Plastic pigtail vs lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of walled-off necrosis (PROMETHEUS study): an open-label, multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have displaced double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) as the standard treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON),ß but evidence for exclusively using LAMS is limited. We aimed to assess whether the theoretical benefit of LAMS was superior to DPS. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, randomized trial was carried out in 9 tertiary hospitals. Between June 2017, and Oct 2020, we screened 99 patients with symptomatic WON, of whom 64 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the DPS group (n = 31) or the LAMS group (n = 33). The primary outcome was short-term (4-weeks) clinical success determined by the reduction of collection. Secondary endpoints included long-term clinical success, hospitalization, procedure duration, recurrence, safety, and costs. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT03100578. RESULTS: A similar clinical success rate in the short term (RR, 1.41; 95% CI 0.88-2.25; p = 0.218) and in the long term (RR, 1.2; 95% CI 0.92-1.58; p = 0.291) was observed between both groups. Procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LAMS group (35 vs. 45-min, p = 0.003). The hospital admission after the index procedure (median difference, - 10 [95% CI - 17.5, - 1]; p = 0.077) and global hospitalization (median difference - 4 [95% CI - 33, 25.51]; p = 0.82) were similar between both groups. Reported stent-related adverse events were similar for the two groups (36 vs.45% in LAMS vs. DPS), except for de novo fever, which was significantly 26% lower in LAMS (RR, 0.26 [0.08-0.83], p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical superiority of LAMS over DPS for WON therapy was not proved, with similar clinical success, hospital stay and similar safety profile between both groups, yet a significant reduction in procedure time was observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03100578.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Interventional Management of Mediastinal Collections: A Narrative Review.

The numerous causes underlying mediastinal lesions require different diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, including conservative, minimally invasive, and surgical interventions. Solid lesions of a malignant nature, mostly located in the anterior mediastinum, are properly treated with surgical resection either with or without adjuvant schemes. In contrast, a surveillance program is usually recommended with solid benign tumors, depending on their size and related symptomatology. In the management of mediastinal collections, when a drainage intervention is required (suspicion of infection and symptomatology), a minimally invasive nonsurgical procedure or thoracic surgery is considered. The minimally invasive nonsurgical procedures that can be available are percutaneous radiology-guided imaging (abdominal ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT) scan), complete single-aspiration guided by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS), and transmural drainage guided by EUS. Surgical debridement is feasible to treat collections, but as this entails considerable risk of postoperative complications, it is chosen only when other minimally invasive therapies are not possible. The published literature related to the interventional endoscopic approach to mediastinal lesions is scarce. Nevertheless, reports in this field reveal that interventional EUS may have a role in both the diagnosis of and therapeutic approach to mediastinal lesions, mainly in the management of mediastinal collections.

Is a coaxial plastic stent within a lumen-apposing metal stent useful for the management of distal malignant biliary obstruction?

BACKGROUND: There are uncertainties concerning the possible benefits derived from the insertion of double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) within lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) in EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDS). The aim of this study was to determine whether a DPS within a biliary LAMS offers a potential benefit in EUS-guided CDS for the palliative management of malignant biliary obstruction. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective study at three tertiary institutions. PERIOD: May 2015 to August 2020. Two interventional strategies (LAMS alone and LAMS plus DPS) were compared. The choice was the endoscopist's discretion. Inclusion: unresectable/inoperable biliopancreatic tumours with previous failed ERCP. Clinical success: bilirubin decrease > 30% at 4 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-one consecutive cases of EUS-CDS using biliary LAMS were treated (22 women; mean age, 72.3 years) during the study period. The procedure was technically successful in 39 (95.1%), who were managed using the two strategies (22 LAMS alone; 17 LAMS plus DPS). No differences between the groups, in terms of clinical success (77.3 vs 87.5%, p = 0.67), adverse events (AEs, 13.6 vs 11.8%, p = 0.99), recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO, 13.6 vs 23.5%, p = 0.67), or survival rate (p = 0.67) were encountered. The LAMS alone group had a shorter length of procedure (50 min vs 66 min, p = 0.102). No risk factors related to clinical success, AEs, RBO, or survival were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The technical variant of adding a coaxial DPS within LAMS in EUS-CDS seems not to be enough to prevent biliary morbidities, and it is a time-consuming strategy. Although prospective studies are needed, these results do not support its routine use.