Evaluation of the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of fully covered self-expandable metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: results of a Spanish nationwide registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Initial reports suggest that fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) may be better suited for drainage of dense pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), such as walled-off pancreatic necrosis. The primary aim was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of FCSEMSs for drainage of different types of PFCs in a large cohort. The secondary aim was to investigate which type of FCSEMS is superior. METHODS: This was a retrospective, noncomparative review of a nationwide database involving all hospitals in Spain performing EUS-guided PFC drainage. From April 2008 to August 2013, all patients undergoing PFC drainage with an FCSEMS were included in a database. The main outcome measurements were technical success, short-term (2 weeks) and long-term (6 months) effectiveness, adverse events, and need for surgery. RESULTS: The study included 211 patients (pseudocyst/walled-off pancreatic necrosis, 53%/47%). The FCSEMSs used were straight biliary (66%) or lumen-apposing (34%). Technical success was achieved in 97% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-99%). Short-term- and long-term clinical success was obtained in 94% (95% CI, 89%-97%) and 85% (95% CI, 79%-89%) of patients, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 21% of patients (95% CI, 16%-27%): infection (11%), bleeding (7%), and stent migration and/or perforation (3%). By multivariate analysis, patient age (>58 years) and previous failed drainage were the most important factors associated with negative outcome. CONCLUSIONS: An FCSEMS is effective and safe for PFC drainage. Older patients with a history of unsuccessful drainage are more likely to fail EUS-guided drainage. The type of FCSEMS does not seem to influence patient outcome.

Endoscopic management of a gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy using the over-the-scope-clip (Ovesco®) system.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is currently used for the management of morbid obesity. Gastric fistula is the primary life-threatening complication, and its resolution continues to be a strong challenge for surgeons. Multiple treatment options are available, ranging from conservative therapy to endoscopic use of clips or stents, and even surgical reoperation involving total gastrectomy or conversion to a different bariatric technique. The applicability of each individual option will depend on the type of fistula and the patient clinical status. A clinical case is reported of a 29-year-old male patient with a body mass index at 49% who following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy had a delayed gastric fistula that failed to respond to conservative management but was successfully treated using the over-the-scope clip (Ovesco®) system.

Manejo endoscópico de una fístula tras gastrectomía vertical mediante el sistema 'over-the-scope-clip' (Ovesco(R)) / Endoscopic management of a gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy using the over-the-scope-clip (Ovesco(R)) system

La gastrectomía tubular laparoscópica se realiza hoy en día como procedimiento para el tratamiento de la obesidad. La fístula gástrica es la principal complicación que puede comprometer la vida del paciente y cuya resolución es un gran reto para el cirujano. Existen múltiples opciones de tratamiento que van desde un tratamiento conservador hasta medidas endoscópicas con clips o prótesis e incluso reintervenciones quirúrgicas que implican una gastrectomía total o la conversión a otra técnica bariátrica. La aplicabilidad de cada una de ellas va a depender del tipo de fístula y del estado general del paciente. Se presenta un caso clínico de un paciente varón de 29 años de edad con índice de masa corporal de 49% que tras una gastrectomía vertical laparoscópica presenta una fístula gástrica tardía que fracasó al manejo conservador y cuya resolución se consiguió mediante el sistema «over-the-scope clip» (Ovesco(R)) (AU)

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is currently used for the management of morbid obesity. Gastric fistula is the primary life-threatening complication, and its resolution continues to be a strong challenge for surgeons. Multiple treatment options are available, ranging from conservative therapy to endoscopic use of clips or stents, and even surgical reoperation involving total gastrectomy or conversion to a different bariatric technique. The applicability of each individual option will depend on the type of fistula and the patient clinical status. A clinical case is reported of a 29-year-old male patient with a body mass index at 49% who following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy had a delayed gastric fistula that failed to respond to conservative management but was successfully treated using the over-the-scope clip (Ovesco(R)) system (AU)

Influence of portal hypertension and its early decompression by TIPS placement on the outcome of variceal bleeding.

Increased portal pressure during variceal bleeding may have an influence on the treatment failure rate, as well as on short- and long-term survival. However, the usefulness of hepatic hemodynamic measurement during the acute episode has not been prospectively validated, and no information exists about the outcome of hemodynamically defined high-risk patients treated with early portal decompression. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement was made within the first 24 hours after admission of 116 consecutive patients with cirrhosis with acute variceal bleeding treated with a single session of sclerotherapy injection during urgent endoscopy. Sixty-four patients had an HVPG less than 20 mm Hg (low-risk [LR] group), and 52 patients had an HVPG greater than or equal to 20 mm Hg (high-risk [HR] group). HR patients were randomly allocated into those receiving transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS; HR-TIPS group, n = 26) within the first 24 hours after admission and those not receiving TIPS (HR-non-TIPS group). The HR-non-TIPS group had more treatment failures (50% vs. 12%, P =.0001), transfusional requirements (3.7 +/- 2.7 vs. 2.2 +/- 2.3, P =.002), need for intensive care (16% vs. 3%, P <.05), and worse actuarial probability of survival than the LR group. Early TIPS placement reduced treatment failure (12%, P =.003), in-hospital and 1-year mortality (11% and 31%, respectively; P <.05). In conclusion, increased portal pressure estimated by early HVPG measurement is a main determinant of treatment failure and survival in variceal bleeding, and early TIPS placement reduces treatment failure and mortality in high risk patients defined by hemodynamic criteria.