Using single-operator cholangioscopy for endoscopic evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures: results from a large multinational registry.

BACKGROUND: Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) of indeterminate biliary strictures aims to achieve a diagnosis through visual examination and/or by obtaining targeted biopsies under direct visualization. In this large, prospective, multinational, real-life experience of POCS-guided evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures, we evaluated the performance of POCS in this difficult-to-manage patient population. METHODS: This prospective registry enrolled patients, with indeterminate biliary strictures across 20 centers in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The primary end points were the ability to visualize the lesion, obtain histological sampling when intended, and an assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of POCS for malignant strictures. Patients were followed for 6 months after POCS or until a definitive malignant diagnosis was made, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: 289 patients underwent 290 POCS procedures with intent to biopsy in 182 cases. The stricture/filling defect was successfully visualized in 286/290 (98.6 %), providing a visual diagnostic impression in 253/290 (87.2 %) and obtaining adequate biopsies in 169/182 (92.9 %). Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 5/289 patients (1.7 %). POCS influenced patient management principally by elucidating filling defects or the causes of bile duct stricture or dilation. The visual impression of malignancy showed 86.7 % sensitivity, 71.2 % specificity, 65.8 % positive and 89.4 % negative predictive value, and 77.2 % overall accuracy compared with final diagnosis. Histological POCS-guided samples showed 75.3 % sensitivity, 100 % specificity, 100 % positive and 77.1 % negative predictive value, and 86.5 % overall accuracy. CONCLUSION: In this large, real-life, prospective series, POCS was demonstrated to be an effective and safe intervention guiding the management of patients with indeterminate biliary strictures.

A Randomized Trial of Topical Epinephrine and Rectal Indomethacin for Preventing Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Rectal indomethacin and topical spray of epinephrine have separately shown efficacy in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) in randomized controlled trials. We hypothesized that the combination of indomethacin and topical spray of epinephrine on the duodenal papillae would further reduce PEP than when indomethacin was used alone. METHODS: We conducted a comparative effectiveness, multicenter, double-blinded, randomized trial of rectal indomethacin alone vs a combination of rectal indomethacin and topical spray of epinephrine for the prevention of PEP in high-risk patients. The primary outcome was the incidence of PEP and the secondary outcome was the severity of PEP. A 2-tailed Fisher's exact test was used to analyze the difference in the proportion of patients with PEP in the indomethacin alone vs the combination group. RESULTS: A total of 960 patients (mean age 52.33 ± 14.96 years; 551 [57.4%] females) were randomized and 959 completed follow-up. The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Women <50 years of age (25.4%) and difficult cannulation (84.9%) were the most common PEP risk factors. The incidence of PEP was 6.4% in the indomethacin alone group (n = 482) compared to 6.7% in the combination group (n = 477; P = 0.87). Severe PEP was found in 5 (12%) and 7 (16%) patients in the indomethacin alone and combination groups, respectively (P = 0.88). The overall mortality was 0.6%, which was unrelated to the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of rectal indomethacin and topical spray of epinephrine does not reduce the incidence of PEP compared to rectal indomethacin alone in high-risk patients; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02116309.

Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stone clearance in a single session of ERCP: results from a large multinational registry demonstrate high success rates.

BACKGROUND: Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) can be useful for difficult bile duct stone clearance. Large prospective multinational data on POCS-guided lithotripsy for clearing difficult bile duct stones in a single session of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are missing. METHODS: Patients with difficult bile duct stones (defined as one or more of: largest stone diameter ≥ 15 mm, failed prior attempt at stone clearance, impacted, multiple, hepatic duct location, or located above a stricture) were enrolled at 17 centers in 10 countries. The principal endpoint was stone clearance in a single ERCP procedure using POCS. RESULTS : 156 patients underwent 174 sessions of POCS-guided electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy. Stone clearance had failed in a previous ERCP using traditional techniques in 124/156 patients (80 %), while 32 /156 patients (21 %) were referred directly to POCS-guided therapy based on preprocedural assessment of the difficulty of stone clearance. In 101/156 patients (65 %), there were impacted stones. POCS-guided stone clearance was achieved in a single POCS procedure in 125 /156 patients (80 %, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 73 % - 86 %), and was significantly more likely for stones ≤ 30 mm compared with > 30 mm (odds ratio 7.9, 95 %CI 2.4 - 26.2; P = 0.002). Serious adverse events occurred in 3/156 patients (1.9 %, 95 %CI 0.4 % - 5.5 %), and included pancreatitis, perforation due to laser lithotripsy, and cholangitis (n = 1 each), all resolved within 1 week. CONCLUSION: POCS-guided lithotripsy is highly effective for clearance of difficult bile duct stones in a single procedure and successfully salvages most prior treatment failures. It may also be considered first-line therapy for patients with difficult choledocholithiasis to avoid serial procedures.

International, multicenter retrospective trial comparing the efficacy and safety of bi-flanged versus lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

BACKGROUND: To compare fully covered bi-flanged metal stents (BFMS) and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage/debridement of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). METHODS: Patients with WON managed by EUS-guided therapy were divided into those who underwent: 1) drainage using BFMS; and 2) drainage using LAMS and scheduled direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). Clinical success (resolution of the WON), technical success (successful stent placement), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. RESULTS: 387 patients underwent WON endoscopic drainage, 205 using BFMS and 182 using LAMS. The clinical success in the BFMS or LAMS groups were similar (197 [96.1%] vs. 174 [95.6%]; P=0.81). Median number of procedures required for WON resolution was significantly lower in BFMS compared to LAMS (2 vs. 3, P<0.001). Technical success for stent placement was similar in BFMS and LAMS groups (203 [99%] vs. 180 [99%], P=0.90). Procedure-related AEs were similar in the BFMS and LAMS groups (19 [9.3%] vs. 20 [10.9%], P=0.61). Stent dysfunction with occluding debris was higher in the BFMS group compared to LAMS group (21 [10.2 %] vs. 11 [5.9%], P=0.04). The migration rate was higher in the BFMS group than in the LAMS group (15 [7.3%] vs. 3 [1.6%]; P<0.001). DEN was required in 23 [11.2%] patients in the BFMS group after lack of WON resolution by conservative means. CONCLUSION: BFMS with a "step-up approach" and LAMS with scheduled DEN are both safe and effective for EUS-guided drainage/debridement of WON.

Fluid type and volume reduce risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and length of hospital stay in high-risk patients: a secondary analysis of the INDIEH trial.

Background and study aims Impact of intravenous fluid administration on prophylaxis against post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) has not been rigorously evaluated among patients at high-risk for PEP. Patients and methods Effect of volume and type of fluid administered on PEP incidence was studied through a secondary analysis of high-risk patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangopancreatography (ERCP) as a part of a randomized controlled trial in which all patients received rectal indomethacin. Periprocedural fluid was defined as fluid infused during and after ERCP. Results A total 960 patients were randomized during the trial, of whom 476 (49.6 %) received periprocedural fluids (mean volume = 1245 mL [±â€Š629]). There was a trend towards a lower incidence of PEP in patients who received periprocedural fluid vs. those who did not (5.2 % vs. 8.0 %, P  = 0.079). Among those receiving fluids, those who did not develop PEP received a higher mean volume of fluid vs. who developed PEP (1012 ±â€Š725 mL vs. 752 ±â€Š783 mL, P  = 0.036). Among 174 patients (37 %) who received LR, patients who did not develop PEP received a higher mean volume of LR vs. those who developed PEP (570 ±â€Š559 mL vs. 329 ±â€Š356 mL, P  = 0.006). Length of hospital stay decreased as the volume of periprocedural volume administration increased (r = 0.16, P  < 0.001). Conclusion Higher fluid volume and lactated Ringer's use during the periprocedural period was associated with a decreased risk of PEP and length of hospital stay beyond rectal indomethacin in high risk patients.