEP in elderly patients.

Safety of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Using a Bipolar Snare for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors and the Predictive Factors of Piecemeal Resection.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic mucosal resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors is a noninvasive treatment; however, perforations can occur. Bipolar snares can reduce the risk of perforation due to small tissue damage. Currently, only few studies have reported endoscopic mucosal resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors using a bipolar snare and the effect of preoperative findings. OBJECTIVE: To investigate (1) resectability and adverse events of endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors and (2) the predictions of piecemeal resection. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2017, 89 patients with 107 lesions underwent endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare. Among them, 88 lesions of 77 patients were evaluated. The primary outcome was the incidence of en bloc resection and R0 resection and adverse events. Risk factors associated with piecemeal resection, including preoperative lesion findings, were also examined. RESULTS: The incidence rates of en bloc and R0 resections were 85.2 and 48.9%, respectively. Neither intraoperative or delayed perforations nor procedure-related mortality was noted. The nonlifting sign after submucosal injection was associated with an increase in piecemeal resection (odds ratio: 20.3, 95% confidence interval: 2.53-162; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors can cause perforation; however, endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare can be a safe treatment option as it does not cause perforations. The nonlifting sign after submucosal injection is a predictive factor for piecemeal resection.

Predictive factors for difficult endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal neoplasia including failure of en bloc resection or perforation.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is accepted as the standard treatment for early-stage esophageal neoplasia. However, esophageal perforation may occur, leading to mediastinitis and pneumothorax, which occasionally require emergency surgery. Moreover, failure of en bloc resection causes local recurrence. However, studies on the predictors of such difficulties during ESD are limited. Hence, we evaluated the predictors associated with the difficulty of ESD for esophageal neoplasia including failure of en bloc resection or perforation. METHODS: Data of 549 consecutive patients who were treated with ESD between May 2004 and March 2016 at a single institution were retrospectively studied. Exclusion criteria were the presence of metachronous esophageal neoplasia or missing data. The primary outcome was determining the predictors associated with the difficulty of ESD for esophageal neoplasia including failure of en bloc resection or perforation. RESULTS: Altogether, 543 patients with 736 lesions were evaluated. Failure of en bloc resection occurred in 6 patients (1.1%) with 6 lesions, and perforation occurred in 11 patients (2.0%) with 11 lesions (1.5%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that large lesion diameter (odds ratio [OR] 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-1.84; p < 0.001) and previous chemoradiotherapy (OR 5.24; 95% CI 1.52-18.06; p = 0.009) were independent predictive factors. CONCLUSIONS: Larger lesions and previous chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer increased the risk for failure of en bloc resection or perforation in patients who underwent esophageal ESD.

Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Histologic diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) using EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) is difficult. To address this issue, new fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles were recently developed. Here, we prospectively evaluated 2 newly designed EUS-FNB needles for histologic evaluation in patients with type 1 AIP. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial comparing biopsy specimens obtained with a 22-gauge Franseen needle or a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle in patients with suspected type 1 AIP. AIP was diagnosed according to international consensus diagnostic criteria. The primary endpoint was the sensitivity of EUS-FNB needles, and secondary endpoints were the amount of specimen obtained, histology of the pancreas based on evaluation of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP), and contribution of histologic findings to the diagnosis of AIP. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were randomly assigned to the Franseen group (22-gauge Franseen needle) or the forward-bevel group (20-gauge forward-bevel needle). EUS-FNB sampling was successful in all patients. Nine patients were excluded because of diagnoses other than AIP. Compared with the forward-bevel needle, the Franseen needle obtained a significantly greater number of high-power fields. Of 101 patients, 39 patients (78%) in the Franseen group and 23 patients (45%) in the Forward-bevel group were diagnosed with level 1 or 2 LPSP (P = .001). Thirty-six patients could not be diagnosed with type 1 AIP without EUS-FNB specimen results. CONCLUSIONS: The 22-gauge Franseen needle should be routinely used for histologic diagnosis of type 1 AIP. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000027668.).

Positive correlation between pancreatic volume and post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) remains the most common and serious adverse event associated with ERCP. Risk factors for PEP have been described in various reports. However, risk factors have not been quantified to date. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk factors for PEP by quantification of pancreatic volume using pre-ERCP images. METHODS: Overall, 800 patients were recruited from April 2012 to February 2015 for this study. There were 168 patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria. Measurement of pancreatic volume was achieved using the volume analyzer SYNAPSE VINCENT in all cases and was used to evaluate the risk factors for PEP. RESULTS: According to the criteria established by the consensus guidelines (Cotton classification), 17 patients (10.1%) were classified as having mild disease, 4 (2.4%) as having moderate disease, and 5 (3.0%) as having severe disease. Multivariate model analysis showed that a large pancreatic volume was a significant risk factor for PEP (odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.13; P < 0.001). In addition, the association between the pancreatic volume and the severity of PEP was positively correlated (the effect of volume [per 1 mL]; OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.07-1.12; P < 0.001, the effect of volume [per 10 mL]; OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.72-3.00; P < 0.001). A larger pancreatic volume was significantly associated with a higher incidence of PEP. CONCLUSIONS: A large pancreatic volume was identified as a risk factor for PEP. The results of this study suggest that pre-ERCP images might be useful for predicting PEP.

Impact of preoperative biopsy sampling on severe submucosal fibrosis on endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: It is believed that preoperative biopsy sampling for superficial-type colorectal tumors should be avoided because submucosal fibrosis caused by biopsy sampling makes EMR impossible. However, few studies have reported the influence of biopsy sampling on colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This study aimed to examine the effect of biopsy sampling on submucosal fibrosis and treatment outcomes of ESD for laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). METHODS: Between April 2005 and September 2015, 441 consecutive patients underwent colorectal ESD in Osaka City University Hospital. Using propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), we retrospectively evaluated risk factors for severe submucosal fibrosis and treatment outcomes for patients with LSTs, with or without preoperative biopsy sampling. RESULTS: A total of 428 LSTs resected using ESD were enrolled. After matching, there were 136 matched pairs of lesions that did or did not undergo biopsy sampling. Preoperative biopsy sampling increased severe fibrosis compared with that in the non-biopsy sampling group (20.6% vs 11.0%; P = .03) and was significantly associated with severe fibrosis after matching (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-4.10; P = .03). After adjustment with IPTW, biopsy sampling also increased the risk of severe fibrosis (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.17-4.63; P = .02). However, no significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative biopsy sampling for colorectal LSTs might cause severe submucosal fibrosis but has no adverse influence on clinical outcomes of ESD.

Long-term outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in patients with severe comorbidities: a comparative propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recently, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) has been performed on patients with severe comorbidities because it is less invasive, although little is known regarding long-term outcomes. This study aimed to assess the long-term outcomes of ESD for patients with severe and non-severe comorbidities. METHODS: We enrolled 1081 patients who underwent ESD for EGC between February 2004 and June 2013. Based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification, we defined patients with severe and non-severe comorbidities as ASA-PS 3 and 1/2, respectively. We retrospectively compared the overall survival, risk factors for mortality, and adverse events between these two groups using propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: A total of 488 patients met the eligibility criteria. After matching, the ASA-PS 3 group showed a significantly shorter survival than the ASA-PS 1/2 group (5-year overall survival rate, 79.1 vs. 87.7%; p < 0.01). In addition, only the ASA-PS 3 group had a significant risk factor for mortality using both the Cox analysis [hazard ratio (HR), 2.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-5.52; p = 0.02] and the IPTW method (HR, 3.14; 95% CI 1.91-5.14; p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in adverse events after matching between the two groups (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The long-term outcome of gastric ESD for patients with severe comorbidities was worse than for those with non-severe comorbidities. Further studies will be necessary to determine if ESD is truly warranted in these patients.