Endoscopic Ultrasound Can Differentiate High-Grade Pancreatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia, Small Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma, and Benign Stenosis.

Background/Aims: High-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm are targets for early detection of pancreatic cancer. However, their imaging characteristics are unknown. We aimed to identify endoscopic ultrasound findings for the detection of these lesions. Methods: Patients diagnosed with high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (n=29), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm (n=11) (who underwent surgical resection), or benign main pancreatic duct stenosis (n=20) between January 2014 and January 2021 were retrospectively included. Six features differentiating these lesions were examined by endoscopic ultrasonography: main pancreatic duct stenosis, upstream main pancreatic duct dilation, hypoechoic areas surrounding the main pancreatic duct irregularities (mottled areas without demarcation or round areas with demarcation), branch duct dilation, prominent lobular segmentation, and atrophy. Interobserver agreement was assessed by two independent observers. Results: Hypoechoic areas surrounding the main pancreatic duct irregularities were observed more frequently in high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (82.8%) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm (90.9%) than in benign stenosis (15.0%) (p<0.001). High-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia exhibited mottled hypoechoic areas more frequently (79.3% vs 18.9%, p<0.001), and round hypoechoic areas less frequently (3.4% vs 72.7%, p<0.001), than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm. The sensitivity and specificity of hypoechoic areas for differentiating high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm, and benign stenosis were both 85.0%, with moderate interobserver agreement. Conclusions: The hypoechoic areas surrounding main pancreatic duct irregularities on endoscopic ultrasound may differentiate between high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ≤10 mm, and benign stenosis (Trial Registration: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000044789).

True diagnostic ability of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy sampling for small pancreatic lesions ≤10 mm and salvage diagnosis by pancreatic juice cytology: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnostic performance of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy sampling (EUS-FNAB) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) ≤10 mm in diameter is relatively low. Pancreatic juice cytology (PJC) has gained attention because of its high sensitivity for small PDACs. We aimed to clarify the diagnostic ability of EUS-FNAB and the salvage ability of PJC for PDAC ≤10 mm. METHODS: Data obtained from attempted EUS-FNAB for patients with EUS-confirmed pancreatic tumors ≤10 mm (excluding pancreatic metastases/malignant lymphomas) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who experienced technical failure or had a negative EUS-FNAB result and had a strong likelihood of PDAC based on imaging characteristics underwent PJC. PDAC was diagnosed using resected histologic specimens, EUS-FNAB-positive tumor growth on the imaging examination, or additional EUS-FNAB-positive results after increase in tumor size. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic ability of EUS-FNAB for PDAC ≤10 mm. The salvage ability of PJC was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 86 of 271 patients with pancreatic tumors ≤10 mm who underwent attempted EUS-FNAB were diagnosed with PDAC. The technical success rate, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNAB for PDAC ≤10 mm were 80.8%, 82.3%, 94.9%, and 91.3%, respectively. Among the 35 PDAC patients who experienced technical failure or false-negative results of EUS-FNAB, 26 (74.3%) were correctly diagnosed using salvage PJC. CONCLUSIONS: The true success rate and sensitivity of EUS-FNAB for PDAC ≤10 mm were relatively low. When EUS-FNAB for a pancreatic lesion ≤10 mm strongly suspected to be PDAC is unsuccessful or yields a negative result, PJC is recommended. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000049965.).

Strategy Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage to Percutaneous Transhepatic Gallbladder Drainage, Following Failed Emergent Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is recommended for patients with acute cholecystitis at high risk for surgery/percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has higher success and mortality rates than ETGBD. Optimal endoscopic drainage remains controversial. Patients with moderate/severe acute cholecystitis and high risk for surgery/PTGBD who underwent ETGBD were enrolled. In the new-ETGBD (N-ETGBD)/traditional-ETGBD (T-ETGBD) strategy, patients in whom the initial ETGBD failed underwent rescue-EUS-GBD in the same endoscopic session/rescue-PTGBD, respectively. Therapeutic outcomes were compared. Patients who could not undergo rescue-EUS-GBD/PTGBD owing to poor general conditions received conservative treatment. Technical success was defined as successful ETGBD or successful rescue-EUS-GBD/PTGBD. Forty-one/forty patients were enrolled in the N-ETGBD/T-ETGBD groups, respectively. The N-ETGBD group had a higher, though non-significant, technical success rate compared to the T-ETGBD group (97.6 vs. 90.0%, p = 0.157). The endoscopic technical success rate was significantly higher in the N-ETGBD than in the T-ETGBD group (97.6 vs. 82.5%, p = 0.023). The clinical success/adverse event rates were similar between both groups. The hospitalization duration was significantly shorter in the N-ETGBD than in the T-ETGBD group (6.6 ± 3.9 vs. 10.1 ± 6.4 days, p < 0.001). ETGBD with EUS-GBD as a rescue backup may be an ideal hybrid drainage for emergency endoscopic gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients.

Usefulness of AI-Equipped Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenoma during Colonoscopy Screening: Confirm That Colon Neoplasm Finely Can Be Identified by AI without Overlooking Study (Confidential Study).

In the present prospective case series study, we investigated the lesion-detection ability of an AI-equipped colonoscopy as an addition to colonoscopy (CS) screening. Participants were 100 patients aged ≥20 years who had not undergone CS at the study site in the last 3 years and passed the exclusion criteria. CS procedures were conducted using conventional white light imaging and computer-aided detection (CADe). Adenoma detection rate (ADR; number of individuals with at least one adenoma detected) was compared between the conventional group and the CADe group. Of the 170 lesions identified, the ADR of the CADe group was significantly higher than the ADR of the conventional group (69% vs. 61%, p = 0.008). For the expert endoscopists, although ADR did not differ significantly, the mean number of detected adenomas per procedure (MAP) was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (1.7 vs. 1.45, p = 0.034). For non-expert endoscopists, ADR and MAP were significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (ADR 69.5% vs. 56.6%, p = 0.016; MAP 1.66 vs. 1.11, p < 0.001). These results indicate that the CADe function in CS screening has a positive effect on adenoma detection, especially for non-experts.

Experience-Related Factors in the Success of Beginner Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: A Multicenter Study.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has become comparable to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and is now considered a first-line intervention for certain biliary obstructions. Although analysis of experience-related factors may help achieve better outcomes and contribute to its wider adoption, no concrete evidence exists regarding the required operator or institutional experience levels. This study aimed to analyze experience-related factors at beginner multicenters. Patients who underwent EUS-BD using self-expandable metal stents and/or dedicated plastic stents during the study period (up to the first 25 cases since introducing the technique) were retrospectively enrolled from seven beginner institutions and operators. Overall, 90 successful (technical success without early adverse events) and 22 failed (technical failure and/or early adverse events) cases were compared. EUS-BD-related procedures conducted at the time of applicable EUS-BD by each institution/operator were evaluated. The number of institution-conducted EUS-BD procedures (≥7) and operator-conducted EUS screenings (≥436), EUS-guided fine-needle aspirations (FNA) (≥93), and EUS-guided drainages (≥13) significantly influenced improved EUS-BD outcomes (p = 0.022, odds ratio [OR], 3.0; p = 0.022, OR, 3.0; p = 0.022, OR, 3.0; and p = 0.028, OR, 2.9, respectively). Our threshold values, which significantly divided successful and failed cases, were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and may provide useful approximate indications for successful EUS-BD.

Accurate Evaluation of Residual Common Bile Duct Stones by Endoscopic Ultrasound: A Two-Step Check Method for Residual Stone Clearance.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Residual common bile duct (CBD) stones occasionally become symptomatic after stone removal with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) upon removal of the endoscopic biliary stent (EBS). An accurate evaluation of residual stones before stent removal is necessary. This study evaluated a new two-step check method using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for the detection of residual stones after ERCP stone removal. METHODS: Fifty-six patients who underwent CBD stone removal and EBS placement were prospectively enrolled. Residual stones were evaluated by the check method. EBS was removed at the time of the check method or at a later time of residual stone removal. The primary outcome was to evaluate the efficacy of this check method. RESULTS: Residual CBD stone/sludge was detected in 20 of 56 patients (35.7%; stones: 28.6%, sludge: 7.1%) by the check method and removed by the ERCP procedure at a later time. After stent and final stone removal, patients were followed for an average of 211 days; cholangitis recurred in only 1.8% of patients. There were no adverse events associated with the check method. Temporary EBS prevented the recurrence of cholangitis by residual stone and caused no adverse events in the pancreatobiliary tract until the two-step check method (median, 113 days; range, 17-232 days). CONCLUSION: The new check method may be ideal and feasible for EBS removal because recurrences are very rare when a clear CBD has been verified, and an additional ERCP procedure is also possibly avoided.

Diagnostic Strategy of Early Stage Pancreatic Cancer via Clinical Predictor Assessment: Clinical Indicators, Risk Factors and Imaging Findings.

Early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in the general population is difficult due to unknown clinical characteristics. This study was conducted to clarify the factors associated with early stage PDAC. Well-known symptoms and factors associated with PDAC were classified into clinical indicators, risk factors, and imaging findings concomitant with early stage PDAC. To analyze these factors for the detection of patients with early stage PDAC compared to patients without PDAC, we constructed new diagnostic strategies. The factors of 35 patients with early stage PDAC (stage 0 and IA) and 801 patients without PDAC were compared retrospectively. Clinical indicators; presence and number of indicators, elevated pancreatic enzyme level, tumor biomarker level, acute pancreatitis history, risk factors; familial pancreatic cancer, diabetes mellitus, smoking history, imaging findings; presence and number of findings, and main pancreatic duct dilation were significant factors for early stage PDAC detection. A new screening strategy to select patients who should be examined by imaging modalities from evaluating clinical indicators and risk factors and approaching a definitive diagnosis by evaluating imaging findings had a relatively high sensitivity, specificity, and areas under the curve of 80.0%, 80.8%, and 0.80, respectively. Diagnosis based on the new category and strategy may be reasonable for early stage PDAC detection.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Adenocarcinoma at the Minor Duodenal Papilla: A Case Report and Suggestions for the Optimal Treatment Strategy.

We herein report an extremely rare case of adenocarcinoma of the minor duodenal papilla (MiDP) which was successfully treated by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). An asymptomatic 84-year-old man underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, which revealed a slightly elevated lesion at the MiDP. The biopsy findings were suggestive of adenocarcinoma. Computed tomography, magnetic resonance images and endoscopic ultrasonography did not reveal pancreatic tumor infiltration nor any apparent distant metastases. Therefore, we treated the lesion using EMR with complete resection. No recurrence or metastasis has been detected at 13 months after EMR. Total resection of the MiDP can thus serve as a relatively safe and simple treatment.

Endoscopic placement of covered versus uncovered self-expandable metal stents for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Stenting is an established endoscopic therapy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). The choice of stent (covered vs uncovered) has been examined in prior randomised studies without clear results. DESIGN: In a multicentre randomised prospective study, we compared covered (CSEMS) with uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMS) in patients with mGOO; main outcomes were stent dysfunction and patient survival, with subgroup analyses of patients with extrinsic and intrinsic tumours. RESULTS: Overall survival was poor with no difference between groups (probability at 3 months 49.7% for covered vs 48.4% for uncovered stents; log-rank for overall survival p=0.26). Within that setting of short survival, the proportion of stent dysfunction was significantly higher for uncovered stents (35.2% vs 23.4%, p=0.01) with significantly shorter time to stent dysfunction. This was mainly relevant for patients with extrinsic tumours (stent dysfunction rates for uncovered stents 35.6% vs 17.5%, p<0.01). Subgrouping was also relevant with respect to tumour ingrowth (lower with covered stents for intrinsic tumours; 1.6% vs 27.7%, p<0.01) and stent migration (higher with covered stents for extrinsic tumours: 15.3% vs 2.5%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Due to poor patient survival, minor differences between covered and uncovered stents may be less relevant even if statistically significant; however, subgroup analysis would suggest to use covered stents for intrinsic and uncovered stents for extrinsic malignancies.

Aerosols Produced by Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Quantitative Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, whether endoscopy generates aerosols needs to be determined. METHODS: In patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with an enclosure covering their heads, 0.3-10-µm aerosols were measured for 60 seconds before, during, and after endoscopy by an optical counter. Whether aerosols increased in the situation with and without endoscopy was examined. RESULTS: The analysis included 103 consecutive patients undergoing endoscopy and 90 control patients. Aerosols increased significantly during endoscopy compared with the control group. Body mass index and burping were significant factors related to increased aerosols during endoscopy. DISCUSSION: Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was an aerosol-generating procedure.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction with surgically altered anatomy: a multicenter prospective registration study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic treatment for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in patients bearing surgically altered anatomy (SAA) is not well-established. Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as a new treatment option for MBO, limited data are available regarding the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in patients with SAA. We conducted a multicenter prospective registration study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in this population. METHODS: This study involved 10 referral centers in Japan. Patients with SAA who were scheduled to receive EUS-BD for unresectable MBO between May 2016 and September 2018 were prospectively registered. The primary endpoint was technical success and the secondary outcomes were clinical success, procedure time, procedure-related adverse events (AEs), stent patency, and overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 40 patients were prospectively enrolled. The surgical reconstruction methods were gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (47.5%), gastrectomy with Billroth-II reconstruction (15%), pancreaticoduodenectomy (27.5%), and hepaticojejunostomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (10%). EUS-BD was performed for primary biliary drainage in 31 patients and for rescue biliary drainage in nine patients. Transmural stenting alone (60%), antegrade stenting alone (5%), and a combination of the two techniques (35%) were selected for patients treated with EUS-BD. Technical and clinical success rates were 100% (95% confidence interval, 91.2-100.0%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 83.1-99.4%), respectively. Mean procedure time was 36.5 min. Early AEs were noted in six patients (15%): three self-limited bile leak, one bile peritonitis, and two pneumoperitonea. Late AEs occurred in six patients (15%): one jejunal ulcer and five stent occlusions. Stent patency rate after 3 months of survival was 95.7% (22/23). Median overall survival was 96 days. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD for MBO in patients with SAA appears to be effective and safe not only as a rescue drainage technique after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography but also as a primary drainage technique. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000022101.

Feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) as a treatment for patients with acute cholecystitis has been shown to obtain high technical and clinical success rates and a low recurrence rate. However, the safety of EUS-GBD for patients receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT) has not been proven. The aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-GBD in patients receiving ATT. METHODS: Twelve patients with acute cholecystitis associated with gallstones who were receiving antithrombotic therapy and underwent EUS-GBD were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients with grade II or III cholecystitis who had failed endoscopic transpapillary GBD (ETGBD) or developed recurrence after multiple ETGBD procedures underwent urgent drainage by EUS-GBD. The primary outcome was the rate of bleeding complications after the procedure and the secondary outcomes were the technical and clinical success rates, complications, and recurrence. RESULTS: Eleven (91.6%) patients underwent EUS-GBD with continuation of ATT (at least 1 agent). Five of 12 patients (41.7%) were receiving more than 1 agent for ATT. The rate of bleeding complications was 0% and the technical success rate was 100%, even though some patients had high-grade (severe) cholecystitis and/or several underlying diseases. Early complications were found in 2 (16.7%) patients. The clinical success rate was 91.7% (11/12). There were no recurrences of cholecystitis during the follow-up period (mean 261 [range 5-650] days). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GBD yielded high technical and clinical success rates and a low recurrence rate. No patients receiving ATT developed bleeding complications. EUS-GBD might be a good option for patients on ATT.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis is feasible for patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT) have an increased risk of bleeding complications during surgery and percutaneous drainage. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is recommended for such cases; however, evidence is limited. To investigate this issue further, we performed a retrospective multicenter study. METHODS: One hundred thirty patients with acute cholecystitis who underwent ETGBD were enrolled. They were divided into an ATT group (continuation of ATT on the day of the procedure and/or heparin substitution) and a Non-ATT group (discontinuation or no use of ATT). The primary outcome was bleeding complication rate, and the secondary outcomes were technical success rate, clinical success rate and total complication rate. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were enrolled in the ATT group, and 47 were enrolled in the Non-ATT group. In the ATT group, 42.2% continued multi-agent ATT. No bleeding complications occurred in either group. There were no significant differences between the ATT and Non-ATT groups in the technical success rate (84.3% vs 89.4%, P = 0.426 respectively) or the clinical success rate (97.1% vs 100%, P = 0.259, respectively). The overall early complication rate was 3.1% (4/130): mild pancreatitis (n = 3) and cholangitis (n = 1). Stent dysfunction was found in 10.9% of patients (at 196 days on average), and the 12-month stent patency rate was 69.0%. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was found in the bleeding complication rate between ETGBD with and without ATT. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage method for patients with acute cholecystitis receiving ATT.

Current Status in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis Patients Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy: Is Endoscopic Drainage Feasible?- A Systematic Review.

The bleeding complication risk of surgery or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) may increase in patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT). Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) may be recommended for such patients. English articles published between 1991 and 2018 in peer-reviewed journals that discuss cholecystectomy, PTGBD, and EGBD in patients with ATT or coagulopathy were reviewed to assess the safety of the procedures, especially in terms of the bleeding complication. There were 8 studies on cholecystectomy, 3 on PTGBD, and 1 on endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) in patients receiving ATT. With respect to EGBD, 28 studies on ETGBD (including 1 study already mentioned above) and 26 studies on endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) were also analyzed. The overall bleeding complication rate in patients with ATT who underwent cholecystectomy was significantly higher than that in patients without ATT (6.5% [23/354] vs. 1.2% [26/2,224], p<0.001). However, the bleeding risk of cholecystectomy and PTGBD in patients receiving ATT was controversial. The overall technical success, clinical success, and bleeding complication rates of ETGBD vs. EUS-GBD were 84% vs. 96% (p<0.001), 92% vs. 97% (p<0.001), and 0.65% vs. 2.1% (p=0.005), respectively. One patient treated with ETGBD experienced bleeding complication among 191 patients with bleeding tendency. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage procedure for patients receiving ATT from the viewpoint of bleeding, although EUS-GBD is also efficacious.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy and hepaticogastrostomy for malignant distal biliary obstruction: Multicenter, randomized, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) can be carried out by two different approaches: choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). We compared the efficacy and safety of these approaches in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) patients using a prospective, randomized clinical trial. METHODS: Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were randomly selected for either CDS or HGS. The procedures were carried out at nine tertiary centers from September 2013 to March 2016. Primary endpoint was technical success rate, and the noninferiority of HGS to CDS was examined with a one-sided significance level of 5%, where the noninferiority margin was set at 15%. Secondary endpoints were clinical success, adverse events (AE), stent patency, survival time, and overall technical success including alternative EUS-BD procedures. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients (HGS, 24; CDS, 23) were enrolled. Technical success rates were 87.5% and 82.6% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively, where the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval of the risk difference was -12.2% (P = 0.0278). Clinical success rates were 100% and 94.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.475). Overall AE rate, stent patency, and survival time did not differ between the groups. Overall technical success rates were 100% and 95.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.983). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that HGS is not inferior to CDS in terms of technical success. When one procedure is particularly challenging, readily switching to the other could increase technical success.

Clinical efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage replacement of percutaneous drainage: A multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is widely used for patients with acute cholecystitis. There are little data on the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) replacement of PTGBD in patients who cannot undergo cholecystectomy. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study in Japan reviewed records of patients who underwent EUS-GBD to replace PTGBD between January 2010 and December 2017. Outcomes evaluated included technical success, defined as successful stent placement between the gastrointestinal lumen and the gallbladder; clinical success, defined as subsequent removal of the percutaneous catheter; adverse events; and stent patency. RESULTS: EUS-GBD was performed in 21 patients (14 women, mean age 77.5 ± 8.0 years) to replace PTGBD that had been instituted for acute cholecystitis (n = 19) or obstructive jaundice (n = 2). Technical success was achieved in 19 (90.5%). The median period from PTGBD placement to EUS-GBD was 11 days (range, 6-68 days). The mean procedure time was 19.5 ± 5.1 min. No early adverse events were observed. There were three late adverse events, distal stent migration in two cases and stent occlusion causing recurrent cholecystitis in one patient. Reintervention was required in two patients. The percutaneous catheter was removed after EUS-GBD in 17 patients at a median of 7 days (range, 2-20 days). The duration of stent patency was 139 days (range, 8-664 days). CONCLUSIONS: Where ongoing gallbladder drainage is required, conversion from PTGBD to EUS-GBD is a feasible, effective, and safe technique for patients who cannot undergo cholecystectomy.

Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasonography Screening for Small Pancreatic Cancer and Proposal for a New Scoring System for Screening.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the utility of endoscopic ultrasonography screening for small pancreatic cancer (PC) and propose a new simple scoring system for selecting individuals who should be screened. METHODS: Risk factors or symptoms related to PC were tentatively divided into high- and low-grade risk groups based mainly on reported relative risk values. Numbers of risk factors were designated as risk scores. Endoscopic ultrasonography screening was performed for 632 individuals. We analyzed scores for PC detection prospectively, and risk factors and scores of PC patients retrospectively. RESULTS: We detected 10 small malignant pancreatic neoplasms (size ≤20 mm; 8 PCs; 9 Tis or T1) and 14 advanced PCs. All small PCs and 95.5% of PCs were found in individuals with low-grade risk scores of at least 3 points (P) or high-grade risk scores of at least 1P. Both average risk scores were significantly higher in patients with small PCs (P ≤ 0.04). Cutoffs for low- and high-grade risk scores implying the presence of small PC and all PC were 3P and 1P, respectively. When subjects having one or both cutoff scores were screened, sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 64.4% for small PCs and 95.5% and 64.4% for all PCs. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasonography screening combining new scoring is effective for detecting small PC.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Rendezvous Technique for Failed Biliary Cannulation in Benign and Resectable Malignant Biliary Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous technique (EUS-RV) has emerged as an effective salvage method for unsuccessful biliary cannulation. However, its application for benign and resectable malignant biliary disorders has not been fully evaluated. AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-RV for benign and resectable malignant biliary disorders. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective study from 12 Japanese referral centers. Patients who underwent EUS-RV after failed biliary cannulation for biliary disorder were candidates for this study. Inclusion criteria were unsuccessful biliary cannulation for therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with benign and potentially resectable malignant biliary obstruction. Exclusion criteria included unresectable malignant biliary obstruction, inaccessible papillae due to surgically altered upper gastrointestinal anatomy or duodenal stricture, and previous sphincterotomy and/or biliary stent placement. The primary outcome was the technical success rate of biliary cannulation; procedure time, adverse events, and clinical outcomes were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty patients were prospectively enrolled. The overall technical success rate and median procedure time were 85% and 33 min, respectively. Guidewire manipulation using a 4-Fr tapered tip catheter contributed to the success in advancing the guidewire into the duodenum. Adverse events were identified in 15% patients, including 2 with biliary peritonitis and 1 mild pancreatitis. EUS-RV did not affect surgical maneuvers or complications associated with surgery, or postoperative course. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-RV may be a safe and feasible salvage method for unsuccessful biliary cannulation for benign or resectable malignant biliary disorders. Use of a 4-Fr tapered tip catheter may improve the overall EUS-RV success rate.

Multicenter prospective evaluation study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy combined with antegrade stenting (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is often indicated for advanced stage patients. Therefore it is important to prevent adverse events associated with EUS-HGS procedures and obtain long stent patency. EUS-guided antegrade stenting (AS) has been developed as an advanced technique. Thus, to prevent adverse events and achieve long stent patency, EUS-AS combined with EUS-HGS (EUS-HGAS) has been reported. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and efficacy of EUS-HGAS in a multicenter, prospective study. METHODS: This prospective study was carried out at each hospital of the Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound Group. Primary endpoint of this multicenter prospective study was stent patency of EUS-HGAS. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were enrolled. Technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 95.9% (47/49). EUS-AS failed in five patients because the guidewire could not be advanced into the intestine across the bile duct obstruction site. Therefore, EUS-HGAS was successfully carried out in 40 patients (technical success rate: 85.7%). Median overall survival was 114 days. Median stent patency including stent dysfunction and patient death was 114 days. In contrast, mean stent patency was 320 days. Adverse events were seen in 10.2% (5/49) of cases. Hyperamylasemia was seen in four patients, and bleeding was seen in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first to evaluate EUS-HGAS. EUS-HGAS has clinical benefit for obtaining long stent patency and avoiding adverse events, although the possibility of acute pancreatitis as a result of obstruction of the orifice of the pancreatic duct must be considered.