Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography-guided versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided technique for pancreatic duct cannulation in patients with pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Stenosis of the pancreaticojejunostomy is a well-known long-term complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Traditionally, the endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided intervention has emerged as an alternative, but the success rate and adverse event rate of both treatment modalities are poorly known. We aimed to compare the outcome data of both interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search using the Pubmed/Medline and Embase databases in order to summarize the available data regarding efficacy and complications of ERP- and EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage and compare these outcome data using uniform outcome measures in a multilevel logistic model. RESULTS : 13 studies were included, involving 77 patients who underwent ERP-guided drainage, 145 who underwent EUS-guided drainage, and 12 patients who underwent both modalities. An EUS-guided approach was significantly superior to an ERP-guided approach with regard to pancreatic duct opacification (87 % vs. 30 %; P < 0.001), cannulation success (79 % vs. 26 %; P < 0.001), and stent placement (72 % vs. 20 %; P < 0.001). An EUS-guided approach also appeared superior with regard to clinical outcomes such a pain resolution. The adverse event rate between the two treatment modalities could not be compared due to insufficient data. All included studies were found to be of low quality. CONCLUSION: Based on limited available data, EUS-guided PD intervention appears superior to ERP-guided PD intervention.

Tailored access to the hepatobiliary system in post-bariatric patients: a tertiary care bariatric center experience.

BACKGROUND: In bariatric surgery patients, pancreaticobiliary access via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is technically challenging and the optimal approach for the evaluation and treatment of biliary tree-related pathologies has been debated. Besides laparoscopy-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) as standard of care, EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS) with placement of a fully covered metal stent have emerged as novel techniques. The objective of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of three different endoscopic approaches (LA-ERCP, EDGE, and HGS) in bariatric patients. METHODS: In this retrospective review, consecutive patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) who underwent from 2013 to 2019 a LA-ERCP, an EDGE, or a HGS at a tertiary care reference center for bariatric surgery were analyzed. Patient demographics, type of procedure and indication, data regarding cannulation and therapeutic intervention of the common bile duct (procedure success), and clinical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included. Indications for LA-ERCP, EDGE, or HGS were mostly choledocholithiasis (78.9%) and in a few cases papillitis stenosans. Eight patients (57.1%) with LA-ERCP underwent concomitant cholecystectomy. Procedure success was achieved in 100%. Adverse events (AEs) were identified in 15.7% of patients (all ERCP related). All AEs were rated as moderate and there were no serious AEs. CONCLUSION: This case series indicates that ERCP via a transgastric approach (LA-ERCP, EDGE, or HGS) is a minimally invasive, effective, and feasible method to access the biliary tree in bariatric patients. These techniques offer an appealing alternative treatment option compared to percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and drainage- or deep enteroscopy-assisted ERCP. In bariatric patients who earlier had a cholecystectomy, EUS-guided techniques were the preferred treatment options for biliary pathologies.

No Difference in Survival between Neo-Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Neo-Adjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Gastric Cardia Cancer Patients: A Contemporary View from the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: Both neo-adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) and neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), in addition to surgical resection of gastric cardia cancer, improves survival outcomes. We assessed whether NACRT or NAC had superior overall survival (OS) and relative survival (RS) outcomes using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: The NCDB from 2006 to 2014 was reviewed to identify non-metastatic adult gastric cardia cancer patients who underwent surgical resection and received NACRT or NAC. Advanced statistical models were applied to assess survival outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 5,371 patients included, 4,520 (84.2%) were male, the mean age was 61.2 years (SD 10.0), 4,229 (78.7%) underwent NACRT, and 1,142 (21.3%) underwent NAC. NACRT patients more often had an R0 resection compared to NAC (91.4 vs. 86.6%, p < 0.001, respectively). Univariate 5-year OS rates were 40.0% (95% CI 38.2-41.8) for NACRT and 40.1% (37.0-43.6) for NAC (p = 0.302). No differences in OS for NAC vs. NACRT were found after multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05, p = 0.290). There were no survival differences after stepwise, propensity score, RS analyses, nor after near-far-matching (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82-1.07, p = 0.332). CONCLUSIONS: NAC or NACRT yield the same survival outcome for patients with resectable gastric cardia cancer. These data support the need for randomized controlled trials comparing the 2 regimens head-to-head.

High rate of positive lymph nodes in T1a gallbladder cancer does not translate to decreased survival: a population-based, propensity score adjusted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current consensus guidelines suggest that gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients with resected T1a disease can be observed while patients with T1b or greater lesions should undergo lymphadenectomy (LNE). The primary aim of this study was to critically explore the impact of LNE in early-stage GBC on overall survival (OS) on a population-based level. METHOD: The 2004-2014 National Cancer Database was reviewed to identify non-metastatic GBC patients with T1a, T1b, or T2 disease and grouped whether a dedicated LNE was performed. OS and relative survival were assessed using Cox proportional hazard regression analyses before and after propensity score adjustments. RESULTS: 4015 patients were included, 246 (6%) had T1a, 654 (16%) T1b, and 3115 (78%) T2 GBC. The rate of positive lymph nodes was 13%, 12%, and 40% for T1a, T1b, and T2 tumors, respectively. Even after propensity score adjustment, no OS benefit was found if LNE was performed for T1a disease (HR:0.63, 95%CI:0.35-1.13) while OS was improved for T1b (HR:0.65, 95%CI:0.49-0.87) and T2 tumors (HR:0.65, 95%CI:0.57-0.73). CONCLUSION: Despite a higher rate of nodal positivity among patients with T1a disease compared to previous reports, there was no impact on survival and current treatment guidelines appear appropriate for the management of T1a disease.