Salvage endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy as a bridge to definitive surgical therapy for duodenal adenocarcinoma presenting with duodenal stent obstruction.

The utilization of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) in the setting of an obstructed (ingrown) duodenal stent as a bridge to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains undescribed. Herein, we report a case study of a 51-year-old patient who underwent EUS-GJ using lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) for an obstructed duodenal stent during neoadjuvant treatment for duodenal adenocarcinoma. The patient ultimately underwent surgical resection by a classic PD 14 weeks after LAMS placement. EUS-GJ using LAMS represents a potential option as a salvage bridge to surgery for duodenal obstruction in the setting of an obstructed duodenal stent.

Utilization and outcomes of extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2 R): Systematic review and meta-analysis of arterio-venous and veno-venous ECCO2 R approaches.

INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2 R) provides respiratory support to patients suffering from hypercapnic respiratory failure by utilizing an extracorporeal shunt and gas exchange membrane to remove CO2 from either the venous (VV-ECCO2 R) or arterial (AV-ECCO2 R) system before return into the venous site. AV-ECCO2 R relies on the patient's native cardiac function to generate pressures needed to deliver blood through the extracorporeal circuit. VV-ECCO2 R utilizes a mechanical pump and can be used to treat patients with inadequate native cardiac function. We sought to evaluate the existing evidence comparing the subgroups of patients supported on VV and AV-ECCO2 R devices. METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify all relevant studies published between 2000 and 2019. Demographic information, medical indications, perioperative variables, and clinical outcomes were extracted for systematic review and meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies including 826 patients were reviewed. 60% of patients (497/826) were supported on VV-ECCO2 R. The most frequent indications were acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [69%, (95%CI: 53%-82%)] and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [49%, (95%CI: 37%-60%)]. ICU length of stay was significantly shorter in patients supported on VV-ECCO2 R compared to AV-ECCO2 R [15 (95%CI: 7-23) vs. 42 (95%CI: 17-67) days, p = 0.05]. In-hospital mortality was not significantly different [27% (95%CI: 18%-38%) vs. 36% (95%CI: 24%-51%), p = 0.26]. CONCLUSION: Both VV and AV-ECCO2 R provided clinically meaningful CO2 removal with comparable mortality.