Consensus statements on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Guidelines from the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasound Group.

OBJECTIVES: This consensus was developed by the Asian EUS Group (AEG), who aimed to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA). METHODS: The AEG initiated the development of consensus statements and formed an expert panel comprising surgeons, gastroenterologists, and pathologists. Three online consensus meetings were conducted to consolidate the statements and votes. The statements were presented and discussed in the first two consensus meetings and revised according to comments. Final voting was conducted at a third consensus meeting. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to define the strength of the recommendations and quality of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 20 clinical questions and statements regarding EUS-TA were formulated. The committee recommended that fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles be preferred over conventional fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for EUS-TA of subepithelial lesions. For solid pancreatic masses, rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely recommended when FNB needles are used. For dedicated FNB needles, fork-tip and Franseen-tip needles have essentially equivalent performance. CONCLUSION: This consensus provides guidance for EUS-TA, thereby enhancing the quality of EUS-TA.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus uncovered duodenal metal stenting for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction (DRA-GOO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic method to palliate malignant gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to assess whether the use of EUS-GE with a double balloon occluder for malignant gastric outlet obstruction could reduce the need for reintervention within 6 months compared with conventional duodenal stenting. METHODS: The was an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted at seven sites in Hong Kong, Belgium, Brazil, India, Italy, and Spain. Consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with malignant gastric outlet obstruction due to unresectable primary gastroduodenal or pancreatobiliary malignancies, a gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) of 0 (indicating an inability in intake food or liquids orally), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or lower were included and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either EUS-GE or duodenal stenting. The primary outcome was the 6-month reintervention rate, defined as the percentage of patients requiring additional endoscopic intervention due to stent dysfunction (ie, restenosis of the stent due to tumour ingrowth, tumour overgrowth, or food residue; stent migration; or stent fracture) within 6 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified secondary outcomes were technical success (successful placement of a stent), clinical success (1-point improvement in gastric outlet obstruction score [GOOS] within 3 days), adverse events within 30 days, death within 30 days, duration of stent patency, GOOS at 1 month, and quality-of-life scores. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03823690) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 185 patients were screened and 97 (46 men and 51 women) were recruited and randomly allocated (48 to the EUS-GE group and 49 to the duodenal stent group). Mean age was 69·5 years (SD 12·6) in the EUS-GE group and 64·8 years (13·0) in the duodenal stent group. All randomly allocated patients completed follow-up and were analysed. Reintervention within 6 months was required in two (4%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 14 (29%) in the duodenal stent group [p=0·0020; risk ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·04-0·61]). Stent patency was longer in the EUS-GE group (median not reached in either group; HR 0·13 [95% CI 0·08-0·22], log-rank p<0·0001). 1-month GOOS was significantly better in the EUS-GE group (mean 2·41 [SD 0·7]) than the duodenal stent group (1·91 [0·9], p=0·012). There were no statistically significant differences between the EUS-GE and duodenal stent groups in death within 30 days (ten [21%] vs six [12%] patients, respectively, p=0·286), technical success, clinical success, or quality-of-life scores at 1 month. Adverse events occurred 11 (23%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 12 (24%) in the duodenal stent group within 30 days (p=1·00); three cases of pneumonia (two in the EUS-GE group and one in the duodenal stent group) were considered to be procedure related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction, EUS-GE can reduce the frequency of reintervention, improve stent patency, and result in better patient-reported eating habits compared with duodenal stenting, and the procedure should be used preferentially over duodenal stenting when expertise and required devices are available. FUNDING: Research Grants Council (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China) and Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva.

Partially covered versus uncovered pyloro-duodenal stents for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction: Randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to compare the efficacy of partially covered duodenal stent (PCDS) vs. uncovered duodenal stent (UCDS) in patients suffering from unresectable primary malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). METHODS: This was a prospective international randomized controlled study conducted in 10 high-volume institutions. Consecutive patients suffering from malignant GOO were recruited. The primary outcome measurement was the reintervention rate. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality, causes of stent dysfunction, and the duration of stent patency. RESULTS: Between March 2017 and October 2020, 115 patients (59 PCDS, 56 UCDS) were recruited. The 1-year reintervention was not significantly different (PCDS vs. UDCS = 12/59, 20.3% vs. 14/56, 25%, P = 0.84). There was a trend to fewer patients with tumor ingrowth in the PCDS group (6/59 [10.2%]) vs. 13/56 [23.2%], P = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the technical success (100% vs. 100%, P = 1), clinical success (91.5% vs. 98.2%, P = 0.21), procedural time (21.5 [interquartile range [IQR] 17-30] vs. 20.0 [IQR 15-34.75], P = 0.62), hospital stay (4 [IQR 3-12] vs. 5 [IQR 3-8] days, P = 0.81), 30-day adverse events (18.6% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.62), or 30-day mortality (6.8% vs. 5.2%, P = 1.00). CONCLUSION: The use of PCDS was associated with a lower risk of tumor ingrowth but did not improve on reintervention rates or stent patency. Both kinds of stents could be used in this group of patients.

A proof-of-concept study on endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of detrusor muscle in porcine bladders.

Introduction: Conventionally, we rely on transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) for local staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, the procedure is limited by its staging inaccuracy which may delay the definitive treatment of MIBC. Methods: We conducted a proof-of concept study on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy of detrusor muscle in porcine bladders. Five porcine bladders were used in this experiment. Upon EUS, four layers of tissue including the mucosa (hypoechoic), submucosa (hyperechoic), detrusor muscle (hypoechoic) and serosa (hyperechoic) could be identified. Results: A total of 37 EUS-guided biopsies were taken from 15 sites (three sites per bladder), and the mean number of biopsies taken from each site was 2.47±0.64. Among the 37 biopsies, 30 of them (81.1%) obtained detrusor muscle in the biopsy specimen. For the per biopsy site analysis, detrusor muscle was obtained in 73.3% if only one biopsy was taken, and 100% if two or more biopsies were taken from the same biopsy site. Overall, detrusor muscle was successfully obtained from all 15 biopsy sites (100%). No bladder perforation was observed throughout all biopsy processes. Conclusion: EUS-guided biopsy of the detrusor muscle could be performed during the initial cystoscopy session, thus expediting the histological diagnosis and subsequent treatment of MIBC.

The effect of Andrographis paniculata water extract on palliative management of metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-A phase II clinical trial.

Patients with metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) have a grave prognosis with limited life expectancy. Here, a phase II clinical trial was conducted to investigate the effect of Andrographis paniculata (AP) on the palliative care of patients with metastatic ESCC. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced ESCC deemed unfit for surgery, and who have already completed palliative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or are not fit for these treatments, were recruited. These patients were prescribed AP concentrated granules for 4 months. They also received clinical and quality of life assessments for clinical response, as well as positron emission tomography-computed tomography at 3 and 6 months after AP treatment for the assessment of tumor volume. Furthermore, the change in gut microbiota composition after AP treatment was studied. From the results, among the 30 recruited patients, 10 completed the entire course of AP treatment, while 20 received partial AP treatment. Patients who completed the AP treatment achieved significantly longer overall survival periods with the maintenance of the quality of life during the survival period when compared to those who could not complete AP treatment. The treatment effect of AP also contributed to the shift of the overall structure of gut microbiota for ESCC patients towards those of healthy individuals. The significance of this study is the establishment of AP as a safe and effective palliative treatment for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first clinical trial of AP water extract in esophageal cancer patients demonstrating its new medicinal use.

EUS-Guided Choledocho-duodenostomy Using Lumen Apposing Stent Versus ERCP With Covered Metallic Stents in Patients With Unresectable Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (DRA-MBO Trial).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several studies have compared primary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with insertion of metal stents in unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) and the results were conflicting. The aim of the current study was to compare the outcomes of the procedures in a large-scale study. METHODS: This was a multicenter international randomized controlled study. Consecutive patients admitted for obstructive jaundice due to unresectable MDBO were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to receive EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy (ECDS) or ERCP for drainage. The primary outcome was the 1-year stent patency rate. Other outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, time to stent dysfunction, reintervention rates, and overall survival. RESULTS: Between January 2017 and February 2021, 155 patients were recruited (ECDS 79, ERCP 76). There were no significant differences in 1-year stent patency rates (ECDS 91.1% vs ERCP 88.1%, P = .52). The ECDS group had significantly higher technical success (ECDS 96.2% vs ERCP 76.3%, P < .001), whereas clinical success was similar (ECDS 93.7% vs ERCP 90.8%, P = .559). The median (interquartile range) procedural time was significantly shorter in the ECDS group (ECDS 10 [5.75-18] vs ERCP 25 [14-40] minutes, P < .001). The rate of 30-day adverse events (P = 1) and 30-day mortality (P = .53) were similar. CONCLUSION: Both procedures could be options for primary biliary drainage in unresectable MDBO. ECDS was associated with higher technical success and shorter procedural time then ERCP. Primary ECDS may be preferred when difficult ERCPs are anticipated. This study was registered to Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03000855.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) compared to submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) for treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Background and study aims Submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) is being increasingly performed for treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), while STER has been limited by close dissection within tunnel and risking breach of tumor capsule. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) allows resection of GIST with margins to prevent recurrence. This study aimed to compare EFTR against STER for treatment of gastric GIST. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed clinical outcomes of patients with gastric GIST who received either STER or EFTR. Patients with gastric GISTs < than 4 cm were included. Clinical outcomes including baseline demographics, perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results From 2013 to 2019, 46 patients with gastric GISTs were treated with endoscopic resection, 26 received EFTR and 20 received STER. Most of the GISTs were in the proximal stomach. There was no difference in operative time (94.9 vs 84.9 mins; P  = 0.401), while endoscopic suturing was applied more for closure after EFTR ( P  < 0.0001). Patients after STER had earlier resumption of diet and shorter hospital stay while there was no difference in adverse event rate between two groups. The en-bloc resection rate for EFTR was significantly higher than for STER (100 % vs 80 %; P  = 0.029), while there was no difference in the local recurrence. Conclusions This study demonstrated that although patients who received EFTR had longer hospital stays and slower resumption of diet compared to those who underwent STER, EFTR achieved a significantly higher rate of en-bloc resection compared to STER for treatment of gastric GIST.

Techniques and Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided-Pancreatic Duct Drainage (EUS- PDD).

Endoscopic ultrasound guided-pancreatic duct drainage (EUS- PDD) is one of the most technically challenging procedures for the interventional endoscopist. The most common indications for EUS- PDD are patients with main pancreatic duct obstruction who have failed conventional endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) drainage or those with surgically altered anatomy. EUS- PDD can be performed via two approaches: the EUS-rendezvous (EUS- RV) or the EUS-transmural drainage (TMD) techniques. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated review of the techniques and equipment available for EUS- PDD and the outcomes of EUS- PDD reported in the literature. Recent developments and future directions surrounding the procedure will also be discussed.

Droplet nuclei are generated during colonoscopy and are decreased by the use of carbon dioxide and water immersion technique.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has raised concerns on whether colonoscopies (CS) carry a transmission risk. The aim was to determine whether CS are aerosol-generating procedures. METHODS: This was a prospective observational trial including all patients undergoing CS at the Prince of Wales Hospital from 1 June to 31 July 2020. Three particle counters were placed 10 cm from each patient's anus and near the mouth of endoscopists and nurses. The particle counter recorded the number of particles of size 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, 5, and 10 µm. Patient demographics, seniority of endoscopists, use of CO2 and water immersion technique, and air particle count (particles/cubic foot, dCF) were recorded. Multilevel modeling was used to test all the hypotheses with a post-hoc analysis. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients were recruited. During CS, the level of 5 µm and 10 µm were significantly higher than the baseline period (P = 0.002). Procedures performed by trainees had a higher level of aerosols when compared to specialists (0.3 µm, P < 0.001; 0.5 µm and 0.7 µm, P < 0.001). The use of CO2 and water immersion techniques had significantly lower aerosols generated when compared to air (CO2 : 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 µm: P < 0.001; water immersion: 0.3 µm: P = 0.048; 0.7 µm: P = 0.03). There were no significant increases in any particle sizes during the procedure at the endoscopists' and nurses' mouth. However, 8/117 (6.83%) particle count tracings showed a simultaneous surge of all particle sizes at the patient's anus and endoscopists' and nurses' level during rectal extubation. CONCLUSION: Colonoscopy generates droplet nuclei especially during rectal extubation. The use of CO2 and water immersion techniques may mitigate these risks.

International cross-sectional survey on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography training by the World Endoscopy Organization.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has revolutionized the treatment of many pancreaticobiliary conditions. However, little is known about the global practices, training programs, and credentialing of the procedure. The aim of the current study is to address the above questions. METHODS: This was an international cross-sectional survey conducted between October 2020 and May 2021. Participating countries were requested to complete an online survey on ERCP services and training. RESULTS: Eighty-nine countries responded to the survey. There were significant increases in the proportion of ERCP services provided by the government (P < 0.0001), number of endoscopists per million of population (P < 0.0001), and number of institutions per million of population (P < 0.0001) from low to high human development index (HDI). Eighteen percent of the countries offer the procedure as part of a standard training program, 68.5% do not follow a standardized training curriculum. Risk factors for higher incidence and mortality from pancreatic cancers include higher HDI category, smaller population, a larger number of endoscopists proficient in ERCP, and lower number of institutions providing ERCP training. Countries with very high HDI have four times higher incidence and mortality from pancreatic cancers as compared to those with low HDI. CONCLUSIONS: There is still an ongoing need for improving ERCP training in low to very high HDI countries. A structured training program is still lacking in many parts of the world. With increasing incidence and mortality of pancreatic cancers, particularly in high HDI countries, there is a need for further increasing facilities for ERCP training.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass, duodenal stent or laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

OBJECTIVES: Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) can be relieved by either laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (LGJ), endoscopic stenting (SEMS) or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (endoscopic ultrasound-guided balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass; EPASS). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the three treatment methods. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who suffered from malignant GOO between January 2012 to November 2020 that received either EPASS, LGJ or SEMS. The outcomes included the technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events and mortality, pre and post stenting GOO scores (GOOSs), stent patency and causes of stent dysfunction. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients were included (30 EPASS, 35 LGJ, 49 SEMS). The technical success of EPASS, LGJ and SEMS were 93.3%, 100%, 100% (P = 0.058) and clinical success rates were 93.3%, 80%, 87.8% (P = 0.276), respectively. Procedural time was longest for the LGJ group (P < 0.001). The EPASS group had the shortest hospital stay (EPASS 1.5 [1-17], LGJ 7 [2-44], SEMS 5 [2-46] days, P < 0.001). EPASS group also had the lowest rates of recurrent obstruction (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 36.7%, P = 0.002) and re-intervention (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 26.5%, P = 0.031). The 1-month GOOS was highest in the EPASS group (EPASS 3 [1-3], LGJ 3 [0-3], SEMS 2 [0-3], P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy was associated with better clinical outcomes then the other two procedures. The procedure may be the best option provided that the expertise is available.

Endoscopic ultrasound in the management of acute cholecystitis.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is increasingly utilised for patients with acute cholecystitis who are high-risk candidates for surgery. The technique to perform EUS-GBD has evolved and matured over the last two decades since EUS-GBD was first described in 2007 using a nasobiliary catheter. Compared to percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD), EUS-GBD offers benefits of shorter hospitalisation stay and lesser procedural pain and need for reintervention. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated review of the equipment and techniques available for EUS-GBD, outcomes of the procedure and how it compares against endoscopic transpapillary drainage (ET-GBD), PT-GBD and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Controversies surrounding the procedure will also be discussed.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage on reducing costs of reintervention and unplanned readmission: a budget impact analysis.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is the preferred treatment for patients with acute calculous cholecystitis who are unfit for surgery. The aim of this study was to perform a cost-effective analysis (CEA) comparing EUS-GBD with percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD). Patients and methods CEA was performed on patients recruited for our prior randomized controlled trial. A budget impact model was developed to compare the base-case and scenario of EUS-GBD applications. The costs including peri-procedure and intra-procedure, reinterventions, expenses associated with treatment of adverse events (AEs), costs of hospital stay, subsequent clinic follow-up, and unplanned readmission were included. Results PT-GBD had a lower total procedure cost per patient (USD$4,375.00) than EUS-GBD (USD$9,397.44). For EUS-GBD, the cost of cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing stent accounted for the major part of the expense (USD$4,910.26). EUS-GBD resulted in a lower expected cost (USD$108.26 vs USD$1,601.54) for a re-procedure. The expected cost per patient in unplanned readmissions in the EUS-GBD group (USD$450.00) was lower than that in the PT-GBD group (USD$1,717.56). Based on the budget impact analysis, the net budget impact per year of introducing EUS-GBD to replace PT-GBD was higher (USD$16,424.10 vs USD$11,433.08). The net budget impact was most sensitive to the cost of stent and linear echoendoscope used in EUS-GBD. Conclusions The net budget impact per year was higher for introducing EUS-GBD. The cost of the stent accounted for the major cost difference between the two procedures. EUS-GBD saved on the cost in management of AEs, reinterventions, and unplanned readmissions but these did not offset the cost of the stent.

Endoscopic Management of Acute Cholecystitis.

Endoscopic drainage of the gallbladder for acute cholecystitis can be performed with the transpapillary method or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided method. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is gaining popularity as the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis in patients who are deemed high-risk for cholecystectomy (CCY). It provides an alternative to percutaneous drainage and laparoscopic CCY in these patients. With the development of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), the procedure is associated with high rates of technical and clinical success with low rates of adverse events (AEs). The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the current status of EUS-GBD including the indications, techniques, stent systems in-use, and how the procedure compares to conventional techniques are outlined. Furthermore, the feasibility of cholecystoscopy and advanced gallbladder interventions is explored. Finally, a comparison in outcomes of EUS-GBD versus laparoscopic CCY is provided giving some initial data in support of the procedure as an alternative to surgery in a selected group of patients.