The EndoRotor, a novel tool for the endoscopic management of pancreatic necrosis

Safety, efficacy, and clinical utility of the 5.1-mm debridement catheter for treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) is a recommended strategy for treatment of walled-off necrosis (WON). DEN uses a variety of devices including the EndoRotor (Interscope, Inc, Northbridge, Mass, USA) debridement catheter. Recently, a 5.1-mm EndoRotor with an increased chamber size and rate of tissue removal was introduced. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of this device.

METHODS

A multicenter cohort study was conducted at 8 institutions including patients who underwent DEN with the 5.1-mm EndoRotor. The primary outcome was the number of DEN sessions needed for WON resolution. Secondary outcomes were the average percentage of reduction in solid WON debris and decrease in WON area per session, total time spent performing EndoRotor therapy for WON resolution, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Sixty-four procedures in 41 patients were included. For patients in which the 5.1-mm EndoRotor catheter was the sole therapeutic modality, an average of 1.6 DEN sessions resulted in WON resolution with an average cumulative time of 85.5 minutes. Of the 21 procedures with data regarding percentage of solid debris, the average reduction was 85% ± 23% per session. Of the 19 procedures with data regarding WON area, the mean area significantly decreased from 97.6 ± 72.0 cm2 to 27.1 ± 35.5 cm2 (P < .001) per session. AEs included 2 intraprocedural dislodgements of lumen-apposing metal stents managed endoscopically and 3 perforations, none of which was related to the EndoRotor. Bleeding was reported in 7 cases, in which none required embolic or surgical therapy and 2 required blood transfusions.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first multicenter retrospective study to investigate the efficacy and safety of the 5.1-mm EndoRotor catheter for WON. Results from this study showed an average of 1.6 DEN sessions were needed to achieve WON resolution with an 85% single-session reduction in solid debris and a 70% single-session decrease in WON area with minimal AEs.

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy: Pilot study of a new dedicated device

Background and study aims Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) represents the first-line treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON). However, DEN has a non-negligible rate of overall adverse events (AE) and is time-consuming due to the lack of dedicated devices. This pilot study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a novel dedicated device for DEN named Necrolit. Patients and methods In this multicenter retrospective analysis,16 patients with WON who underwent DEN using Necrolit were compared with a control group treated with non-dedicated devices. Technical success, AEs, clinical success, number of procedures per patient, procedure time, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Necrolit technical performance indicators were also studied. Results Technical success was obtained in all patients in both groups. In the Necrolit group, the overall AE rate was 10.1% vs. 15.9% in the control group. Clinical success was 100% in the Necrolit group vs. 81.3% in the control group. Patients treated with Necrolit underwent a slightly lower mean number of procedures (4.1 ± 2.3 vs. 5.1 ± 1.9) with comparable mean procedure time (67.8 ± 39 minutes vs. 70.1 ± 32.6 minutes). Mean duration of hospital stay was 39.4 days (± 30.9) in the Necrolit group vs. 43 days (± 29.4) in the control group. Device-related technical performance was rated positively. Conclusions DEN with Necrolit appears feasible and safe.

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.

Endoscopic Necrosectomy

The management of walled-off necrosis has evolved substantially over the past 23 years since its first description. In this article, we review its history and the evidence supporting modern treatment, which is still subject to heterogeneity across centers and among endoscopists. This allows for creativity and customization of what can be an endoscopic marathon. Our typical practice is discussed with image and video guides aimed at improving procedure success.

Direct Endoscopic Necrosectomy of a Recurrent Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis at High Risk for Severe Bleeding: A Hybrid Technique Using a Dedicated Device

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) is a challenging procedure for the debridement of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN), which may be complicated by several adverse events, primarily bleeding which may require radiological embolization or even surgery. The lack of dedicated devices for this purpose largely affects the possibility of safely performing DEN which increases the risk of complications. We present the case of a 63 years-old man who underwent an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of a WOPN, and who was readmitted one month after stent removal with clinical, endoscopic, and radiological signs of infected necrosis involving the splenic artery. A second EUS-guided drainage was performed, with clear visualization of the arterial vessel in the midst of a large amount of solid necrosis. Due to the high risk of major bleeding during DEN, a hybrid procedure in the angiographic room was performed, in order to identify and avoid, under fluoroscopic control, the splenic artery during the entire procedure guide, which was successfully performed using the EndoRotor system. We hereby review the current literature regarding DEN using the EndoRotor system. The case reported, with a literature overview, may help the management of these patients affected by benign but life-threatening conditions which involve a multidisciplinary setting.

From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s

Colonoscopy represents the most widespread and effective tool for the prevention and treatment of early stage preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in the panorama of cancer screening. In the world there are different approaches to the topic of colorectal cancer prevention and screening: different starting ages (45-50 years); different initial screening tools such as fecal occult blood with immunohistochemical or immune-enzymatic tests; recto-sigmoidoscopy; and colonoscopy. The key aspects of this scenario are composed of a proper bowel preparation that ensures a valid diagnostic examination, experienced endoscopist in detection of preneoplastic and early neoplastic lesions and open-minded to upcoming artificial intelligence-aided examination, knowledge in the field of resection of these lesions (from cold-snaring, through endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection, up to advanced tools), and management of complications.

Innovations in GI-endoscopy

Gastrointestinal endoscopy covers both diagnosis and therapy. Due to its diagnostic accuracy and minimal invasiveness, several innovations have been made within the last years including artificial intelligence and endoscopic tumor resection. The present review highlights some of these innovation. In addition, a special focus is set on the experience made by our own research group trying to combine the expertise of endoscopists/ physicians as well as engineers and computer scientists.

Endoscopic Transmural Drainage and Necrosectomy in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Review

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis occurs in 10%–20% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) which is one of the most important acute abdominal diseases that require hospital admission. Pancreatic necrosis is also associated with high mortality and morbidity. In the past 20 years, the treatment of pancreatic necrosis has shifted from open necrosectomy to minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic interventions. With the development of endoscopic techniques, the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic interventions have improved, but there exist several unresolved problems. Currently, there is no unified standard approach for endoscopic treatment of pancreatic necrosis that takes into account local expertise, anatomical features of necrosis, patients’ preferences, and comorbidity profile. We reviewed the current status of endoscopic therapy for acute necrotizing pancreatitis, focusing on the new endoscopic drainage technique and necrosectomy protocol.

Direct Endoscopic Necrosectomy: Timing and Technique

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) is one of the local complications of acute pancreatitis (AP). Several interventional techniques have been developed over the last few years. The purpose of this narrative review is to explore such methodologies, with specific focus on endoscopic drainage and direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN), through evaluation of their indications and timing for intervention. Findings indicated how, after the introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), DEN is becoming the favorite technique to treat WOPN, especially when large solid debris or infection are present. Additionally, DEN is associated with a lower adverse events rate and hospital stay, and with improved clinical outcome.

Multidisciplinary Management of Complicated Pancreatitis: What Every Interventional Radiologist Should Know

Management of acute pancreatitis is challenging in the presence of local complications that include pancreatic and peripancreatic collections and vascular complications. This review, targeted for interventional radiologists, describes minimally invasive endoscopic, image-guided percutaneous, and surgical procedures for management of complicated pancreatitis and provides insight into the procedures' algorithmic application. Local complications are optimally managed in a multidisciplinary team setting that includes advanced endoscopists; pancreatic surgeons; diagnostic and interventional radiologists; and specialists in infectious disease, nutrition, and critical care medicine. Large symptomatic or complicated sterile collections and secondary infected collections warrant drainage or débridement. The drainage is usually delayed for 4-6 weeks unless clinical deterioration warrants early intervention. If collections are accessible by endoscopy, endoscopic procedures are preferred to avoid pancreaticocutaneous fistulas. Image-guided percutaneous drainage is indicated for symptomatic collections that are not accessible for endoscopic drainage or that present in the acute setting before developing a mature wall. Peripancreatic arterial pseudoaneurysms should be embolized before necrosectomy procedures to prevent potentially life-threatening hemorrhage. Surgical procedures are reserved for symptomatic collections that persist despite endoscopic or interventional drainage attempts. Understanding these procedures facilitates their integration by interventional radiologists into the complex longitudinal care of patients with complicated pancreatitis.

[Endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis]

The review is devoted to endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Terminology, indications and options for transluminal drainage procedures and endoscopic sequestrectomy are presented in detail. The authors analyzed the results of numerous studies devoted to effectiveness of endoscopic interventions and possible combination of treatment options. Modern international clinical guidelines indicating the feasibility of endoscopic treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in multi-field specialized centers are considered.

The waterjet necrosectomy device for endoscopic management of pancreatic necrosis: design, development, and preclinical testing (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic intervention has emerged as a first-line option for management of symptomatic pancreatic necrosis, yet endoscopic debridement is limited by the lack of dedicated endoscopic tools intended for this purpose. The objectives of this study were to design and build a prototype necrosectomy device compatible for use with a flexible endoscope and capable of selective tissue fragmentation, and to test the prototype in benchtop and porcine models.

METHODS

A novel prototype, named the waterjet necrosectomy device (WAND), was designed and developed, consisting of a single-use disposable endoscopic waterjet instrument capable of waterjet selection and independent tip articulation while fitting through a 2.8-mm working channel of a standard adult upper GI endoscope. Benchtop, ex vivo, and in vivo (porcine) testing was performed in the initial stages of investigation.

RESULTS

The WAND was capable of delivering a continuous waterjet force with a surface pressure of 0.72 bar at a flow rate of 0.37 L/minute. In phase 1 of testing, the WAND was able to achieve complete fragmentation of gelatin as a surrogate for pancreatic necrosis in benchtop testing. In phase 2 of testing, the WAND was able to achieve complete fragmentation of freshly explanted human pancreatic necrosis. In phase 3 of testing for safety in fresh necropsy swine, use of the WAND resulted in no significant tissue trauma, even when irrigation was applied at closer proximity and for more extended duration than would be anticipated in clinical use.

CONCLUSION

The WAND prototype delivers irrigation capable of fragmenting necrotic debris ex vivo and avoiding trauma to healthy nontarget tissue. Planning is underway for first-in-human studies to assess the efficacy and safety of the WAND for endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy.

Management of pancreatic collections: an update

Pancreatic fluid collections frequently occur in the context of moderate and severe acute pancreatitis, and may also appear as a complication of chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic surgery or trauma. It is essential to adhere to the Atlanta classification nomenclature that subclassifies them into four categories (acute peripancreatic fluid collections, acute necrotic collections, pseudocysts, and walled-off necrosis) since it has an impact on prognosis and management. Pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis are encapsulated pancreatic fluid collections characterized by a surrounding inflammatory wall, which typically develops three to four weeks after the onset of acute pancreatitis. Most pancreatic fluid collections resolve spontaneously and do not require intervention. However, when they become symptomatic or complicated drainage is indicated, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage has become first-line treatment of encapsulated collections. Drainage of pseudocysts is relatively straightforward due to their liquid content. However, in walled-off necrosis the presence of solid necrotic debris can make treatment more challenging and therefore multidisciplinary management in experienced centers is recommended, being a step-up approach the current standard of care. In this review, we aim to address the management of pancreatic fluid collections with an especial focus on endoscopic drainage.

Preliminary report on the safety and utility of a novel automated mechanical endoscopic tissue resection tool for endoscopic necrosectomy: a case series

Background and study aims  Endoscopic drainage of walled-off necrosis and subsequent endoscopic necrosectomy has been shown to be an effective step-up management strategy in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. One of the limitations of this endoscopic approach however, is the lack of dedicated and effective instruments to remove necrotic tissue. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and clinical outcome of the EndoRotor, a novel automated mechanical endoscopic tissue resection tool, in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Methods  Patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis in need of endoscopic necrosectomy after initial cystogastroscopy, were treated using the EndoRotor. Procedures were performed under conscious or propofol sedation by six experienced endoscopists. Technical feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes were evaluated and scored. Operator experience was assessed by a short questionnaire. Results  Twelve patients with a median age of 60.6 years, underwent a total of 27 procedures for removal of infected pancreatic necrosis using the EndoRotor. Of these, nine patients were treated de novo. Three patients had already undergone unsuccessful endoscopic necrosectomy procedures using conventional tools. The mean size of the walled-off cavities was 117.5 ± 51.9 mm. An average of two procedures (range 1 - 7) per patient was required to achieve complete removal of necrotic tissue with the EndoRotor. No procedure-related adverse events occurred. Endoscopists deemed the device to be easy to use and effective for safe and controlled removal of the necrosis. Conclusions  Initial experience with the EndoRotor suggests that this device can safely, rapidly, and effectively remove necrotic tissue in patients with (infected) walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

American Gastroenterological Association Clinical Practice Update: Management of Pancreatic Necrosis

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available evidence and expert recommendations regarding the clinical care of patients with pancreatic necrosis and to offer concise best practice advice for the optimal management of patients with this highly morbid condition.

METHODS

This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This review is framed around the 15 best practice advice points agreed upon by the authors, which reflect landmark and recent published articles in this field. This expert review also reflects the experiences of the authors, who are advanced endoscopists or hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons with extensive experience in managing and teaching others to care for patients with pancreatic necrosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Pancreatic necrosis is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality and optimal management requires a multidisciplinary approach, including gastroenterologists, surgeons, interventional radiologists, and specialists in critical care medicine, infectious disease, and nutrition. In situations where clinical expertise may be limited, consideration should be given to transferring patients with significant pancreatic necrosis to an appropriate tertiary-care center. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Antimicrobial therapy is best indicated for culture-proven infection in pancreatic necrosis or when infection is strongly suspected (ie, gas in the collection, bacteremia, sepsis, or clinical deterioration). Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infection of sterile necrosis is not recommended. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: When infected necrosis is suspected, broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics with ability to penetrate pancreatic necrosis should be favored (eg, carbapenems, quinolones, and metronidazole). Routine use of antifungal agents is not recommended. Computed tomography-guided fine-needle aspiration for Gram stain and cultures is unnecessary in the majority of cases. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: In patients with pancreatic necrosis, enteral feeding should be initiated early to decrease the risk of infected necrosis. A trial of oral nutrition is recommended immediately in patients in whom there is absence of nausea and vomiting and no signs of severe ileus or gastrointestinal luminal obstruction. When oral nutrition is not feasible, enteral nutrition by either nasogastric/duodenal or nasojejunal tube should be initiated as soon as possible. Total parenteral nutrition should be considered only in cases where oral or enteral feeds are not feasible or tolerated. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Drainage and/or debridement of pancreatic necrosis is indicated in patients with infected necrosis. Drainage and/or debridement may be required in patients with sterile pancreatic necrosis and persistent unwellness marked by abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and nutritional failure or with associated complications, including gastrointestinal luminal obstruction; biliary obstruction; recurrent acute pancreatitis; fistulas; or persistent systemic inflammatory response syndrome. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Pancreatic debridement should be avoided in the early, acute period (first 2 weeks), as it has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Debridement should be optimally delayed for 4 weeks and performed earlier only when there is an organized collection and a strong indication. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Percutaneous drainage and transmural endoscopic drainage are both appropriate first-line, nonsurgical approaches in managing patients with walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). Endoscopic therapy through transmural drainage of WON may be preferred, as it avoids the risk of forming a pancreatocutaneous fistula. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Percutaneous drainage of pancreatic necrosis should be considered in patients with infected or symptomatic necrotic collections in the early, acute period (<2 weeks), and in those with WON who are too ill to undergo endoscopic or surgical intervention. Percutaneous drainage should be strongly considered as an adjunct to endoscopic drainage for WON with deep extension into the paracolic gutters and pelvis or for salvage therapy after endoscopic or surgical debridement with residual necrosis burden. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Self-expanding metal stents in the form of lumen-apposing metal stents appear to be superior to plastic stents for endoscopic transmural drainage of necrosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: The use of direct endoscopic necrosectomy should be reserved for those patients with limited necrosis who do not adequately respond to endoscopic transmural drainage using large-bore, self-expanding metal stents/lumen-apposing metal stents alone or plastic stents combined with irrigation. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy is a therapeutic option in patients with large amounts of infected necrosis, but should be performed at referral centers with the necessary endoscopic expertise and interventional radiology and surgical backup. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Minimally invasive operative approaches to the debridement of acute necrotizing pancreatitis are preferred to open surgical necrosectomy when possible, given lower morbidity. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Multiple minimally invasive surgical techniques are feasible and effective, including videoscopic-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, laparoscopic transgastric debridement, and open transgastric debridement. Selection of approach is best determined by pattern of disease, physiology of the patient, experience and expertise of the multidisciplinary team, and available resources. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Open operative debridement maintains a role in the modern management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in cases not amenable to less invasive endoscopic and/or surgical procedures. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: For patients with disconnected left pancreatic remnant after acute necrotizing mid-body necrosis, definitive surgical management with distal pancreatectomy should be undertaken in patients with reasonable operative candidacy. Insufficient evidence exists to support the management of the disconnected left pancreatic remnant with long-term transenteric endoscopic stenting. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: A step-up approach consisting of percutaneous drainage or endoscopic transmural drainage using either plastic stents and irrigation or self-expanding metal stents/lumen-apposing metal stents alone, followed by direct endoscopic necrosectomy, and then surgical debridement is reasonable, although approaches may vary based on the available clinical expertise.