Metal Versus Plastic Stents for Pancreatic Fluid Collection Drainage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the 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 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 from the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) have the purpose 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.

EUS-guided interventional therapies for pancreatic diseases

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an integrated diagnostic technique merging endoscope and ultrasound to examine the digestive system. EUS has emerged as a primary diagnostic method for pancreatic diseases due to its distinctive benefits. Over the past four decades, EUS has undergone a transformation, shifting its role from primarily diagnostic to increasingly therapeutic. Additionally, in recent years, EUS has emerged as an increasingly prominent adjunctive or alternative approach to conventional surgical interventions. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of current technological approaches in the treatment of pancreatic diseases. The dynamic interplay with diverse therapeutic approaches has reinvigorated EUS and shaped its trajectory in the management of pancreatic diseases.

Inverse association of hospital volume with in-hospital mortality rate of patients receiving EUS-guided interventions for pancreatic fluid collections

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided interventions currently serve as first-line treatment for symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) but require high-level expertise and multidisciplinary care. Hospital caseload has not been fully examined in relation to clinical outcomes of patients with endoscopically managed PFCs.

METHODS

Using the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database (a Japanese nationwide inpatient database), we identified 4053 patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of PFCs at 486 hospitals between 2010 and 2020 and examined an association of hospital volume (average annual number of cases at a hospital) with in-hospital mortality. Associations with bleeding, length of stay, and total costs were examined as secondary analyses. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted with adjustment for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The hospital volume was inversely associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality (Ptrend < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for in-hospital mortality comparing the extreme quintiles of hospital volume was .17 (95% confidence interval, .09-.33). A restricted cubic spline analysis yielded no statistically significant evidence on the nonlinear relationship (Pnonlinearity = .19). The types of stents (plastic vs lumen-apposing metal stent) seemed to have no effect modification on the volume-mortality relationship (Pinteraction = .58). Higher hospital volume was also associated with lower risk of bleeding, shorter length of stay, and lower medical costs of inpatient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher hospital volume was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality of patients receiving EUS-guided treatment of PFCs. A further investigation is warranted to justify the volume-based selective referral of the patients.

Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) Versus Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background and aim Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is the gold standard approach for the treatment of encapsulated pancreatic collections (EPCs) including pseudocyst and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), and is associated with an equivalent clinical efficacy to surgical drainage with fewer complications and less morbidity. Drainage may be achieved via several types of stents including a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS). However, to date there have been no randomized trials to compare these devices. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the SEMS versus LAMS for EUS-guided drainage of EPCs. Methods A phase IIB randomized trial was designed to compare the SEMS versus LAMS for the treatment of EPCs. Technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and procedure time were evaluated. A sample size of 42 patients was determined. Results There was no difference between the two groups in technical (LAMS 80.95% vs 100% SEMS, p=0.107), clinical (LAMS 85.71% vs 95.24% SEMS, p=0.606) or radiological success (LAMS 92.86% vs 83.33% SEMS, p=0.613). There was no difference in AEs including stent migration rate and mortality. The procedure time was longer in the LAMS group (mean time 43.81 min versus 24.43 min, p=0.001). There was also a difference in the number of intra-procedure complications (5 LAMS vs 0 SEMS, p=0.048). Conclusion SEMS and LAMS have similar technical, clinical, and radiological success as well as AEs. However, SEMS has a shorter procedure time and fewer intra-procedure complications compared to non-electrocautery-enhanced LAMS in this phase IIB randomized controlled trial (RCT). The choice of the type of stent used for EUS drainage of EPCs should consider device availability, costs, and personal and local experience.

Development of devices for interventional endoscopic ultrasound for the management of pancreatobiliary diseases

A variety of devices have been developed for interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). EUS-guided drainage of the bile duct and pancreatic duct, as well as fluid collection adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract, is performed by a procedure involving puncture, guidewire manipulation, tract dilation, and stent placement. Devices specialized for interventional EUS are being developed for each step of the procedure. Mechanical dilators such as bougie, balloon, and electrocautery dilators are used for tract dilation. Various types of plastic stents, self-expandable metal stents, and lumen-apposing metal stents specifically designed for interventional EUS are now available, including one-step devices developed to improve the efficacy and safety of interventional EUS. In addition, radiofrequency ablation and the placement of fiducial markers and radioactive seeds under EUS guidance are now becoming established for pancreatic neoplasms. Such development of specialized devices has expanded the indications for interventional EUS, increased the success rate, and lowered the adverse event rate.

The use of endoscopic ultrasound in the management of post-surgical and pancreatic fluid collections

Fluid collections after abdominal surgeries, particularly pancreatic surgeries, are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Up until recently, percutaneous drainage was the first line therapy, but not without disadvantages, including high maintenance, risk of infection and chronic fistulas, electrolyte losses, and impact on quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of post-surgical fluid collections (PSFCs) is safe and effective, carrying similar success, adverse event (AE), and recurrence rates as percutaneous drainage. Despite limited data on EUS-guided drainage of PSFCs, especially with regards to direct comparisons to percutaneous drainage, EUS management of these collections is becoming the first-line approach in many expert institutions.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic ultrasound drainage for the management of fluid collections after pancreas surgery

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated systematically. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the outcomes of EUSD in patients with PFC after pancreas surgery and compare it with percutaneous drainage (PCD).

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes EUSD in treatment of PFC after pancreas surgeries, from their inception until January 2022. Two meta-analyses were performed: (A) a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of EUSD (meta-analysis A) and (B) two-arm meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of EUSD and PCD (meta-analysis B). Pooled proportion of the outcomes in meta-analysis A as well as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) in meta-analysis B was calculated to determine the technical and clinical success rates, complications rate, hospital stay, and recurrence rate. ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 610 articles, 25 of which were eligible for inclusion. Included clinical studies comprised reports on 695 patients. Twenty-five studies (477 patients) were included in meta-analysis A and eight studies (356 patients) were included in meta-analysis B. In meta-analysis A, the technical and clinical success rates of EUSD were 94% and 87%, respectively, with post-procedural complications of 14% and recurrence rates of 9%. Meta-analysis B showed comparable technical and clinical success rates as well as complications rates between EUSD and PCD. EUSD showed significantly shorter duration of hospital stay compared to that of patients treated with PCD.

CONCLUSION

EUSD seems to be associated with high technical and clinical success rates, with low rates of procedure-related complications. Although EUSD leads to shorter hospital stay compared to PCD, the certainty of evidence was low in this regard.