In the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) seems to be safe and more effective than enteral stent placement. However, comparisons with laparoscopic ...GE (L-GE) are scarce. Our aim was to perform a propensity score–matched comparison between EUS-GE and L-GE.
An international, multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive EUS-GE and L-GE procedures in 3 academic centers (January 2015 to May 2020) using propensity score matching to minimize selection bias. A standard maximum propensity score difference of .1 was applied, also considering underlying disease and oncologic staging.
Overall, 77 patients were treated with EUS-GE and 48 patients with L-GE. By means of propensity score matching, 37 patients were allocated to both groups, resulting in 74 (1:1) matched patients. Technical success was achieved in 35 of 37 EUS-GE–treated patients (94.6%) versus 100% in the L-GE group (P = .493). Clinical success, defined as eating without vomiting or GOO Scoring System ≥2, was achieved in 97.1% and 89.2%, respectively (P = .358). Median time to oral intake (1 interquartile range {IQR}, .3-1.0 vs 3 IQR, 1.0-5.0 days, P < .001) and median hospital stay (4 IQR, 2-8 vs 8 IQR, 5.5-20 days, P < .001) were significantly shorter in the EUS-GE group. Overall (2.7% vs 27.0%, P = .007) and severe (.0% vs 16.2%, P = .025) adverse events were identified more frequently in the L-GE group.
For patients with GOO, EUS-GE and L-GE showed almost identical technical and clinical success. However, reduced time to oral intake, shorter median hospital stay, and lower rate of adverse events suggest that the EUS-guided approach might be preferable.
Endoscopic duodenal stenting is the current standard treatment for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) in patients with limited life expectancy. However, duodenal stenting is prone to stent ...dysfunction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel technique with potentially superior stent patency. We compared clinical success, safety, and stent dysfunction of EUS-GE and duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO using propensity score matching.
This international, multicenter, retrospective study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing EUS-GE or duodenal stenting for GOO between 2015 and 2021 in three European centers. Primary outcomes were clinical success (GOO scoring system GOOSS ≥ 2) and stent dysfunction (GOOSS ≤ 1 after initial clinical success). A propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed using age, sex, underlying disease, disease stage, ascites, and peritoneal carcinomatosis as variables.
214 patients underwent EUS-GE (n = 107) or duodenal stenting (n = 107). After propensity score matching, 176 patients were matched and compared. Technical success rates for EUS-GE and duodenal stenting were 94 % (95 %CI 89 %-99 %) vs. 98 % (95 %CI 95 %-100 %), respectively (
= 0.44). Clinical success rates were 91 % (95 %CI 85 %-97 %) vs. 75 % (95 %CI 66 %-84 %;
= 0.008). Stent dysfunction occurred in 1 % (95 %CI 0-4 %) vs. 26 % (95 %CI 15 %-37 %) of patients (
< 0.001). Adverse event rate was 10 % (95 %CI 4 %-17 %) vs. 21 % (95 %CI 12 %-29 %;
= 0.09).
EUS-GE had higher clinical success and lower stent dysfunction, with similar safety, compared with duodenal stenting, suggesting that EUS-GE may be preferred over duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO.
Background Surgical repair of endoscopic perforations of the GI tract used to be the standard, but immediate, secure endoscopic closure has become an attractive alternative treatment with the ...potential to reduce morbidity and mortality. Objective We aimed to perform a systematic review of the medical literature on endoscopic closure of acute iatrogenic perforations of the GI tract. Design A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Setting Available medical literature from 1966 through November 2013. Patients Patients with an acute perforation after an endoscopic procedure that was closed endoscopically. Interventions Endoscopic closure of an acute perforation of the GI tract. Main Outcome Measurements Clinically successful endoscopic closure. Results In our search, we identified 726 studies, 702 of which had to be excluded. Twenty-four cohort studies (21 retrospective, 3 prospective) were included in the analysis. No randomized trials were identified. Overall, the methodological quality was low. The 24 studies included described 466 acute perforations in which endoscopic closure was attempted. Successful endoscopic closure was achieved in 419 cases (89.9%; 95% CI, 87%-93%). Successful closure was achieved in 90.2% (n = 359; 95% CI, 87%-93%) of cases by using endoclips, in 87.8% (n = 58; 95% CI, 78%-95%) by using the over-the-scope-clip, and in 100% (n = 2) by using a metal stent. Limitations Low methodological quality of included studies. Conclusion This systematic review suggests that endoscopic perforation closure is a safe and effective alternative for surgical intervention in selected cases; however, the overall methodological quality was low. Prospective, true consecutive studies are needed to define the definitive role of endoscopic closure of perforations.
Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease and an indication for invasive intervention. The surgical step-up approach is the standard treatment. A promising alternative is the ...endoscopic step-up approach. We compared both approaches to see whether the endoscopic step-up approach was superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes.
In this multicentre, randomised, superiority trial, we recruited adult patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis and an indication for invasive intervention from 19 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned to either the endoscopic or the surgical step-up approach. The endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic necrosectomy. The surgical approach consisted of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or death during 6-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN09186711.
Between Sept 20, 2011, and Jan 29, 2015, we screened 418 patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis, of which 98 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach (n=51) or the surgical step-up approach (n=47). The primary endpoint occurred in 22 (43%) of 51 patients in the endoscopy group and in 21 (45%) of 47 patients in the surgery group (risk ratio RR 0·97, 95% CI 0·62–1·51; p=0·88). Mortality did not differ between groups (nine 18% patients in the endoscopy group vs six 13% patients in the surgery group; RR 1·38, 95% CI 0·53–3·59, p=0·50), nor did any of the major complications included in the primary endpoint.
In patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing major complications or death. The rate of pancreatic fistulas and length of hospital stay were lower in the endoscopy group. The outcome of this trial will probably result in a shift to the endoscopic step-up approach as treatment preference.
The Dutch Digestive Disease Foundation, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.
Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are believed to clinically improve endoscopic transluminal drainage of infected necrosis when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents. However, comparative data ...from prospective studies are very limited.
Patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, who underwent an endoscopic step-up approach with LAMS within a multicentre prospective cohort study were compared with the data of 51 patients in the randomised TENSION trial who had been assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach with double-pigtail plastic stents. The clinical study protocol was otherwise identical for both groups. Primary end point was the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. Secondary end points included mortality, major complications, hospital stay and healthcare costs.
A total of 53 patients were treated with LAMS in 16 hospitals during 27 months. The need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy was 64% (n=34) and was not different from the previous trial using plastic stents (53%, n=27)), also after correction for baseline characteristics (OR 1.21 (95% CI 0.45 to 3.23)). Secondary end points did not differ between groups either, which also included bleeding requiring intervention-5 patients (9%) after LAMS placement vs 11 patients (22%) after placement of plastic stents (relative risk 0.44; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17). Total healthcare costs were also comparable (mean difference -€6348, bias-corrected and accelerated 95% CI -€26 386 to €10 121).
Our comparison of two patient groups from two multicentre prospective studies with a similar design suggests that LAMS do not reduce the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis. Also, the rate of bleeding complications was comparable.
Acute perforations of the gastrointestinal tract are rare, severe complications of endoscopy that usually require surgical repair. Endoscopic repair of perforations would reduce the need for ...surgeries; we evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic closure of acute perforations of the gastrointestinal tract by using a new clip device.
We conducted a prospective, international, multicenter study of 36 consecutive patients (15 male) with acute iatrogenic perforations (5 esophageal, 6 gastric, 12 duodenal, and 13 colonic perforation). Endoscopic repair was performed by using the Over-the-Scope-Clip according to a standardized operating procedure. Primary end point was successful closure, which was determined as endoscopic successful closure without leakage (detected by water-soluble contrast x-ray analysis), and absence of adverse events within 30 days after the procedure.
Immediate closure was endoscopically successful in 33 patients (92%). One patient developed an esophageal perforation while the cap was introduced, and in 2 patients the perforations did not close; these 3 patients were successfully treated with surgery. None of the patients had leakage of soluble contrast on the basis of contrast x-ray. One patient with a closed colonic perforation deteriorated clinically within 6 hours after the procedure. Despite surgery, the patient died within 36 hours. The remaining 32 patients had successful endoluminal closures; the overall success rate was 89% (95% confidence interval, 75%-96%). The mean endoscopic closure time was 5 minutes 44 seconds ± 4 minutes 15 seconds.
The Over-the-Scope-Clip is effective for endoluminal closure of acute iatrogenic perforations. It allows patients to avoid surgery, and 89% of patients had successful closures without adverse events.
Objective
We performed a systematic review to assess the outcome of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis with additional focus on indication, disease severity, and ...methodological quality of studies.
Design
We searched the literature published between January 2005 and June 2013. Cohorts, including patients with (infected) necrotising pancreatitis, undergoing endoscopic necrosectomy were included. Indication, disease severity, and methodological quality were described. The main outcomes were mortality, major complications, number of endoscopic sessions, and definitive successful treatment with endoscopic necrosectomy alone.
Results
After screening 581 papers, 14 studies, including 455 patients, fulfilled the eligibility criteria. All included studies were retrospective analyses except for one randomized, controlled trial. Overall methodological quality was moderate to low (mean 5, range 2–9). Less than 50 % of studies reported on pre-procedural severity of disease: mean APACHE-II score before intervention was 8; organ failure was present in 23 % of patients; and infected necrosis in 57 % of patients. On average, four (range 1–23) endoscopic interventions were performed per patient. With endoscopic necrosectomy alone, definitive successful treatment was achieved in 81 % of patients. Mortality was 6 % (28/460 patients) and complications occurred in 36 % of patients. Bleeding was the most common complication.
Conclusions
Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy is an effective treatment for the majority of patients with necrotising pancreatitis with acceptable mortality and complication rates. It should be noted that methodological quality of the available studies is limited and that the combined patient population of endoscopically treated patients is only moderately ill.
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided interventions are among the most challenging procedures performed by interventional endoscopists and are ...associated with a significant risk of complications. Early recognition and classification of perforations allows immediate therapy which improves clinical outcomes. In this article we review the different aspects of iatrogenic perforations associated with pancreatico-biliary interventions, elucidating risk factors, diagnostic challenges and the latest therapeutic interventions.
PDF
