Upfront endoscopic necrosectomy or step-up endoscopic approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis (DESTIN): a single-blinded, multicentre, randomised trial

Necrosectomy and its timing in relation to clinical outcomes of EUS-guided treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided transmural drainage with on-demand endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) is increasingly used to manage walled-off necrosis (WON). It has not been fully elucidated how EN and its timing are correlated with treatment outcomes compared with the drainage-based approach.

METHODS

Within a multi-institutional cohort of 423 patients with pancreatic fluid collections, including 227 patients with WON, 153 patients were identified who received the step-up treatment after the initial EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic WON; this included 102 EN patients and 51 non-EN (drainage) patients. Using the competing-risks multivariable proportional hazards regression model with adjustment for potential confounders, we calculated subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) for clinical treatment success (WON resolution) according to use of EN and its timing.

RESULTS

Compared with drainage alone, the EN-based treatment was associated with a shorter time to clinical success with a multivariable SHR of 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.46). Despite a higher risk of procedure-related bleeding in the EN group, there were no differences in the rates of severe adverse events (7.8% vs 5.9% in the EN and non-EN groups, respectively) or mortality (6.9% vs 9.8%). In the EN-treated patients, the timing of EN was not statistically significantly associated with the time to clinical success (Ptrend = .34).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of symptomatic WON, the use of EN in addition to drainage procedures was associated with earlier disease resolution. Further research is desired to determine the optimal timing of initiating EN considering a risk-benefit balance and cost-effectiveness.

Endoscopic management of infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Advancing through standardization

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) remains a life-threatening complication of acute pancreatitis. Despite advancements such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage, lumen-apposing metal stents, and protocolized step-up strategies, the clinical practice remains heterogeneous, with variability in endoscopic strategies, procedural timing, device selection, and adjunctive techniques contributing to inconsistent outcomes. This review synthesizes current evidence to contribute to a structured framework integrating multidisciplinary team decision-making, advanced imaging (three-dimensional reconstruction, contrast-enhanced computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging), EUS assessment, and biomarker-driven risk stratification (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin) to optimize patient selection, intervention timing, and complication management. Key standardization components include endoscopic assessment and procedural strategies, optimal timing of intervention, personalized approaches for complex pancreatic collections, and techniques to reduce the number of endoscopic debridements and mitigate complications. This work aims to enhance clinical outcomes, minimize practice heterogeneity, and establish a foundation for future research and guideline development in endoscopic management of INP.

Endoscopic interventions for managing pancreatic fluid collections associated with acute pancreatitis: A state-of-the-art review (with videos)

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease, which may be associated with pancreatic and peri-pancreatic necrosis and development of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). Interventions in acute pancreatitis have evolved over the years with a paradigm shift from open surgical drainage and necrosectomy to minimally invasive approaches. Depending on the presence of necrosis, the PFCs may be acute necrotic collections or acute pancreatic fluid collections, which evolve over a period of three to four weeks to walled-off necrosis and pseudocysts, respectively. Patients with symptomatic and infected PFCs require drainage. In general, drainage should be delayed beyond three to four weeks when the collection wall has matured and the necrotic debris is liquefied. However, some patients may merit early drainage (within the first three to four weeks), if they have suspected infected pancreatic necrosis and worsening organ dysfunction despite antibiotics and supporting therapy. Endoscopic transmural drainage and necrosectomy have now emerged as the most favored treatment modality in suitable pancreatic collections located predominantly in the lesser sac. Being minimally invasive, per-oral endoscopic direct necrosectomy is as effective as surgical necrosectomy in patients with infected necrotic collections but with fewer adverse events. Percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy is an important addition to our armamentarium for laterally placed collections as an effective alternative to surgical video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The current review provides an overview of the evolution, indications, approaches, techniques and outcomes of endoscopic interventions in the management of pancreatic fluid collections associated with acute pancreatitis. Future direction for better outcomes has been highlighted.

The Multidisciplinary Approach to Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is a common gastrointestinal condition, primarily caused by gallstones and alcohol abuse, with other causes including hypertriglyceridemia, trauma, infections, etc. While most cases are mild and self-limiting, up to 20% of patients develop severe pancreatitis with pancreatic necrosis, increasing the risk of multi-organ failure and mortality. Conservative management involves fluid resuscitation, nutritional support, and antibiotics for infected peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). When PFCs are infected or symptoms persist, invasive interventions such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage or percutaneous drainage are recommended. Dual modalities (endoscopic and percutaneous drainage) offer better outcomes with fewer complications. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy is considered for patients who do not improve with drainage. A multidisciplinary team, including endoscopists, interventional radiologists, surgeons, and specialists, is essential for optimal management of severe necrotizing pancreatitis.

Approach to the Diagnosis and Management of Infected Pancreatic Necrosis: A Narrative Review

Infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is a dreaded complication of acute necrotizing pancreatitis and is linked to persistent organ failure, sepsis, and increased morbidity and mortality. Clinical indicators of IPN include fever, clinical deterioration, and worsening inflammatory markers. The diagnosis of IPN is based on clinical signs, microbiological confirmation, and radiological evidence, with contrast-enhanced CT being the preferred imaging modality. In the absence of tests with high sensitivity, a high clinical suspicion is required for early recognition and treatment. Although there is no way to prevent IPN, a systematic management approach with parenteral antibiotics, nutritional management, and minimally invasive procedures has become the cornerstone of the treatment. The step-up approach includes minimally invasive procedures that minimize procedure-related complications and are associated with improved outcomes. The percutaneous route remains the most common route for drainage, while endoscopic interventions are preferred for perigastric or periduodenal encapsulated collections. The use of lumen-apposing metal stents is associated with excellent outcomes in cases of infected walled-off necrosis. Patients with significant quantities of infected necrosis may benefit from direct or percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy. Minimally invasive surgical techniques followed by open surgeries are reserved for patients who do not improve with percutaneous or endoscopic necrosectomies. The outcome can be maximized through a multidisciplinary approach by a team of interventional radiologists, advanced therapeutic endoscopists, and surgeons.

Practical management of severe acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) represents one of the most common reasons for hospital admission and intensive care treatment in internal medicine. The incidence of AP is increasing, posing significant financial burden on healthcare systems due to the necessity for frequent medical interventions. Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is a potentially life-threatening condition with substantial morbidity and mortality. The management of SAP requires prolonged hospitalization and the expertise of a multidisciplinary team, comprising emergency physicians, intensivists, internists, gastroenterologists, visceral surgeons, and experts in nutrition, infectious disease, endoscopy, as well as diagnostic and interventional radiology. Effective management and beneficial patient outcomes depend on continuous interdisciplinary collaboration. This review synthesizes recent evidence guiding the practical management of SAP, with a particular focus on emergency and intensive care settings. Both established as well as new diagnostic and therapeutic paradigms are highlighted, including workup, risk stratification, fluid management, analgesia, nutrition, organ support, imaging modalities and their timing, along with anti-infective strategies. Furthermore, the review explores interventions for local and vascular complications of SAP, with particular attention to the indications, timing and selection between endoscopic (both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)), percutaneous and surgical approaches. Similarly, the management of biliary AP due to obstructive gallstones, including the imaging, timing of ERCP and cholecystectomy, are discussed. By integrating new evidence with relevant guidance for everyday clinical practice, this review aims to enhance the interdisciplinary approach essential for improving outcomes in SAP management.

Endoscopic Step-Up Approach in Management of Necrotizing Pancreatitis

The endoscopic step-up approach in the management of necrotizing pancreatitis involves sequential steps of intervention at different time points in the clinical course of the disease. EUS -guided drainage of walled-off necrosis is the first step of the endoscopic step-up approach. Lumen-apposing metal stents are preferred over plastic stents for safe and effective drainage because of their wide caliber. Successive steps in the endoscopic step-up approach include direct endoscopic necrosectomy and/or irrigation using naso-cystic tube in symptomatic patients, primarily based on necrotic debris characteristics. Minimally invasive percutaneous radiological and/or surgical drainage are considered when endoscopic drainage is not feasible or successful.

Heterogeneity in Pancreatitis: Recognizing Heterogeneity and Its Role in the Management of Pancreatitis Summary of a National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Workshop

ABSTRACT

Both the clinical management and study of recurrent acute pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis are complicated by significant heterogeneity in the etiology, mechanisms, symptoms, and complications of pancreatitis. The National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease recently convened a workshop to address current knowledge and knowledge gaps in the field. Preclinical models that better replicate human disease are important for development of new therapies. Pain is often the most common and most difficult symptom to treat, as the causes are multifactorial and effective treatment may vary depending on whether pain is neuropathic or nociceptive in origin, and the placebo effect can complicate evaluation of the efficacy of medical and procedural interventions. Novel technologies like functional magnetic resonance imaging and virtual reality may offer novel means for assessing and treating pain, respectively. Clinical trial designs will need to consider best approaches to addressing the heterogeneity of chronic pancreatitis, including careful attention to designing eligibility criteria, and establishing accepted and validated core outcomes criteria for the field. The latter may be informed by consensus in pain research. Recruitment of participants into clinical trials has been challenging, often requiring multiple centers. Establishment of a clinical trials network would facilitate greater opportunities for therapeutic trials in pancreatitis.

Controversies in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided management of walled-off necrosis

Walled-off necrosis (WON) develops as local complications after acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Although less invasive interventions such as endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided drainage and endoscopic necrosectomy are selected over surgical interventions, delayed and step-up interventions are still preferred to avoid procedure-related adverse events. However, there is a controversy about the appropriate timing of drainage and subsequent necrosectomy. The advent of large-caliber lumen-apposing metal stents has also brought about potential advantages of proactive interventions, which still needs investigation in future trials. When step-up interventions of necrosectomy and additional drainage are necessary, a structured or protocoled approach for WON has been reported to improve safety and effectiveness of endoscopic and/or percutaneous treatment, but has not been standardized yet. Finally, long-term outcomes such as recurrence of WON, pancreatic endocrine, and exocrine function are increasingly investigated in association with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. In this review we discuss current evidence and controversy on EUS-guided management of WON.

Updates on therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided therapeutic interventions have been developed for the management of benign and malignant pancreaticobiliary and gastrointestinal luminal pathology. Recent high-quality evidence is increasingly validating these interventions and positioning them within evidence-based therapeutic algorithms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Here we review therapeutic EUS-guided interventions including pancreatic fluid collection drainage, gastroenterostomy, biliary drainage, pancreatic duct drainage and gallbladder drainage. The most up-to-date high-quality evidence supporting these interventions is presented including comparative data with other conventional treatment options. Newer emerging interventions such as tumor ablation are also reviewed. Current controversies and future avenues for research are discussed. The key role of EUS-guided interventions in managing pancreaticobiliary pathology in patients with a surgically altered anatomy is highlighted.

SUMMARY

Multiple EUS therapeutic interventions have evolved from experimental or rescue options to now well established first- and second-line interventions over other endoscopic, percutaneous and surgical alternatives with the support of high-quality data. Further research is needed to better optimize patient selection and guide long term postintervention follow-up.

Therapeutic endoscopy: Recent updates and future directions

The landscape of therapeutic endoscopy has undergone a remarkable evolution over the past few decades, carving out a niche that merges innovative technology with advanced clinical practice. As we venture further into the 21st century, the horizon of this field continues to expand, driven by rapid advancements in technology and a deeper understanding of gastrointestinal pathology. This review article aims to shed light on the recent advances and future trajectories of therapeutic endoscopy, focusing on pivotal areas such as third space endoscopy, endoscopic resection techniques, artificial endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), the integration of artificial intelligence (AI), and endoscopic anti-reflux therapies.

Clinical update on acute cholecystitis and biliary pancreatitis: between certainties and grey areas

Acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) and acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) are significant complications of gallstone disease. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of current management practices for ACC and ABP. The Tokyo Guidelines (TG) and World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines recommend early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) as the treatment of choice for ACC. High-risk patients may benefit from alternative treatments like biliary drainage, with emerging techniques such as endoscopic drainage showing promise. ABP requires prompt diagnosis and intervention. The Revised Atlanta Classification (RAC) criteria are used for diagnosis, with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and cholecystectomy as primary treatments. Minimally invasive approaches are preferred for managing complications like infected pancreatic necrosis, with the endoscopic step-up method showing superior outcomes. The management of ACC and ABP continues to evolve. Future research is needed to refine guidelines further and address existing controversies, ultimately improving patient outcomes in these acute biliary conditions.

Practical approach to acute pancreatitis: from diagnosis to the management of complications

The purpose of this review is to provide a practical guide for the clinical care of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) from the management of the early phases of disease to the treatment of local complications. AP is one of the most frequent causes of gastroenterological admission in emergency departments. It is characterized by a dynamic and unpredictable course and in its most severe forms, is associated with organ dysfunction and/or local complications, requiring intensive care with significant morbidity and mortality. Initial therapy includes adequate fluid resuscitation, nutrition, analgesia, and when necessary critical care support. In recent years, the development of minimally invasive tailored treatments for local complications, such as endoscopic drainage, has improved patients' acceptance and outcomes. Despite this, the management of AP remains a challenge for clinicians. The present review was conducted by the authors, who formulated specific questions addressing the most critical and current aspects of the clinical course of AP with the aim of providing key messages.

The i-EUS consensus on the management of pancreatic fluid collections - Part 1

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), including pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), are common complications of pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Historically, the treatment of these conditions has relied on surgical and radiological approaches; however, it has later shifted toward an endoscopy-based approach. With the development of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures have become the standard approach for PFC drainage. However, there is still limited consensus on several aspects of the multidisciplinary management of PFCs. The interventional endoscopy and ultrasound (i-EUS) group is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with special interest in biliopancreatic interventional endoscopy, especially interventional EUS. This manuscript describes the first part of the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance on aspects such as indications for treating PFCs, the timing of intervention, and different technical strategies for managing patients with PFCs.

Early versus delayed necrosectomy in pancreatic necrosis: A population-based cohort study on readmission, healthcare utilization, and in-hospital mortality

BACKGROUND

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is a severe and life-threatening condition. It poses a considerable challenge for clinicians due to its complex nature and the high risk of complications. Several minimally invasive and open necrosectomy procedures have been developed. Despite advancements in treatment modalities, the optimal timing to perform necrosectomy lacks consensus.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of necrosectomy timing on patients with pancreatic necrosis in the United States.

METHODS

A national retrospective cohort study was conducted using the 2016-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients with non-elective admissions for pancreatic necrosis were identified. The participants were divided into two groups based on the necrosectomy timing: The early group received intervention within 48 hours, whereas the delayed group underwent the procedure after 48 hours. The various intervention techniques included endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical necrosectomy. The major outcomes of interest were 30-day readmission rates, healthcare utilization, and inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1309 patients with pancreatic necrosis were included. After propensity score matching, 349 cases treated with early necrosectomy were matched to 375 controls who received delayed intervention. The early cohort had a 30-day readmission rate of 8.6% compared to 4.8% in the delayed cohort (P = 0.040). Early necrosectomy had lower rates of mechanical ventilation (2.9% vs 10.9%, P < 0.001), septic shock (8% vs 19.5%, P < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (1.1% vs 4.3%, P = 0.01). Patients in the early intervention group incurred lower healthcare costs, with median total charges of $52202 compared to $147418 in the delayed group. Participants in the early cohort also had a relatively shorter median length of stay (6 vs 16 days, P < 0.001). The timing of necrosectomy did not significantly influence the risk of 30-day readmission, with a hazard ratio of 0.56 (95% confidence interval: 0.31-1.02, P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that early necrosectomy is associated with better clinical outcomes and lower healthcare costs. Delayed intervention does not significantly alter the risk of 30-day readmission.

Effect of the Step-Jump Approach in Infected Pancreatic Necrosis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Purpose

The effects of the step-jump approach on the survival and prognosis of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) patients have not yet been determined.

Patients and Methods

Between November 2018 and June 2023, 188 patients were included in this study. There were 144 patients in the step-up group (the SU group) and 44 in the step-jump group (the SJ group). In the SU group, patients successfully treated with percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) alone were classified into the SU-1 group (n=101), while those requiring additional surgery after PCD were categorized into the SU-2 group (n=43). In the SJ group, patients who underwent minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) without PCD were assigned to the SJ-1 group (n=34), whereas those who initially underwent PCD followed by immediate open surgery were placed in the SJ-2 group (n=10). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to mitigate bias.

Results

After PSM, a total of 34 pairs were successfully matched. A comparison of the SU group with the SJ-1 group (upfront MIN without PCD) revealed similar mortality rates (P=0.239); however, the incidences of multiple drug-resistant organisms (MDROs) (P=0.029) and surgical complications (P<0.001) were significantly lower in the SJ-1 group. After comparing the SU-2 and SJ-2 groups (patients who underwent direct open necrosectomy without MIN after PCD failure), the incidences of surgical complications and MDRO in the SJ-2 group were significantly lower (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with the step-up approach, the step-jump approach is safer and more effective and can significantly reduce the incidence of MDRO and surgical complications.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. Endoscopic Ultrasound Group, Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) Clinical Guidelines

Acute pancreatitis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. It can develop complications such as fluid collections and necrosis. Infection of necrosis occurs in about 20-40 % of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with organ failure and worse prognosis. In the past few years the treatment of pancreatic collections has shifted from open surgery to minimally invasive techniques such as endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage. These guidelines from a selection of experts among the Endoscopic Ultrasound Group, Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) are intended to provide advice on the management of pancreatic collections based on a thorough review of the available scientific evidence. It also reflects the experience and clinical practice of the authors, who are advanced endoscopists or clinical pancreatologists with extensive experience in managing patients with acute pancreatitis.

Consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis from a Chinese multiple disciplinary team expert panel

Objective

To prepare a set of practice guidelines to standardize the entire process, from diagnosis to treatment and follow-up, for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis.

Methods

Thirty-six experts in the fields of digestive endoscopy, pancreatic surgery, interventional radiology, and others presented their opinions via discussions in online conferences by referring to the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes principles and then reviewed the evidence and statements using the Delphi method to reach a consensus. The consensus of >80% was finally achieved for the items.

Results

The experts discussed and reached a consensus on 29 statements including 10 categories: (1) definition and classification, (2) imaging and endoscopic diagnosis, (3) therapeutic implications, (4) surgical therapy, (5) percutaneous catheter drainage, (6) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, (7) EUS-guided drainage, (8) stent selection for EUS-guided drainage, (9) complication related to stents for cyst drainage, and (10) drug treatment and follow-up.

Conclusion

This consensus based on the clinical experience of experts in various fields and international evidence-based medicine further standardizes the multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment processes for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage: Where are we?

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) result from injury to the pancreas from acute or chronic pancreatitis, surgery, or trauma. Management of these collections has evolved over the last 2 decades. The choice of interventions includes percutaneous, endoscopic, minimally invasive surgery, or a combined approach. Endoscopic drainage is the drainage of PFCs by creating an artificial communication between the collection and gastrointestinal lumen that is maintained by placing a stent across the fistulous tract. In this editorial, we endeavored to update the current status of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of PFCs.

Postponed endoscopic necrosectomy results in a lower rate of additional intervention for infected walled-off necrosis

Although endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) is more frequently used to manage walled-off necrosis (WON), there is still debate over how much time should pass between the initial stent placement and the first necrosectomy. This study aims to determine the effect of performing EN within different timings after placing the initial stent on clinical outcomes for WON. A retrospective study on infected WON patients compared an early necrosectomy within one week after the initial stent placement with a necrosectomy that was postponed after a week. The primary outcomes compared the rate of clinical success and the need for additional intervention after EN to achieve WON resolution. 77 patients were divided into early and postponed necrosectomy groups. The complete resolution of WON within six months of follow-up was attained in 73.7% and 74.3% of patients in both the early and postponed groups. The early group tended to a greater need for additional intervention after EN (26.8% early necrosectomy vs. 8.3% postponed necrosectomy, P = 0.036). Our study does not demonstrate that early necrosectomy is superior to postponed necrosectomy in terms of clinical success rate, total count of necrosectomy procedures, procedure-related complications, length of hospitalization and prognosis. Conversely, patients in the postponed group received fewer additional interventions.

Factors affecting the time interval of endoscopic ultrasound-guided endoscopic necrosectomy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: A retrospective single-center study in China

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided endoscopic necrosectomy is an effective and minimally invasive treatment for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). This study investigated the factors affecting the time interval of EUS-guided WON necrosectomy.

METHODS

Patients who received EUS-guided necrosectomy in the Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University in the past 5 years were retrospectively analyzed. Data including general information, etiology, blood biochemical indexes, physical signs, CT severity grade, location, size, solid necrotic ratio, type and number of stents, and immediate necrosectomy were collected to explore the relationships between these factors and the interval of endoscopic necrosectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 51 WON patients were included. No significant correlation has been noted between the endoscopic debridement interval and the following indexes, including the patients' general information, the etiology of pancreatitis, blood biochemical indexes (leukocyte count, neutrophil percentage, C-reactive protein), preoperative fever, and WON's location and size, type and number of stents, and whether immediate necrosectomy. However, there were significant differences between the debridement interval and the modified CT Severity Index (MCTSI) (p < 0.001), the solid necrotic ratio of WON (p < 0.001) before the intervention, postoperative fever (p = 0.038), C-reactive protein increasing (p = 0.012) and fever before reintervention (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-measured solid necrotic ratio, the MCTSI, postoperative fever, C-reactive protein increase, and fever before reintervention in patients affect the time interval of EUS-guided endoscopic necrosectomy in WON patients. These five indicators may be promisingly effective in predicting and managing endoscopic necrosectomy intervals.

The contribution of EUS to the management of endoscopic and surgical complications

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) stands as a remarkable innovation in the realm of gastroenterology and its allied disciplines. EUS has evolved to such an extent that it now assumes a pivotal role in both diagnosis and therapeutics. In addition, it has developed as a tool which is also capable of addressing complications arising from endoscopic and surgical procedures. This minimally invasive technique combines endoscopy with high-frequency ultrasound, facilitating, high-resolution images of the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent structures. Complications within the gastrointestinal tract, whether stemming from endoscopic or surgical procedures, frequently arise due to disruption in the integrity of the gastrointestinal tract wall. While these complications are usually promptly detected, there are instances where their onset is delayed. EUS plays a dual role in the management of these complications. Firstly, in its ability to assess and increasingly to definitively manage complications through drainage procedures. It is increasingly employed to manage post-surgical collections, abscesses biliary strictures and bleeding. Its high-resolution imaging capability allows precise real-time visualisation of these complications.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Not All Queries Are Already Solved

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are well-known complications of acute pancreatitis. The overinfection of these collections leads to a worsening of the prognosis with an increase in the morbidity and mortality rate. The primary strategy for managing infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or symptomatic PFCs is a minimally invasive step-up approach, with endosonography-guided (EUS-guided) transmural drainage and debridement as the preferred and less invasive method. Different stents are available to drain PFCs: self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), double pigtail stents (DPPSs), or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs). In particular, LAMSs are useful when direct endoscopic necrosectomy is needed, as they allow easy access to the necrotic cavity; however, the rate of adverse events is not negligible, and to date, the superiority over DPPSs is still debated. Moreover, the timing for necrosectomy, the drainage technique, and the concurrent medical management are still debated. In this review, we focus attention on indications, timing, techniques, complications, and particularly on aspects that remain under debate concerning the EUS-guided drainage of PFCs.

Indications, Techniques and Future Perspectives of Walled-off Necrosis Management

Necrotizing pancreatitis is a complex clinical condition burdened with significant morbidity and mortality. In recent years, the huge progress of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has allowed a shift in the management of pancreatic necrotic collections from surgical/percutaneous approaches to mini-invasive endoscopic internal drainage and debridement procedures. The development of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs), devices specifically dedicated to transmural EUS interventions, further prompted the diffusion of such techniques. Several studies have reported excellent outcomes of endoscopic interventions, in terms of technical success, clinical efficacy and safety compared to surgical interventions, and thus endoscopic drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) has become a fundamental tool for the management of such conditions. Despite these advancements, some critical unresolved issues remain. Endoscopic therapeutic approaches to WON are still heterogeneous among different centers and experts. A standardized protocol on indication, timing and technique of endoscopic necrosectomy is still lacking, and experts often adopt a strategy based on personal experience more than robust data from well-conducted studies. In this review, we will summarize the available evidence on endoscopic management of WON and will discuss some unanswered questions in this rapidly evolving field.