Comparative Study Evaluating Lumen Apposing Metal Stents Versus Double Pigtail Plastic Stents for Treatment of Walled-Off Necrosis

Safety and efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) has variable outcomes according to the type of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) used. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available data.Online databases, including EMBASE, PubMed, and SCOPUS, were searched from inception to 30 January 2024. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and the need for endoscopic necrosectomy. Pooled estimates stratified by the type of stent (Axios, Nagi, or Spaxus), severity of bleeding, and type of PFC were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 values.37 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled outcomes (95%CIs) for PFC drainage using the Axios, Nagi, and Spaxus stents, respectively, were: technical success 97.7% (96.4%-98.8%), 96.9% (94.6%-98.5%), 98.2% (94.4%-99.9%); clinical success 90.9% (88.7%-92.8%), 88.5% (79.9%-95.0%), 93.5% (91.0%-95.6%); total AEs 20.4% (16.6%-24.6%), 17.1% (8.3%-28.3%), 7.6% (3.6%-13.0); migration 4.2% (2.9%-5.7%), 7.8% (4.1%-12.4%), 0.9% (0.1%-2.8%); overall bleeding 7.0% (4.9%-9.5%), 4.4% (2.2%-7.4%), 1.8% (0.8%-3.3%); and endoscopic necrosectomy 54.5% (38.9%-69.7%), 16.0% (11.4%-21.3%), 19.9% (6.6%-38.1%). In terms of severity, moderate-severe bleeding was most common with all three stents. AEs were higher in patients with walled-off necrosis compared with pseudocysts. Substantial-to-considerable heterogeneity (I 2 >60%) was present for total AEs for all of the stents.Our study shows good technical and clinical success rates with all three LAMSs for EUS-guided PFC drainage. Total AEs and bleeding were highest with the Axios stent and lowest with the Spaxus. Stent migration was highest with the Nagi stent and lowest with the Spaxus.

The 1st i-EUS consensus on the management of pancreatic fluid collections - Part 2

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. The treatment of patients with PFCs has already focused toward an endoscopy-based approach, and with the development of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), it has almost totally shifted towards interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures. However, there is still limited consensus on several aspects of PFCs treatment within the multidisciplinary management. 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 focuses on the second part of the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS, with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance on several intra- and post-procedural aspects of PFCs drainage, such as clinical management and follow-up.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Stent Types for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is required in select cases including infected or symptomatic collections. In this network meta-analysis, we have compared lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS), and double-pigtail stents (DPS) to identify the most useful stent type in the management of PFCs.

METHODS

We reviewed several databases to identify studies that compared DPS or FCSEMS with LAMS and the ones which compared DPS with FCSEMS for the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success, adverse events, technical success, recurrence of PFCs, and procedure duration. Random effects model and frequentist approach were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We included 28 studies with 2974 patients. Rate of clinical success was significantly lower with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.32, 0.59). Rate of recurrence was higher with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 2.06 (1.19, 3.57). We found no significant difference in rate of adverse events between groups. Rate of technical success was higher for FCSEMS compared to LAMS. Procedure duration was significantly shorter for LAMS compared to DPS and FCSEMS. Based on frequentist approach, LAMS was found to be superior to DPS and FCSEMS in achieving higher clinical success, lower rate of adverse events and recurrence, and shorter procedure time.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis demonstrates the superiority of LAMS over DPS and FCSEMS in the management of PFCs in achieving a higher clinical success, shorter procedure time, and lower rate of recurrence. Some of the analyses are not adequately powered to make firm conclusions, and future large multicenter RCTs are required to further evaluate this issue.

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.

Multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for the internal drainage of pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) including pancreatic pseudocyst (PP) and walled-off necrosis (WON) are complications after acute pancreatitis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) placement to manage PFCs. Between June 2019 and May 2023, patients with symptomatic PFCs who underwent EUS-guided electrocautery-enhanced LAMS drainage were enrolled retrospectively from eight tertiary centers in Taiwan. In total, 33 [14 (42.42%) PP and 19 (57.58%) WON] patients were enrolled. Gallstones (27.27%) and abdominal pain (72.73%) were the most common etiology and indication for drainage. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 96.97%, respectively, and the mean procedure time was 30.55 (± 16.17) min. Complications included one (3.03%) case of self-limited bleeding; there were no cases of mortality. Seven (21.21%) patients had recurrence. Patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) had a higher recurrence rate than those without (71.43% vs. 38.46%, p = 0.05). After replacing LAMSs with transmural double-pigtail plastic stents (DPSs) in the DPDS patients, the DPS migration rate was higher in the patients with recurrence (100% vs. 33.33%, p = 0.04). In conclusion, drainage of symptomatic PFCs with EUS-guided electrocautery-enhanced LAMS appears to be efficient and safe. Replacing LAMSs with DPSs in DPDS patients was associated with a lower recurrence rate.

[Transgastric necrectomy for acute pancreatitis]

The review is devoted to transgastric necrectomy in the treatment of infected forms of acute pancreatitis. The authors discuss the indications for transgastric necrectomy and technical features of these interventions (direct endoscopic necrectomy, laparoscopic and open transgastric necrectomy). Numerous studies devoted to results of transgastric necrectomy indicate advisability of this procedure in carefully selected patients and interdisciplinary interaction of various specialists before and after surgery. Regional specialized centers for the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis are necessary for wider introduction of minimally invasive surgical technologies and their personalization.

Safety and efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents and double-pigtail plastic stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with walled-off necrosis (WON) are still challenging to treat safely and effectively. Recently, double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS), bi-flanged metallic stents (BFMS), and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have been employed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS-guided) drainage. However, there is little solid evidence to support the effectiveness and safety of using stents. This study aims to compare the outcomes of the LAMS and the PS.

METHOD

Till July 2022, a thorough database search was done, and studies that met the criteria were chosen. By using the RevMan software, the technical and clinical success and other secondary outcomes were calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed between the LAMS and the BFMS.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (two randomized controlled trials and thirteen observational) with 687 patients receiving metal stents and 771 patients receiving plastic stents were selected for final analysis. There was no significant risk of bias or publication bias. The odds ratios (OR) for technical and clinical success were 0.36 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.08, 1.52) and 2.26 (95%CI 1.62, 3.15), respectively. The OR for overall adverse events was 0.74 (95% CI 0.41, 1.34). In subgroup analysis, the LAMS and the BFMS showed the same outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Compared to DPS, LAMS had better clinical outcomes and fewer side effects when treating patients with WON.

Mishaps with EUS-guided lumen-apposing metal stents in therapeutic pancreatic EUS: Management and prevention

EUS-guided interventions have become widely accepted therapeutic management options for drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections. Apart from endosonographic skills, EUS interventions require knowledge of the endoscopic stenting techniques and familiarity with the available stents and deployment systems. Although generally safe and effective, technical failure of correct stent positioning or serious adverse events can occur, even in experts' hands. In this article, we address common and rare adverse events in transmural EUS-guided stenting, ways to prevent them, and management options when they occur. Knowing the risks of what can go wrong combined with clinical expertise, high levels of technical skills, and adequate training allows for the safe performance of EUS-guided drainage procedures. Discussing the procedural risks and their likelihood with the patient is a fundamental part of the consenting process.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: do we know enough about the best approach?

Pancreatic fluid collection often occurs as a local complication of acute pancreatitis, and drainage is indicated in symptomatic patients. The drainage may be surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided. In symptomatic collections older than 4 weeks and localized in the upper abdomen, EUS-guided drainage is the first choice of treatment. Lumen-apposing metal stents are useful in cases of walled-off necrosis, facilitating access to the cavity; however, they do not reduce the number of necrosectomy sessions required. In most pancreatic pseudocysts requiring drainage, plastic stents remain the first choice of treatment. This review aimed to summarize the principles and techniques of step-up therapy of pancreatic fluid collections, including preprocedural and postprocedural assessment and practical approaches of drainage and necrosectomy, making available evidence more accessible to endoscopists aiming to train for this procedure. Successful and safe EUS drainage connotes early recognition and treatment of complications and the presence of a multidisciplinary team for optimal patient management. However, the best time for necrosectomy, modality of drainage method (lumen-apposing metal stents or plastic stents), and duration of antibiotherapy are still under evaluation.

Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent With and Without Concurrent Double-Pigtail Plastic Stent for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are often used to drain pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, adverse events, such as stent obstruction, infection, or bleeding, have been reported. Concurrent double-pigtail plastic stent (DPPS) deployment has been suggested to prevent these adverse events. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of LAMS with DPPS vs. LAMS alone in the drainage of PFCs.

Methods

An extensive search was conducted in the literature to include all the eligible studies that compared LAMS with DPPS vs. LAMS alone for drainage of PFCs. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained within a random-effect model. The outcomes were technical and clinical success, and overall adverse events, including stent migration and occlusion, bleeding, infection, and perforation.

Results

Five studies involving 281 patients with PFCs (137 received LAMS plus DPPS vs. 144 received LAMS alone) were included. LAMS plus DPPS group was associated with comparable technical success (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97 - 1.04, P = 0.70) and clinical success (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.88 - 1.17). Lower trends of overall adverse events (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.32 - 1.29), stent occlusion (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.27 - 1.49), infection (RR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.15 - 1.64), and perforation (RR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.06 - 2.78) were observed in LAMS with DPPS group compared to LAMS alone but without a statistical significance. Stent migration (RR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.50 - 3.34) and bleeding (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.25 - 1.72) were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Deployment of DPPS across LAMS for drainage of PFCs has no significant impact on efficacy or safety outcomes. Randomized, controlled trials are necessary to confirm our study results, especially in walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

Clinical Outcomes of the Endoscopic Step-Up Approach with or without Radiology-Guided Percutaneous Drainage for Symptomatic Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis

Background and objectives: Symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis is a serious local complication of acute necrotising pancreatitis. The endoscopic step-up approach is the standard treatment for symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis; however, adjunctive radiologic percutaneous drainage for this condition is controversial. This study compared the clinical and radiologic resolution of walled-off pancreatic necrosis achieved with the endoscopic step-up approach with or without radiology-guided percutaneous drainage. Material and Methods: This retrospective, single-centre cohort study enrolled patients with symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis who underwent endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) followed by directed endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) with or without radiology-guided drainage. A total of 34 patients (endoscopic approach, n = 22; combined modality approach, n = 12) underwent the endoscopic step-up approach (ETD followed by DEN). Baseline characteristics, clinical success, and resolution of necrosis were compared between groups. Results: All patients achieved symptom resolution from walled-off pancreatic necrosis. The mean patient age was 58.4 years, and 21 (61.8%) were men. Following treatment with the endoscopic approach and combined modality approach, clinical success was achieved in 90.9% of patients within 11.5 days, and 66.7% of patients within 16.5 days, respectively. Both length of hospital stay (55 days vs. 71 days; p = 0.071) and time to complete radiologic resolution were shorter (93 days vs. 124 days; p = 0.23) in the endoscopic approach group. Conclusion: Both the endoscopic step-up approach and the CMD approach resulted in a favourably high clinical resolution rates in patients with symptomatic WON. However, clinical success rates seemed to be higher, and the length of hospital stay tended to be shorter in the endoscopic approach than in the CMD approach, as well as the significantly shorter necrosectomy time in each procedure was observed. Of note, these findings might be from some inherited differences in baseline characteristics of the patients between the two groups, and a randomized controlled trial with a larger sample size to verify these results is warranted.

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.

Microbial Spectra and Clinical Outcomes from Endoscopically Drained Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Descriptive Cohort Study

Pancreatic pseudocyst (PC) and walled-off necrosis (WON) are dreaded complications of acute pancreatitis. Standard therapy consists of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural placement of stents to expedite resolution through internal drainage of fluids or necrotic material. Either double pigtail plastic stents (DPPS) or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), or a combination of both, are available for this purpose. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of different stent types on infection rates in addition to clinical outcome measures such as periprocedural adverse events. We conducted a retrospective study comprising 77 patients who had undergone endoscopic drainage for PC or WON in a pancreatitis tertiary referral center. Analysis revealed that both bacterial and fungal infections occurred more frequently in patients treated with LAMS with or without DPPS compared to DPPS only. The use of antibiotics and antimycotics followed the same pattern. Furthermore, a prolonged length of hospital stay and a higher likelihood of transfer to an intermediate care unit were observed in patients with LAMS with or without DPPS. These differences were eliminated if only WON patients were analyzed. Our data imply that the clinical course is primarily influenced by the complexity of the pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) itself rather than the stent type. Prospective large-scale cohort studies are mandatory to underpin these findings.

Hydrogen peroxide assisted endoscopic necrosectomy for walled-off pancreatic necrosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) is the preferred approach for management of symptomatic or infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). Hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) has been reported to be a good adjunctive therapy for EN. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate effectiveness and safety of H₂O₂ assisted EN for WOPN.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of multiple databases (through December 2020) was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of H₂O₂ assisted EN for WOPN. Outcomes assessed included clinical success, technical success, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 454 patients with mean age (47.3 ± 7.9 years) and WOPN size (12.4 ± 3.1 cm) were included from 15 studies. The median H₂O₂ concentration was 3% (range 0.1-3%), with dilution and volume ranging from 1:1 to 10:1 and 20 ml to 1 L, respectively. The rates of technical success, clinical success and adverse events was 97.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94.8-98.6, I² = 0), 89.8% (95% CI: 86.3-92.5, I² = 0) and 17.9% (95% CI: 12.6-24.7, I² = 38), respectively. The most common adverse event was bleeding (7.1%) followed by stent migration (5.3%). On meta-regression, WOPN size, patient age, use of metal stent, number of necrosectomies and transgastric access were not significant predictor for technical success, clinical success or adverse events.

CONCLUSION

H₂O₂ assisted EN is effective and safe for management of WOPN. Its use may be encouraged, and future randomized controlled studies are needed to study the optimal technique, concentration and best predictors of success.

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

OBJECTIVES

The therapeutic efficacy of metal stents (MSs) for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is invariably controversial. Here, we conducted a meta-analysis to summarize the results of efficacy of MSs and plastic stents (PSs) in PFC drainage.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE for all of the published studies regarding the use of MSs and PSs for endoscopic transmural drainage of PFCs from January, 1 2015 to June 1, 2020. We extracted data from 9 studies (1359 patients) that met the inclusion criteria. The main outcome measures were the rates of treatment success, including technique success and clinical success (CS), adverse events, recurrence, procedure time, and length of hospital stay (LOS).

RESULTS

There was no difference in overall technique success between patients treated with MSs and PSs for PFCs. However, MSs showed a higher CS rate 92% versus 82% (P<0.01) and a lower overall adverse event rate 20% versus 31% (P<0.01) than PSs. The recurrence rate of PFCs using MSs also had significant advantages over PSs 3% versus 10% (P<0.01) and MSs needed a shorter procedure time than PSs (26.73 vs. 45.40 min, P<0.01). In comparing direct endoscopic necrosectomy use and LOS, there was no difference between MSs and PSs.

CONCLUSIONS

Bringing together the results of the current study, endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of PFCs using MSs may be superior to PSs in terms of CS, adverse events rates and recurrence rate, with similar LOS and direct endoscopic necrosectomy use.

Therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound in pancreato-biliary disorders: Does it really replace the surgical/percutaneous approach?

Pancreato-biliary disorders are still incredibly challenging in the field of gastroenterology, as they would sometimes require multi-approach interventional procedures. Recently, therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a potential alternative to surgical or percutaneous approaches. Unfortunately, considering the high cost of EUS, lack of facility and expertise, most gastroenterologists still often refer cases to undergo surgical interventions without contemplating the possibility of utilizing EUS first. EUS-guided biliary drainage has become one of the best choices for establishing access to biliary system, given the clear visualization of pancreas, gallbladder, and common bile duct. Although there are still only a few studies which directly compare EUS-guided and surgical approaches for biliary drainage, current evidence demonstrated the superiority of EUS-guided approach in terms of adverse events and re-intervention rates, with similarly high technical and clinical success rates compared to percutaneous and surgical approaches, especially in patients with history of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt. Comparable success rates with shorter length of hospital stay between endoscopic and surgical approaches have also been exhibited for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis. Recent findings about the progress of EUS approach in gastroenterostomy/jejunostomy also indicated a promising potential of EUS, as a less invasive approach, for managing gastric outlet obstruction.

Comparison Between Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents and Plastic Stents in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collection: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore efficacy and safety between LAMSs (lumen-apposing metal stents) and DPPSs (double-pigtail plastic stents) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage for pancreatic fluid collections.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies published until July 20, 2020.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were identified in this study. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage with LAMS has higher clinical success (90.01% vs 82.56%) (odds ratio [OR], 2.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79-3.33; P < 0.00001), less recurrence (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.29-0.68; P = 0.0002), and fewer additional interventions (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.211-0.55; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between LAMS and DPPS in technical success (97.45% vs 97.38%) (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.50-1.70; P = 0.80), adverse events (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.41-2.09; P = 0.84), stent-related adverse events (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.39-1.54; P = 0.47), and bleeding (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.57-3.28; P = 0.42). Lumen-apposing metal stents have slightly more perforations (OR, 7.10; 95% CI, 1.22-41.30; P = 0.03) in studies of walled-off necrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumen-apposing metal stents have the advantage of higher clinical success, less recurrence, and fewer additional interventions. However, LAMS may increase perforation for walled-off necrosis.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure has resulted in a paradigm shift toward endoscopic management of disease states that previously required percutaneous or surgical approaches. The past few years have seen additional techniques and devices that have enabled endoscopists to expand its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Some of these techniques initially were reported more than a decade ago; however, with further device development and refinement in techniques there is potential for expanding the application of these techniques and new technologies to a broader group of interventional gastroenterologists. Lack of formalized training, devices, and prospective data regarding their use in addition to a scarcity of guidelines on implementation of these technologies into clinical practice are contributing factors impeding the growth of the field of interventional EUS. In April 2019, the American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology conducted its annual Tech Summit and a key session focused on interventional EUS. This article is a White Paper generated from the conference, discusses the published literature pertaining to the topic of interventional EUS, and outlines a proposed framework for the implementation of interventional EUS techniques into clinical practice. Three primary areas of interventional EUS are addressed: (1) EUS-guided access; (2) EUS-guided tumor ablation; and (3) endohepatology. There was general agreement among participants on several key components. The introduction of these novel interventions requires better tools, more data on safety/outcomes, and improved training for endoscopists. Participants also agreed that widespread implementation and use of these techniques will require support from Gastrointestinal Societies and other key stakeholders including payers. Continued work by the Gastrointestinal Societies and manufacturers to provide training programs, appropriate equipment/work environments, and policies that motivate endoscopists to adopt new techniques is essential for growing the field of interventional EUS.

When Should We Perform Endoscopic Drainage and Necrosectomy for Walled-Off Necrosis?

Endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy are now accepted treatment approaches for patients with symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). The current recommendations advocate step-up approaches for the treatment of symptomatic WON. Previous recommendations stipulated that endoscopic intervention should be delayed until more than four weeks after the onset. Recent data on early drainage have been increasing and this option might be considered in well-encapsulated cases, but the percutaneous route is preferred if the drainage is performed within two weeks after onset or in nonencapsulated cases. Recently, additional drainage methods, such as the multiple gateway technique and multiple stent placement, have been developed to open up multiple dead spaces in the WON cavity. Endoscopic necrosectomy could be performed via the transluminal route or percutaneous route after failed initial and additional drainage procedures. The use of novel lumen-apposing stents is a promising treatment option that could reduce the number of steps, the procedure time, and the overall number of necrosectomies.

Efficacy and safety of plastic versus lumen-apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of walled-off necrosis: a retrospective single-center study

Background

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) were considered a breakthrough in the endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis (WON), as their larger drainage diameter was expected to provide effective drainage of necrotic material. However, various studies and meta-analyses that have compared plastic and metal stents for the treatment of WON have shown conflicting results. We retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of endoscopic transmural drainage between multiple plastic stents and LAMS.

Methods

Endoscopic data were retrospectively retrieved for patients who had undergone endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage/debridement of WON. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether multiple plastic stents or LAMS were deployed during initial drainage. The resolution and complication rates were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

One hundred sixty-six patients (83% male, mean age 37.5 years) with symptomatic WON were treated with EUS-guided drainage using either multiple plastic stents (n=138) or LAMS (n=28). Patients in the LAMS group had significantly larger WON and a significantly higher proportion of solid content. WON resolution rates did not differ between plastic stents and LAMS (98.5% vs. 96.4% respectively, P=0.42). However, the time taken to resolution was significantly shorter in the LAMS group than in the plastic stents group (26.7 vs. 29.8 days, P=0.03). There was no significant difference between the groups in either mortality or complication rates.

Conclusions

The technical success, rates of WON resolution and complications were similar in patients treated with multiple plastic stents and LAMS. However, LAMS were associated with a significantly shorter time to resolution.