EUS-guided pancreatogastrostomy and pancreatobulbostomy for the treatment of pain in patients with pancreatic ductal dilatation inaccessible for transpapillary endoscopic therapy

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a method of decompressing the pancreatic duct (PD) if unable to access the papilla or surgical anastomosis, particularly in nonsurgical candidates. The 2 types of EUS-PDD are EUS-assisted pancreatic rendezvous (EUS-PRV) and EUS-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (EUS-PG). EUS-PRV should be considered in patients with accessible papilla or anastomosis, while EUS-PG is a comparable alternative in surgically altered foregut anatomy. While technical and clinical successes range from 79% to 100%, adverse events occur in approximately 20%. A multidisciplinary approach that considers the patient's anatomy, clinical indication, and long-term goals should be discussed with surgical and interventional radiology colleagues.

Feasibility of Percutaneous Pancreatic Stent Placement in Postoperative Pancreaticojejunostomy Stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of percutaneous pancreatic stent placement in postoperative pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis (PJS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included seven procedures in five patients (four males and one female; median age, 63 years) who underwent percutaneous pancreatic stent placement for postoperative PJS between January 2005 and December 2021. The patients were referred to interventional radiology because of unfavorable anatomy or bowel abnormalities. The pancreatic duct was accessed under ultrasound and/or computed tomography guidance. A stent was placed after balloon dilatation of the PJS. Moreover, plastic stents were placed for the first two procedures, whereas bare-metal stents were used for the remaining five procedures. Technical success was defined as the successful placement of stents for the PJS, meanwhile, clinical success was defined as the normalization of pancreatic enzymes without recurrence of pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Pancreatic duct access and stent placement were successfully performed in all patients (technical success rate: 100%). All the procedures initially yielded clinical success. However, recurrence of pancreatitis was observed after two procedures that used plastic stents because of stent migration at 0.3 and 3 months after the procedure. In contrast, no instances of recurrent pancreatitis were noted after metal stent placement for a follow-up duration of 1-36 months. No serious procedure-related adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous pancreatic stent placement may be a viable option for patients with postoperative PJS in whom an endoscopic approach is not feasible. Metal stents may be considered over plastic stents for the management of PJS, considering the possible lower stent migration and infeasibility of frequent endoscopic stent exchange due to the altered anatomy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic duct drainage is one of the most challenging procedures in therapeutic endoscopy. Technical success is lower than for other therapeutic EUS procedures. However, when successful in a clear clinical indication, this procedure can offer a useful therapeutic alternative and improves the overall clinical success of the endoscopic approach. Current challenges include the standardization of clinical indications and of the techniques used for accessing the pancreatic duct, the strategy for mid-term and long-term management, and definition of the scope of the training that should be offered to a few highly experienced endoscopists.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

Best Practices in Pancreatico-biliary Stenting and EUS-guided Drainage

Indications for endoscopic placement of endoluminal and transluminal stents have greatly expanded over time. Endoscopic stent placement is now a well-established approach for the treatment of benign and malignant biliary and pancreatic diseases (ie, obstructive jaundice, intra-abdominal fluid collections, chronic pancreatitis etc.). Ongoing refinement of technical approaches and development of novel stents is increasing the applicability and success of pancreatico-biliary stenting. In this review, we discuss the important developments in the field of pancreatico-biliary stenting, with a specific focus on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound-associated developments.

Multicenter retrospective cohort of EUS-guided anterograde pancreatic duct access

Background and study aims  Pancreatic duct (PD) cannulation may be difficult during conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) due to underlying pathology, anatomical variants or surgically altered anatomy. Pancreatic access in these cases previously necessitated percutaneous or surgical approaches. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) allows for an alternative and can be combined with ERCP for rendezvous during the same procedure, or for other salvage options. Patients and methods  Patients with attempted EUS access of the PD from tertiary referral centers between 2009 and 2022 were included in the cohort. Demographic data, technical data, procedural outcomes and adverse events were collected. The primary outcome was rendezvous success. Secondary outcomes included rates of successful PD decompression and change in procedural success over time. Results  The PD was accessed in 105 of 111 procedures (95 %), with successful subsequent ERCP in 45 of 95 attempts (47 %). Salvage direct PD stenting was performed in 5 of 14 attempts (36 %). Sixteen patients were scheduled for direct PD stenting (without rendezvous) with 100 % success rate. Thus 66 patients (59 %) had successful decompression. Success rates improved from 41 % in the first third of cases to 76 % in the final third. There were 13 complications (12 %), including post-procedure pancreatitis in seven patients (6 %). Conclusions  EUS-guided anterograde pancreas access is a feasible salvage method if retrograde access fails. The duct can be cannulated, and drainage can be achieved in the majority of cases. Success rates improve over time. Future research may involve investigation into technical, patient and procedural factors contributing to rendezvous success.

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.

Current landscape of therapeutic EUS: Changing paradigms in gastroenterology practice

Therapeutic EUS has witnessed exponential growth in the last decade, but it has been considered investigational until recently. An increasing body of good-quality evidence is now demonstrating clear advantages over established alternatives, adding therapeutic EUS to management algorithms of complex hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) and gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. In this review, the available evidence and clinical role of therapeutic EUS in established and evolving applications will be discussed. A Graphical Summary for each scenario will provide (1) technical steps, (2) anatomical sketch, (3) best-supporting evidence, and (4) role in changing current and future GI practice. Therapeutic EUS has accepted well-established applications such as drainage of symptomatic peripancreatic fluid collections, biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and treatment of acute cholecystitis in unfit-for-surgery patients. In addition, good-quality evidence on several emerging indications (e.g., treatment of gastric outlet obstruction, local ablation of pancreatic solid lesions, etc.) is promising. Specific emphasis will be given to how these technical innovations have changed management paradigms and algorithms and expanded the possibilities of gastroenterologists to provide therapeutic solutions to old and emerging clinical needs. Therapeutic EUS is cementing its role in everyday practice, radically changing the treatment of different HPB diseases and other conditions (e.g., GI obstruction). The development of dedicated accessories and increased training opportunities will expand the ability of gastroenterologists to deliver highly effective yet minimally invasive therapies, potentially translating into a better quality of life, especially for oncological and fragile patients.

EUS-guided transenteric pancreatic duct drainage

Endoscopic drainage requires transpapillary access to the pancreatic duct during ERCP. When ERCP failed, EUS-guided pancreatico-gastro or bulbostomy and/or rendez-vous technique offers an alternative to surgery. Although data has demonstrated that the procedure can be safe and effective, EUS-guided PD drainage remains one of the most technically challenging therapeutic EUS interventions, as evidenced by the multiple considerations on device selection and the risk of severe complications.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided access procedures following surgery

EUS-guided therapeutic procedures have emerged in the recent years as a minimally invasive option for the management of complex hepatobiliary disorders. Gastrointestinal surgeries, e.g., pancreaticoduodenectomy, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, and partial gastrectomy with different reconstructions are commonly performed for a wide range of indications that include tumour resections and weight loss. Conventional endoscopic procedures are challenging in those patients due to inaccessible or unreachable ampulla. Patients with surgically altered anatomy are good candidates for EUS-guided access procedures that have shown good technical and clinical success rates. This category of procedures includes EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic drainage, EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and EUS-guided Gastroenterostomy. Studies have shown that these procedures have comparable or better results than traditional endoscopic, interventional radiology-guided and surgical procedures. This article discusses the indications, technique and outcome of the different EUS-guided access procedures in patients with surgically altered anatomy.

[Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage in Pancreatobiliary Diseases]

EUS-guided drainage for gallbladder, bile duct, pancreatic duct, and peripancreatic fluid collection has been performed more frequently in the last decade. The development of dedicated stents and delivery systems for EUS-guided interventions have improved the efficacy and safety of these procedures. Furthermore, the introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents has reduced the complication significantly of endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic collections and gallbladder. Recent studies show that EUS-guided drainage of pancreaticobiliary ducts and peripancreatic fluid collection produces good results and low complication rates. This review describes the current position and role of interventional EUS for pancreatobiliary disease in clinical practice.

Endoscopic Management of Complications in Chronic Pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of complications in patients with chronic pancreatitis is often suboptimal. This review discusses detailed endoscopic approaches for managing complications in CP.

LITERATURE FINDINGS

CP is characterized by progressive and irreversible destruction of pancreatic parenchyma and ductal system resulting in fibrosis, scarring, and loss of glandular function. Abdominal pain remains is the most common symptom of the disease and the main aim of medical, endoscopic, and surgical therapy is to help relieve symptoms, prevent disease progression, and manage complications related to CP. In fact, advances in our understanding of CP have improved medical care and quality of life in these patients. With significant sequela, morbidity and a progressive nature, a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology, natural course, diagnostic approaches, and optimal management strategies for this disease is warranted. The existing modalities and new innovations in this field are safe, effective, and likely to have a positive impact on management of complication in CP whenever used in the right context.

When ERCP Fails: EUS-Guided Access to Biliary and Pancreatic Ducts

Pancreaticobiliary (PB) endotherapy continues to progress in the era of therapeutic endosonography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary method for PB access in native and altered anatomy. In altered anatomy, PB access can be obtained via enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (e-ERCP) or laparoscopy-assisted ERCP; however, both approaches have significant limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary and pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-BPD) are increasingly becoming the preferred alternative when ERCP fails, with advantages over percutaneous drainage. EUS-BPD continues to evolve with better feasibility, safety and efficacy as dedicated procedural equipment continues to improve. In this article, we discuss the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) when ERCP fails and their indications, technique, and outcomes.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been continuously evolving for the past three decades and has become widely used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The efficacy of therapeutic EUS (TEUS) has proven to be superior and better tolerated than conventional percutaneous or surgical techniques. TEUS has allowed the performance of multiple procedures including gallbladder, pancreatic duct and biliary drainage as well as gastrointestinal anastomoses. TEUS procedures generally require the following critical steps: needle access, guidewire placement, fistula creation and stent deployment. The indications and contraindication for TEUS procedures vary with different procedures but common contraindications include hemodynamic instability, severe coagulopathy unable to be reversed, large volume ascites or the inability to obtain access to the target site. Proficiency and high volume in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and diagnostic EUS procedures are required for training in TEUS. The complexity of the cases performed can be seen as a pyramid with drainage of pancreatic fluid collections at the base, pancreaticobiliary decompression in the middle, and creation of digestive anastomosis at the top. The mastery of each level is crucial prior to reaching the next level of complexity. TEUS has been incorporated in our arsenal and is impacting on a daily basis the way we offer minimally invasive therapy.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

1:  ESGE recommends a prolonged course of a prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotic in patients with ascites who are undergoing therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents during EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy for biliary drainage in malignant disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE recommends EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be performed in high volume expert centers, owing to the complexity of this technique and the high risk of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends a stepwise approach to EUS-guided PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy, starting with rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (RV-ERP), followed by antegrade or transmural drainage only when RV-ERP fails or is not feasible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests performing transduodenal EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), rather than using the transgastric route, as this may reduce the risk of stent dysfunction.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6:  ESGE recommends using saline instillation for small-bowel distension during EUS-guided gastroenterostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7:  ESGE recommends the use of saline instillation with a 19G needle and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) procedures.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE recommends the use of either 15- or 20-mm LAMSs for EDGE, with a preference for 20-mm LAMSs when considering a same-session ERCP.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Early and long-term clinical outcomes of endoscopic interventions for benign pancreatic duct stricture/obstruction-the possibility of additional clinical effects of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic drainage

OBJECTIVES

For benign pancreatic duct strictures/obstructions (BPDS/O), endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) is performed when endoscopic transpapillary pancreatic drainage (ETPD) fails. We clarified the clinical outcomes for patients with BPDS/O who underwent endoscopic interventions through the era where EUS-PD was available.

METHODS

Forty-five patients with BPDS/O who underwent ETPD/EUS-PD were included. We retrospectively investigated overall technical and clinical success rates for endoscopic interventions, adverse events, and clinical outcomes after successful endoscopic interventions.

RESULTS

The technical success rates for ETPD and EUS-PD were 77% (35/45) and 80% (8/10), respectively, and the overall technical success rate using two drainage procedures was 91% (41/45). Among the 41 patients who underwent successful endoscopic procedures, the clinical success rates were 97% for the symptomatic patients (35/36). The rates of procedure-related pancreatitis after ETPD and EUS-PD were 13% and 30%, respectively. After successful endoscopic interventions, the cumulative 3-year rate of developing recurrent symptoms/pancreatitis was calculated to be 27%, and only two patients finally needed surgery. Continuous smoking after endoscopic interventions was shown to be a risk factor for developing recurrent symptoms/pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

By adding EUS-PD to ETPD, the technical success rate for endoscopic interventions for BPDS/O was more than 90%, and the clinical success rate was nearly 100%. Due to the low rate of surgery after endoscopic interventions, including EUS-PD, for patients with BPDS/O, EUS-PD may contribute to their good clinical courses as a salvage treatment for refractory BPDS/O.

Approach to management of pancreatic strictures: the gastroenterologist's perspective

Pancreatic strictures represent a complex clinical problem which often requires multidisciplinary management with a team of gastroenterologists, surgeons and radiologists. Dominant strictures are largely due to inflammatory processes of the pancreas like chronic pancreatitis. However, differentiating benign from malignant processes of the pancreas, leading to strictures is imperative and remains a challenge. With advances in endoscopic management, options for therapy include endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) in situations where ERCP is not feasible or fails. However, endoscopic therapy is suited for a select group of patients and surgery remains key to management in many patients. In this narrative review, we look at the gastroenterologist's perspective and approach to pancreatic ductal strictures, including endoscopic and surgical management.

EUS guided pancreatic duct decompression in surgically altered anatomy or failed ERCP - A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

INTRODUCTION

EUS-PD (EUS guided pancreatic duct drainage) is classified into two types: EUS-guided rendezvous techniques and EUS-guided PD stenting. Prior studies showed significant variation in terms of technical success, clinical success and adverse events.

METHODS

Three independent reviewers performed a comprehensive review of all original articles published from inception to June 2020, describing pancreatic duct drainage utilizing EUS. Primary outcomes were technical success, clinical success of EUS-PDD and safety of EUS-PD in terms of adverse events. All meta-analysis and meta-regression tests were 2-tailed. Finally, probability of publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and with Egger's test.

RESULTS

A total of sixteen studies (503 patients) described the use of EUS-PD for pancreatic duct decompression yielded a pooled technical success rate was 81.4% (95% CI 72-88.1, I 2 = 74). Meta-regression revealed that proportion of altered anatomy and method of dilation of tract explain the variance. Overall pooled clinical success rate was 84.6% (95% CI 75.4-90.8, I 2 = 50.18). Meta-regression analysis revealed that the type of pancreatic duct decompression, proportion of altered anatomy and follow up time explained the variance. Overall pooled adverse event rate was 21.3% (95% CI 16.8-26.7, I 2 = 36.6). The most common post procedure adverse event was post procedure pain. Overall pooled adverse event rate of post EUS-PD pancreatitis was 5% (95% CI 3.2-7.8, I 2 = 0).

CONCLUSION

The systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression provides answer to the questions of the overall technical success, clinical success and the adverse event rate of EUS-PD by summarizing the available literature.

Safety and efficacy of EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage in symptomatic main pancreatic duct obstruction: Is there still a place for surgery?

Background and study aims In patients with symptomatic dilation of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) for whom endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is impossible, surgery has long been the only available treatment. EUS-PD is described as a minimally invasive alternative for ductal decompression surgery. We describe the results of our experience with it.

Patients and methods This was a retrospective single-center study over 9 years. Twenty-seven patients, median age 61.8 years (range 36 to 85) who underwent EUS-PD for symptomatic MPD dilatation were included. The main objective was to evaluate the technical success (placement of a plastic stent between the stomach and the MPD). Secondary objectives were to document clinical success based on pain and quality of life (visual analogic scales and treatments) and complication rates, and to define a standardized management algorithm.

Results The technical success rate was 92.5 %. The rate of minor adverse events was 21 % (4 cases of non-specific postoperative pain and two cases of delayed benign edematous pancreatitis). The clinical success rate was 88 %, and half of patients in whom the procedure was successful had "complete regression" of pain and half "partial regression." Median follow-up was 34.2 months (range 4 to 108). During follow-up, 74 % of patients reported improvement in quality of life and no patients required secondary surgery.

Conclusion Provided it is performed in an expert center, EUS-PD is a minimally invasive, effective, and safe alternative to pancreatic surgical drainage in patients with symptomatic MPD dilatation with failure or in whom ERCP is impossible.

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.

EUS-guided pancreatic ductal intervention: A comprehensive literature review

EUS has opened a new frontier in endoscopic techniques for accessing pancreatic ducts in patients with failed ERCP. The major indications of EUS-guided pancreatic duct intervention (EUS-PDI) are main pancreatic duct (MPD) strictures due to chronic pancreatitis or strictures of pancreaticojejunal or pancreaticogastric anastomosis after Whipple resection, which lead to recurrent acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided pancreaticogastro or duodenostomy offers an alternative to surgery when transpapillary drainage fails or is not possible. We provide an expert commentary and a brief overview on this relatively novel technique utilizing EUS-PDI creation in patients with impaired drainage of the MPD who have failed other conventional endoscopic techniques for MPD drainage and either are poor surgical candidates or are reluctant to undergo surgery.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 714 patients

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a minimal-invasive therapeutic option to surgery and in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). The aim of this review was to quantitatively appraise the clinical outcomes of EUS-PDD by meta-analysis methods. Methods  We searched multiple databases from inception through March 2020 to identify studies that reported on EUS-PDD. Pooled rates of technical success, successful drainage of pancreatic duct, clinical success, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I ² % and 95 % prediction interval. Results  A total of 22 studies (714 patients) were included. The pooled rate of technical success in EUS-PDD was 84.8 % (95 % CI 79.1-89.2). The pooled rate of successful PD drained by EUS-PDD was 77.5 % (95 % CI 63.1-87.4). The pooled rate of clinical success of EUS-PDD was 89.2 % (95 % CI 82.1-93.7). The pooled rate of all adverse events was 18.1 % (95 % CI 14.2-22.9). On sub-group analysis, the pooled technical success and clinical success of EUS-PDD from Japanese data were considerably superior (91.2 %, 83-95.6 & 92.5 %, 83.9-96.7, respectively). The pooled rate of post EUS-PDD acute pancreatitis was 6.6 % (95 % CI 4.5-9.4), bleeding was 4.1 % (95 % CI 2.7-6.2), perforation and/or pneumoperitoneum was 3.1 % (95 % CI 1.9-5), pancreatic leak and/or pancreatic fluid collection was 2.3 % (95 % CI 1.4-4), and infection was 2.8 % (95 % CI 1.7-4.6). Conclusion  EUS-PDD demonstrates high technical success and clinical success rates with acceptable adverse events. Technical success was especially high for anastomotic strictures.

Endoscopic endgame for obstructive pancreatopathy: outcomes of anterograde EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage. A dual-center study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Anterograde endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) refers to transmural drainage of the main pancreatic duct via an endoprosthesis passed anterograde through the gastric (or intestinal) wall. Anterograde EUS-PDD is a rescue procedure for recalcitrant cases of benign obstructive pancreatopathy.

METHODS

We conducted a dual-center retrospective chart review of 28 patients (mean age, 59 years; 50% female) who underwent attempted anterograde EUS-PDD between April 2016 and September 2019 for chronic pancreatitis (CP) (93%) or pancreaticojejunostomy stenosis (PJS) after Whipple resection (7%). The study endpoint was achievement of transpapillary/transanastomotic drainage (definitive therapy).

RESULTS

Gastropancreaticoenterostomy (ring drainage, definitive therapy) was successfully performed during the index procedure in the 2 patients with PJS (technical success, 100%). Clinical success was 100% in the 2 ring drainage recipients during a mean 18-month follow-up period. The remaining 26 patients with CP underwent attempted pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) with 81% technical success, 75% clinical success, and 15% adverse events (AEs). Repeat endoscopic transmural interventions were performed in the 15 patients with clinical success after PG creation. Definitive therapy transpired in all 15 patients after a median 1 repeat procedure per patient. Clinical success after definitive therapy was maintained in all 15 patients (100%) during a median 4.5-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In agreement with previous studies, our study showed mild to moderately high rates of technical failure (19%), clinical failure (25%), and AEs (15%) during index drainage (PG creation). Among patients with CP with both technical and clinical success after index PG creation (n = 15), 100% definitive therapy was achieved and clinical outcomes were excellent (100% clinical success, 0% AEs).

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: Techniques and Literature Review of Transmural Stenting

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has emerged as an option in patients with failure of retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) because of difficulty in cannulation or surgically altered anatomy. This article provides a comprehensive review of the techniques and outcomes of EUS-PD, especially EUS-guided pancreatic transmural stenting. The clinical data derived from a total of 401 patients were reviewed in which the overall technical and clinical success rates were 339/401 (85%, range 63%–100%) and 328/372 (88%, range 76%–100%), respectively. Short-term adverse events occurred in 25% (102/401) of the cases, which included abdominal pain (n=45), acute pancreatitis (n=17), bleeding (n=10), and issues associated with pancreatic juice leakage such as perigastric or peripancreatic fluid collection (n=9). In conclusion, although EUS-PD remains a challenging procedure with a high risk of adverse events such as pancreatic juice leakage, perforation, and severe acute pancreatitis, the procedure seems to be a promising alternative for PD drainage in patients with altered anatomy or unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde pancreatography.

International consensus guidelines on interventional endoscopy in chronic pancreatitis. Recommendations from the working group for the international consensus guidelines for chronic pancreatitis in collaboration with the International Association of Pancreatology, the American Pancreatic Association, the Japan Pancreas Society, and European Pancreatic Club

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

This paper is part of the international consensus guidelines on chronic pancreatitis, presenting for interventional endoscopy.

METHODS

An international working group with experts on interventional endoscopy evaluated 26 statements generated from evidence on 9 clinically relevant questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to evaluate the level of evidence. To determine the level of agreement, a nine-point Likert scale was used for voting on the statements.

RESULTS

Strong consensus was obtained for 15 statements relating to nine questions including the recommendation that endoscopic intervention should be offered to patients with persistent severe pain but not to those without pain. Endoscopic decompression of the pancreatic duct could be used for immediate pain relief, and then offered surgery if this fails or needs repeated endoscopy. Endoscopic drainage is preferred for portal-splenic vein thrombosis and pancreatic fistula. A plastic stent should be placed and replaced 2-3 months later after insertion. Endoscopic extraction is indicated for stone fragments remaining after ESWL. Interventional treatment should be performed for symptomatic/complicated pancreatic pseudocysts. Endoscopic treatment is recommended for bile duct obstruction and afterwards surgery if this fails or needs repeated endoscopy. Surgery may be offered if there is significant calcification and/or mass of the pancreatic head. Percutaneous endovascular treatment is preferred for hemosuccus pancreaticus. Surgical treatment is recommended for duodenal stenosis due to chronic pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This international expert consensus guideline provides evidenced-based statements concerning indications and key aspects for interventional endoscopy in the management of patients with chronic pancreatitis.

Advances in Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS): A Technical Review

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become the therapeutic intervention of choice for multiple diseases and continues to evolve rapidly. Its increasing use has allowed the development and adaptation of multiple, revolutionary devices and tools. Currently, there is paucity of randomized clinical trials evaluating multiple EUS-guided interventions and the vast majority of published data is heterogenous. However, the available literature on EUS-guided therapeutic interventions continues to expand and demonstrate its safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness in carefully selected patients when performed by expert endosonographers. The future of interventional EUS appears to be bright!

EUS-guided pancreatic drainage: A steep learning curve

Background and Objective:

EUS-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) is an efficacious, acceptable risk option for patients with pancreatic duct obstruction who fail conventional ERCP. The aim of this study was to define the learning curve (LC) for EUS-PD.

Methods:

Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-PD by a single operator were included from a dedicated registry. Demographics, procedural info, adverse events, and follow-up data were collected. Nonlinear regression and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses were conducted for the LC.

Results:

Fifty-six patients were included (54% of male, with a mean age of 58 years). Technical success was achieved in 47 patients (84%). Stent placement was antegrade in 36 patients (77%) and retrograde in 11 (23%). Clinical success was achieved in 46/47 (98%) patients who achieved technical success. Adverse events were seen in 13 patients (6 of whom did not achieve technical success) and included bleeding requiring embolization (n = 5), bleeding treated with clips peri-procedurally (n = 1), pancreatitis (n = 5), and a pancreatic fluid collection drained via EUS-drainage (n = 2). The median procedural time was 80 min (range 49–159 min). The CUSUM chart showed that 80-min procedural time was achieved at the 27^th procedure. Durations further reduced 40^th procedure onward, reaching a plateau indicating proficiency (nonlinear regression P < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

Endoscopists experienced in EUS-PD are expected to achieve a reduction in procedural time over successive cases, with efficiency reached at 80 min and a learning rate of 27 cases. Continued improvement is demonstrated with additional experience, with plateau indicating mastery suggested at the 40^th case. EUS-PD is probably one of the hardest therapeutic endosonographic procedures to learn.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Management of Chronic Pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP).

RECENT FINDINGS

EUS has evolved and become invaluable in diagnosing early CP with the use of elastography and contrast enhancement. Lumen-apposing metal stents have allowed for easier transmural drainage and necrosectomy for pancreatic pseudocyst and walled of necrosis. EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage is being utilized for pancreatic duct complications including stenosis, stones, and duct disruptions that are not amendable to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. EUS is an effective tool that assists with the diagnosis and treatment of CP. The technology continues to evolve allowing for diagnosis of CP in earlier stages, which enables more effective therapy. The development of new EUS-guided tools and techniques has improved the treatment of complications from CP.

Long-term outcome of endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage using a fully covered self-expandable metal stent for pancreaticojejunal anastomosis stricture

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has been proposed for pancreatic duct obstruction after failure of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. We evaluate the long-term outcomes of EUS-PD using a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) for pancreaticojejunal anastomosis (PJA) strictures following Whipple procedures.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with PJA strictures underwent EUS-PD according to the findings of EUS-guided pancreatogram and the passage of the guidewire through PJA stricture (complete vs partial stricture) after failure of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and long-term outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical success was achieved in all patients. The complete and partial strictures were 11 and 12, respectively. The direct transanastomotic and transmural plastic stenting in partial PJA stricture was successful in only three patients (13%). Therefore, 20 patients underwent EUS-guided transmural FCSEMS placement during the initial attempt. Early AEs, including abdominal pain (n = 3) and peripancreatic fluid collection (n = 1), occurred in four patients (17.4%). During the follow-up periods (median, 27.2 months; interquartile range [IQR], 18.7-40.6), five patients (21.7%) developed late AEs, including asymptomatic stent fracture at the gastric end (n = 3), asymptomatic stent migration (n = 1), and stent occlusion (n = 1). The total duration of stent placement was 27.2 months (IQR, 18.7-40.6), and the median number of stent revision was 2 (IQR, 1-2).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of safety and efficacy, EUS-PD with an FCSEMS showed favorable success and acceptable AEs rate and durable long-term outcomes.

Six-year retrospective analysis of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic ductal interventions at a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic ductal intervention (EUS-PDI) serves as a rescue therapy in patients with failure of retrograde access to the pancreatic duct (PD) at the time of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). We review our experience of this procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent EUS-PDI for an unsuccessful ERP and altered anatomy.

RESULTS

A total of 44 (65.9% male) patients underwent EUS-PDI with a mean age of 43.5 years, (range: 23-67). Transgastric rendezvous technique was carried out in 23/44 (52.3%), transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy in 18/44 (40.9%) and transduodenal pancreaticobulbostomy in 3/44 (6.8%). Overall technical and clinical success was seen in 88.6% (39/44) and 81.8% (36/44), respectively. Technical success of transgastric rendezvous was 95.6% and that of transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy was 77.8%. Two of seven patients with failure to access the PD had successfully undergone EUS-PD stenting at subsequent attempt. Ten immediate adverse events (AE) were noted which included abdominal pain (n = 4), pancreatitis (n = 2), fever (n = 2), minor bleeding (n = 1), and stripping of wire (n = 1). Delayed AE included stent blockage in 12/39 (30.8%) and spontaneous stent migration in 5/39 (12.8%) which were managed with stent exchange at follow up. The rendezvous technique was associated with fewer AE than transgastric pancreaticogastrostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasonography-PDI is an effective treatment modality and salvage therapy in patients with unsuccessful ERP. Technical and clinical success seen with this study is comparable to studies conducted across the world. EUS-PDI needs to show cost-effectiveness in future studies.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct intervention and pancreaticogastrostomy using a novel cross-platform technique with small-caliber devices

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) has been used as an alternative to surgery to drain pancreatic ducts for treatment of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS). Previous techniques involved using needle-knife cautery, bougie dilation or a stent extraction screw to allow stent passage through the gastric wall and pancreatic parenchyma, with potential for severe complications including duct leak, especially if drainage fails. A novel technique employing EUS guided puncture of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) with a 19- or a 22-gauge needle, passage of an 0.018-guidewire, dilation of the tract with a small-diameter (4 F) angioplasty balloon and placement of 3F plastic stents with the pigtail curled inside the duct as an anchor. Methods  This is a retrospective case series at a single tertiary center. EUS-guided PG was considered when conventional endoscopic pancreatic duct drainage failed. Main outcomes included technical and clinic success and complications. Results  Eight patients underwent PG. Indications were DPDS (n = 4), stenotic pancreaticoenteral anastomosis after Whipple procedure (n = 3) and chronic pancreatitis with dilated MPD (n = 1). Median MPD diameter was 6.75 mm [IQR 2.8 - 7.6]. Technical success was achieved in seven of eight cases (88 %); angioplasty balloon passed into the pancreatic duct in all accessed ducts. There was one asymptomatic duct leak, and no major or delayed complications, with clinical improvement (complete or partial) in five of eight (71 %). Conclusions  EUS-guided PG using a small-caliber guidewire, 4F angioplasty balloon, and reverse 3F single pigtail stents offers a safe and atraumatic alternative without use of cautery.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Transmural Stenting and Transmural Intervention

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic access is an emergent method that can be divided into the two main techniques of EUS-guided rendezvous and pancreatic transmural stenting (PTS). While many reports have described EUS-guided procedures, the indications, technical tips, clinical effects, and safety of EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) remain controversial. This review describes the current status of and problems associated with EUS-PD, particularly PTS. We reviewed clinical data derived from a total of 334 patients. Rates of technical and clinical success ranged from 63% to 100% and 76% to 100%, respectively. In contrast, the rate of procedure-related adverse events was high at 26.7% (89/334). The most frequent adverse events comprised abdominal pain (n=38), acute pancreatitis (n=15), bleeding (n=9), and issues associated with pancreatic juice leakage such as perigastric fluid, pancreatic fluid collection, or pancreatic juice leaks (n=8). In conclusion, indications for EUS-PTS are limited, as is the evidence of its viability, due to the scarcity of expert operators. Despite improvements made to various devices, EUS-PTS remains technically challenging. Therefore, a long-term, large-scale, multicenter study is required to establish this technique as a viable alternative drainage method.

Anterograde Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Duct Drainage: A Technical Review

The advancement of pancreatic endotherapy has increased the availability of minimally invasive endoscopic pancreatic ductal drainage techniques. In this regard, familiarity with endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is critical for treatment of obstructed pancreatic ductal systems, especially in nonsurgical candidates and in patients desiring a minimally invasive approach. Two distinct forms of EUS-PDD exist, viz. rendezvous-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (rendezvous-assisted ERP) and anterograde EUS-PDD. Anterograde EUS-PDD refers to transmural anterograde passage of a pancreatic drainage catheter or stent directly into the main pancreatic duct, through either the gastric or enteral wall. Rendezvous-assisted ERP should be attempted after failed conventional ERP, and anterograde EUS-PDD should be considered if rendezvous-assisted ERP fails or is not technically feasible. Common clinical scenarios that fulfil these conditions are chronic pancreatitis with high-grade main pancreatic duct obstruction, surgically altered anatomy with ductal/anastomotic obstruction, pancreas divisum, and disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. The focus of this review article is anterograde EUS-PDD and its indications, technique, and outcomes. It also provides a summary of our own experience with this procedure, and a video demonstration of the technique.

Open Internal Stenting of the Main Pancreatic Duct as Life-Saving Surgery in a Critically Ill Patient with Chronic Frequently Relapsing Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Ductal Hypertension

Patient: Male, 63

Final Diagnosis: Chronic frequently relapsing alcoholic pancreatitis (relapsing phase) • pancreatic ductal hypertension • parapancreatic inflammatory mass • fermentative ascites-peritonitis • two-sided pleural effusions • sepsis • cachexia

Symptoms: Upper abdominal pain • fatigue • an increase in volume of the abdomen • loss of appetite • weight loss

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: Open internal stenting of the pancreatic duct

Specialty: Surgery

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage

Endoscopic transpapillary or transanastomotic pancreatic duct drainage (PD) is the mainstay of drainage in symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction or leakage. However, transpapillary or transanastomotic PD can be technically difficult due to the tight stricture or surgically altered anatomy (SAA), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided PD (EUS-PD) is now increasingly used as an alternative technique. There are two approaches in EUS-PD: EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV) and EUS-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TMD). In cases with normal anatomy, EUS-RV should be the first approach, whereas EUS-TMD can be selected in cases with SAA or duodenal obstruction. In our literature review, technical success and adverse event rates were 78.7% and 21.8%, respectively. The technical success rate of EUS-RV appeared lower than EUS-TMD due to the difficulty in guidewire passage. In future, development of dedicated devices and standardization of EUS-PD procedure are necessary.

Updates in Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasonography

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in the possibilities of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). From EUS fine needle aspiration of cancerous lesion to pseudocyst drainage, it has now not only replaced some of the percutaneous techniques but has permitted to bypass all together laparoscopic approach for patient with altered anatomy or malignant gastric outlet obstruction. This review will emphasize the novel therapeutic EUS procedures added to our arsenal.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel

OBJECTIVES

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures.

METHODS

Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question.

RESULTS

A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Indications for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Drainage: For Benign or Malignant Cases?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recurrent pancreatitis associated with pancreatic strictures requires treatment with endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP), but it is sometimes technically unsuccessful. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD) was developed as an alternative to a surgical approach after failed ERP; however, the indications for EUS-PD are unclear. In this study, we evaluated the outcomes of EUS-PD and established the indications for EUS-PD.

METHODS

A total of 15 patients had indications for EUS-PD for recurrent pancreatitis due to pancreatic strictures. There were eight patients with benign pancreatic strictures and seven with malignant pancreatic strictures. The success rate, adverse events, and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The technical success rates of benign and malignant strictures were 75% (6/8) and 100% (7/7), respectively, and clinical success was achieved in 100% (6/6) and 87.5% of cases (6/7), respectively. Rendezvous procedures were performed in two patients with benign strictures. The adverse event (AE) rate was 26.7% (4/15) and included cases of peritonitis, bleeding, and stent migration. Reinterventions were performed in three patients with benign strictures and two with malignant strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-PD was an appropriate treatment for not only benign strictures but also malignant strictures with recurrent pancreatitis after failed ERP. However, the AE rate was high, and reinterventions were required in some cases during long-term follow-up. The indications for EUS-PD should be considered carefully, and careful follow-up is needed.

Evaluation of a new stent for EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage: long-term follow-up outcome

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has been reported as an alternative for failed conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, there are few dedicated devices for EUS-PD. Recently, we have developed a new plastic stent dedicated to EUS-PD and have conducted a feasibility study to evaluate its efficacy. In the current study, we evaluated the long-term efficacy of this new plastic stent.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Thirty patients (61 ± 14.3 years old, 14 men) with acute recurrent pancreatitis caused by a stricture in the main pancreatic duct (MPD) or stenotic pancreatoenterostomy were treated at our institution using our recently developed 7Fr plastic stent between August 2013 and April 2017.

RESULTS

 The stent was placed successfully in all patients (30/30) and early clinical success was achieved in all of them. Early adverse events (AEs) occurred in seven patients (23.3 %), namely, self-limited abdominal pain (n = 5), mild pancreatitis (n = 1), and bleeding which required transcatheter arterial embolization (n = 1). Two patients died of primary disease and three were lost to follow-up. The remaining 25 patients were followed up after initial EUS-PD for a median of 23 months (range, 6 - 44 months). Twenty patients required regular stent exchange (3 times; range, 1 - 12 times). Spontaneous stent dislodgement was observed in six patients. Four patients wanted their stents removed 1 year after the initial intervention. Twelve patients (48 %) had regular stent exchange 1 year after the initial intervention. Three patients converted to standard transpapillary pancreatic duct stenting by conventional ERCP. Finally, nine patients (36 %) had complete stent removal either intentionally or by spontaneous dislodgement without any symptoms.

CONCLUSION

 The new plastic stent for EUS-PD was associated with not only short-term technical success but also long-term clinical success in the majority of patients evaluated in this study.

EUS-Guided Transluminal Interventions

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has transitioned from a diagnostic to a therapeutic one over the past 40 years. With the advent of curvilinear array echoendoscopes in the 1990s with an accessory channel, multiple tools and devices have been developed and used for a variety of transluminal interventions. EUS provides a viable option and is becoming the procedure of choice for many interventions, including bile and pancreatic duct drainage, guiding angiotherapy, pancreatic fluid collection management, gallbladder drainage, and creating a gastrojejunostomy. Although reports demonstrate the technical success of these interventions, there is tremendous study heterogeneity and a relative lack of controlled randomized trials, which may limit our understanding of their role and utility. Furthermore, adverse events are relatively common and occasionally severe. Despite the limitations, available data strongly indicate the efficacy of EUS interventions when performed by well-trained endosonographers in carefully selected patients and managed in a multidisciplinary setting.

Management of Benign and Malignant Pancreatic Duct Strictures

The diagnosis and management of pancreatic strictures, whether malignant or benign, remain challenging. The last 2 decades have seen dramatic progress in terms of both advanced imaging and endoscopic therapy. While plastic stents remain the cornerstone of the treatment of benign strictures, the advent of fully covered metal stents has initiated a new wave of interest in calibrating the pancreatic duct with fewer sessions. In malignant disease, palliation remains the priority and further data are necessary before offering systematic pancreatic stenting.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreaticogastrostomy for symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction caused by migrated pancreatic stent

Endoscopic pancreatic stenting has been widely used in various pancreatic conditions. With the increasing use of pancreatic stents, many complications have been recognized. Especially, proximal stent migration presents a serious condition because of subsequent pancreatic duct obstruction, impaired drainage, ductal dilation, and pancreatic pain. Although endoscopic retrieval is the preferred treatment for proximally migrated pancreatic stents, it is not always successful, resulting in conversion to surgery. To date, endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PD) has never been reported for treatment of pancreatic duct obstruction caused by proximally migrated pancreatic stent. We herein describe a case of pancreatic duct rupture and obstruction caused by proximally migrated pancreatic stent that was successfully treated by EUS-guided pancreaticogastrostomy while keeping the former stent in situ after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. We believe that this report adds to the increasing evidence of symptomatic pancreatic duct obstruction being successfully treated by EUS-PD.

Pancreatic Leaks and Fistulae: An Endoscopy-Oriented Classification

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic leaks occur as a complication of upper gastrointestinal surgery, acute pancreatitis, or abdominal trauma. Pancreatic fistulas and leaks are primarily managed conservatively. Overall, conservative measures are successful in more than half of cases. Whenever conservative treatment is not efficient, surgery is usually considered the treatment of choice. Nowadays however, endoscopic treatment is being increasingly considered and employed in many cases, as a surgery sparing intervention.

AIM

To introduce a classification of pancreatic fistulas according to the location of the leak and ductal anatomy and finally propose the best suited endoscopic method to treat the leak according to current literature.

METHODS

We performed an extensive review of the literature on pancreatic fistulae and leaks.

RESULTS

In this paper, we review the various types of leaks and propose a novel endoscopic classification of pancreatic fistulas in order to standardize and improve endoscopic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A proper and precise diagnosis should be made before embarking on endoscopic treatment for pancreatic leaks in order to obtain prime therapeutic results. A multidisciplinary team of interventional endoscopists, pancreatic surgeons, and interventional radiologists is best suited to care for these patients.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Techniques for Accessing and Draining the Biliary System and the Pancreatic Duct

When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) fails to decompress the biliary system or the pancreatic duct, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biliary or pancreatic access and drainage can be used. Data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. The outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage seem equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP, whereas only retrospective studies are available for pancreatic duct drainage. In this article, revision of the technical and clinical status and the current evidence of interventional EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic duct access and drainage are presented.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions

Drainage of obstructed bile duct and pancreatic duct under endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance has evolved into viable techniques suitable for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or altered surgical anatomy. One of the major advantages of EUS guidance is the possibility of multiple access points depending upon patient and ductal anatomy. Unlike ERCP, an approachable papilla is not a requisite for successful EUS-guided biliary or pancreatic ductal drainage. Moreover, as the access is away from the papilla, there is the possibility of reduced pancreatitis. A variety of procedures have become available for EUS-guided drainage, and it is important to develop standard terminology and procedural details. EUS-specific stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents have recently become available, and are likely to impact the outcomes of these procedures. Available data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. Success rate appears to be low for pancreatic duct drainage because of a variety of reasons. Outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage appear equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage appears promising for patients requiring gallbladder drainage but unfit for surgery. Further large controlled studies are needed to evaluate the exact role of these procedures.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography: Where are we headed?

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is an essential endoscopic tool within the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium of gastrointestinal and hepatic diseases. EUS-guided tissue acquisition will develop towards facilitating personalized treatment by obtaining large representative tissue specimens for elaborate immunohistochemical and biomolecular typing of the tumor. Intratumoral or intravascular delivery of drugs potentially offers many advantages over systemic injection. Intratumoral application of radiofrequency ablation and photodynamic therapy show promise but need to be explored further. Appositioning and connecting luminal structures within the gastrointestinal tract using fully covered expandable lumen-apposing stents will expand its indication far beyond the drainage of (infected) fluid collections and EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy is a particularly exciting development that could have significant impact on the management of gastric outlet obstruction.