Efficacy and safety of endoscopic drainage versus percutaneous drainage for pancreatic fluid collection; a systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluating safety and efficacy of plastic versus metal stenting in malignant hilar biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Stenting malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) is challenging due to its complex structure, and it is less effective than blockages in the distal bile duct area. Plastic stents (PSs) and metal stents (MSs) are commonly used for stenting MHBO. This study aims to compare the outcomes of PSs and MSs in MHBO patients.

METHODS

We conducted a search of medical databases up to March 2024. Using a fixed-effect model, we analyzed the risk ratios (RRs) of the outcomes between the PS and MS groups. We calculated the RR for clinical and technical success, reinterventions, and adverse events, as well as the hazard ratio (HR) for survival and stent patency.

RESULTS

This analysis includes five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 322 patients (156 in the PS group and 166 in the MS group). Significant differences (P < .05) in favor of the MS group were found in the reinterventions (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.07-3.04), and stent patency (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.90). There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between the PS and MS groups regarding technical success (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94-1.09), clinical success (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.69-1.07), overall survival (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.47-1.05), stent migration (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.08-6.02), stent occlusion (RR1.32, 95% CI 0.97-1.81), and adverse events (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.53-1.20).

CONCLUSION

Both PS and MS are effective for managing MHBO, while MS offers greater efficacy in increased stent patency and lower reintervention rates. Key message What is already known on this topic Metal stents (MSs) and plastic stents (PSs) are used for palliative treatment of malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). MSs significantly reduced the need for reinterventions compared to PSs in patients with MHBO. What this study adds There were no significant differences between MSs and PSs in terms of technical success, clinical success, overall survival, stent migration, stent occlusion, or adverse events. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy The study's findings may prompt researchers to design more targeted studies to further investigate these specific outcomes in MHBO patients. The results encourage endoscopists to consider patient-specific factors, such as life expectancy and preference for minimizing recurrent procedures, when choosing between MSs and PSs for MHBO.

First-intention EUS-guided transluminal drainage with LAMS: an effective and safe method for management of fluid collections after any kind of surgery

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic postoperative collections (PCs) frequently complicate surgery with significant morbidity and mortality. In contrast with pancreatic inflammatory collections, little is known about endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of PCs (EUS-PCD). The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-PCD using lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) as the first-line drainage approach for PCs of any kind.

METHODS

This is a monocentric retrospective study. We retrieved all consecutive symptomatic PCs treated at our center between February 2019 and September 2024. All cases were considered suitable for EUS-PCD after multidisciplinary discussion. Rates of technical success, clinical success, and AEs were calculated.

RESULTS

We retrieved 66 PCs, mainly resulting from pancreatic and lower gastrointestinal tract surgery. The median size of collections was 7.6 cm and infection occurred in 54 of the cases. The median time from surgery to drainage was 19 days (IQR 13-29); in 10 cases, this occurred ≤ 7 days after surgery. 51 drainages were performed from the gastric/duodenal window, 15 transrectally. LAMS were removed after a median time of 18.5 days (IQR 12-27). After removal, double-pigtail stents were placed in 25 PCs and at least one necrosectomy session was performed in 13. Technical success was achieved in 97.0% of cases. Clinical success was achieved in 95.2%; in 3 cases, collection recurrence occurred and retreatment with LAMS was successful. Overall AEs rate was 9.1%, but only one was severe, requiring surgery. Rates of technical and clinical failure and AEs were not affected by surgery type (pancreatic, non-pancreatic), timing of drainage (≤ 7, 7-10, > 10 days), size of collections (≤ 4, 4-10, > 10 cm), and access window (transgastric/duodenal/rectal). Necrosectomy performance was the only predictor of AEs occurrence (OR 6.9, C.I.: 1.1-46.9, p = 0.048) at univariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

First-intention EUS-PCD seems to be a safe and effective treatment, regardless of the origin and size of the collection and drainage timing.

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 Drainage of Intra-abdominal Fluid Collections and Abscesses

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has transitioned from a primarily diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure. EUS-guided drainage of intra-abdominal fluid collections is common practice with vast data in the management of symptomatic, mature pancreatic fluid collections. Evidence has demonstrated that EUS-guided drainage for these intra-abdominal fluid collections is effective with an acceptable safety profile. These techniques are being utilized for the management of other intra-abdominal fluid collections with equally positive results. This review will discuss the utilization of EUS for the management of various intra-abdominal fluid collections, discussing efficacy, safety, and limitations.

Percutaneous Biopsy and Drainage of the Pancreas

Percutaneous biopsy and drainage of pancreatic lesions, though less frequent due to advancements in endoscopic techniques, remain vital skills for interventional radiologists. This review details the indications, options, approaches, and technical considerations for pancreatic biopsy and (peri)pancreatic fluid drainage by examining a comprehensive range of literature. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach is emphasized to ensure optimal patient care and outcomes, highlighting current best practices and recent advancements.

Safety and efficacy of side-by-side versus stent-in-stent stenting for malignant hilar biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

Stenting of the malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) area for bile drainage is challenging. Bilateral stenting techniques of stent-in-stent (SIS) and stent-by-stent (SBS) have shown promising results. This study evaluates the efficacy of different stenting methods for MHBO.

Design

A meta-analysis was performed to determine the efficacy of SIS and SBS stenting strategies for MHBO.

Data sources and methods

Medical databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus, were searched up to August 2023. We selected eligible studies reporting the data on technical and clinical success, adverse events, and incidence of re-obstruction (RO) of SBS and SIS groups in MHBO patients. We compared the outcomes of SBS and SIS groups.

Results

A total of 9 studies comparing the data of 545 patients (268 in the SBS group and 277 in the SIS stenting group) were analyzed. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the odds ratio (OR) of Re-obstruction (RO) 0.87 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.6-1.25), technical success 0.58 (95% CI 0.16-2.11), clinical success 1.13 (95% CI 0.62-2.07), and adverse events 1.53 (95% CI 0.88-2.64). The mean difference in procedure time was -12.25 min (95% CI -18.39, -6.12), and the hazard ratio of stent patency was 1.22 (95% CI 1.01-1.47), favoring SBS, with high heterogeneity (I 2 = 94%). There was no significant difference in HR for survival 1.05 (95% CI 0.95-1.16) with high heterogeneity (I 2 = 84%).

Conclusion

Compared with SIS, SBS showed better stent patency with comparable technical and clinical success and adverse events.

Prospero registration

The registration number for this study on PROSPERO is CRD42024523230.

Endoscopic treatment for early duodenal papillary carcinoma: long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study aims to determine whether endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is a safe and effective treatment for early duodenal papillary carcinoma with long-term follow-up.

METHODS

From June 2012 to September 2022, 48 patients with early duodenal papilloma carcinoma who received endoscopic treatment were included. The histological types, percentage of complete resections, postoperative residuals, adverse events, and recurrences were evaluated.

RESULTS

EP was successful in all patients; 46 were lumped, and two were fragmented, with a 95.8% intact removal rate (46/48). The preoperative biopsy pathological positive rate was 70.8% (34/48). The incidence of early postoperative adverse events (within 1 month after EP) were 16.7% (8/48), including four cases of acute pancreatitis, three cases of delayed bleeding, and one case of acute cholangitis. In addition, 4.2% (2/48) of the late adverse events were bile duct stenosis. After 6 months, the postoperative residual rate was 0%. The median time to recurrence was 17.5 months, and the postoperative recurrence rate was 16.7% (8/48) in patients treated with radiofrequency ablation. The median progression-free survival was 18.6 months (95% CI, 12.1-25.1), and the median overall survival was 121.5 months (95% CI, 105.6-120.9).

CONCLUSIONS

EP is a safe and efficient alternative therapy for early duodenal papillary carcinoma. Endoscopic follow-up and treatment are essential because of the potential for recurrence.

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.

Infected pancreatic necrosis-Current trends in management

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is a common gastrointestinal disease requiring hospitalization and multiple interventions resulting in higher morbidity and mortality. Development of infection in such necrotic tissue is one of the sentinel events in natural history of necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected necrosis develops in around 1/3rd of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis resulting in higher mortality. So, timely diagnosis of infected necrosis using clinical, laboratory and radiological parameters is of utmost importance. Though initial conservative management with antibiotics and organ support system is effective in some patients, a majority of patients still requires drainage of the collection by various modalities. Mode of drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis depends on various factors such as the clinical status of the patient, location and characteristics of collection and availability of the expertise and includes endoscopic, percutaneous and minimally invasive or open surgical approaches. Endoscopic drainage has proved to be a game changer in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis in the last decade with rapid evolution in procedure techniques, development of novel metal stent and dedicated necrosectomy devices for better clinical outcome. Despite widespread adoption of endoscopic transluminal drainage of pancreatic necrosis with excellent clinical outcomes, peripheral collections are still not amenable for endoscopic drainage and in such scenario, the role of percutaneous catheter drainage or minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy cannot be understated. In a nutshell, the management of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis involves a multi-disciplinary team including a gastroenterologist, an intensivist, an interventional radiologist and a surgeon for optimum clinical outcomes.

ERCP endoscopic minimally invasive treatment of acute suppurative obstructive cholangitis: A study of 47 patients

The primary objective of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic therapy for acute obstructive suppurative cholangitis (AOSC) in patients with different underlying conditions. The present study comprised 47 patients diagnosed with AOSC, with a mean age of 70±14 years. Minimally invasive endoscopic treatments, including endoscopic duodenal papillary sphincterotomy, endoscopic duodenal nasobiliary drainage and/or placement of an endobiliary duct stent drainage tube, were performed. Variations in the levels of the white blood cell count, liver function, procalcitonin (PCT) and carbohydrate antigen-199 (CA199) were examined, compared and evaluated both prior to and following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Among the 47 patients, 45 had a high fever, although their body temperature returned to normal after 7 days of ERCP treatment. The infection was difficult to control completely in two cases, including one case of biliary anastomosis secondary tumor with stenosis and AOSC and another case of an elderly patient with multiple choledocholithiasis complicated with sepsis. Within 7 days following treatment, the abdominal pain was resolved in 27 patients and jaundice subsided in 29 patients. On the 7th day after endoscopic treatment, the blood leukocyte, liver function, PCT and CA-199 parameters of all patients were significantly improved compared with those at admission. A total of 35 bile cultures yielded positive results, with Escherichia coli accounting for 11 cases (31.4%), Klebsiella pneumoniae accounting for 7 cases (20%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa accounting for 5 cases (14.3%), Enterococcus faecus accounting for 4 cases (11.4%) and other strains making up the remaining 17 cases. No serious complications were encountered with these patients, such as perforation, bleeding, severe pancreatitis or mortality, following ERCP. In conclusion, ERCP has been shown to be a safe and effective minimally invasive treatment method for elderly patients with AOSC, yielding a high rate of success.

Endoscopic versus minimally invasive surgical approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Acute pancreatitis is a common condition of the digestive system, but sometimes it develops into severe cases. In about 10-20% of patients, necrosis of the pancreas or its periphery occurs. Although most have aseptic necrosis, 30% of cases will develop infectious necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) requires a critical treatment approach. Minimally invasive surgical approach (MIS) and endoscopy are the management methods. This meta-analysis compares the outcomes of MIS and endoscopic treatments.

METHODS

We searched a medical database until December 2022 to compare the results of endoscopic and MIS procedures for INP. We selected eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported treatment complications for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comparing a total of 284 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 139 patients underwent MIS, while 145 underwent endoscopic procedures. The results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) in the risk ratios (RRs) for major complications (RR: 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.97), new onset of organ failure (RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.82), surgical site infection (RR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07-0.92), fistula or perforation (RR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64), and pancreatic fistula (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05-0.45). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for the endoscopic group compared to the MIS group, with a mean difference of 6.74 days (95% CI: -12.94 to -0.54). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the RR for death, bleeding, incisional hernia, percutaneous drainage, pancreatic endocrine deficiency, pancreatic exocrine deficiency, or the need for enzyme use.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management of INP performs better compared to surgical treatment due to its lower complication rate and higher patient life quality.

Correlation between prescribing doctor attributes and intestinal cleanliness in colonoscopy: a study of 22522 patients

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the correlation between different attributes of doctors who prescribe colonoscopies and the cleanliness of the intestine to guide the development of colonoscopy application protocols.

METHODS

Data on colonoscopy cases conducted in the gastroenterology department of Hangzhou First People's Hospital between April 2018 and March 2021 were collected. The gender, age, professional attributes of the prescribing doctors, and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score were recorded. In addition, the correlation between the prescribing doctors' characteristics and the intestine's cleanliness was analyzed.

RESULTS

The study included 22,522 patients with a mean BBPS score of 6.83 ± 1.94. There were 16,459 male and 6,063 female doctors with similar BBPS scores (p = 0.212). The study found no significant difference in BBPS scores between 19,338 internist and 3,184 non-internist (p = 0.154). However, BBPS scores differed significantly between 18,168 gastroenterologists and 4,354 non-gastroenterologists (p = 0.016) and between 19,990 intestinal-related specialties(gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery) and 2,532 non-intestinal-related specialties (p = 0.000). In addition, BBPS scores were significantly different between 18,126 prescribing endoscopiests and 4,396 non-endoscopiests (p = 0.014). However, there was no significant difference in BBPS scores among doctors of different ages (p = 0.190). The study found significant differences in BBPS scores between male and female patients and those under or over 40 years (p = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

To improve colonoscopy preparation quality, priority should be given to doctors in gastroenterology, intestinal-related specialties, and endoscopiests. Their expertise may result in better education and improved bowel cleanliness.