Search

Competing Interests: T. H. B. is a consultant for Cook Endoscopy, Boston Scientific, Olympus, Medtronic, ConMed, and W. L. Gore. J. W. and J. A. T. have no conflicts of interests.

Background and study aims Use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy is an essential aid in advanced endoscopic interventions. However, it also raises concerns about radiation exposure. This study aimed to develop consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, prioritizing the safety and well-being of healthcare workers and patients. Methods A modified Delphi approach was employed to achieve consensus over three rounds of surveys. Proposed statements were generated in Round 1. In the second round, panelists rated potential statements on a 5-point scale, with consensus defined as ≥80% agreement. Statements were subsequently prioritized in Round 3, using a 1 (lowest priority) to 10 (highest priority) scale. Results Forty-six experts participated, consisting of 34 therapeutic endoscopists and 12 endoscopy nurses from six continents, with an overall 45.6% female representation (n = 21). Forty-three item statements were generated in the first round. Of these, 31 statements achieved consensus after the second round. These statements were categorized into General Considerations (n = 6), Education (n = 10), Pregnancy (n = 4), Family Planning (n = 2), Patient Safety (n = 4), and Staff Safety (n = 5). In the third round, accepted statements received mean priority scores ranging from 7.28 to 9.36, with 87.2% of statements rated as very high priority (mean score ≥ 9). Conclusions This study presents consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, addressing the well-being of healthcare workers and patients. These consensus-based statements aim to mitigate risks associated with radiation exposure while maintaining benefits of fluoroscopy, ultimately promoting a culture of safety in healthcare settings., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Tyler Berzin - Consultant for: Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Wision AI, Microtech. Alan N. Barkun - Consultant for Olympus Inc and Medtronic Inc. Cecilia Binda – Lecturer for Steris, Fujifilm, Boston Scientific, Q3 Medical. Alessandro Fugazza – Consultant for Boston Scientific. Rogier P. Voermans - Consultancy and research grant for Boston Scientific, Research grant Prion Medical; Consultancy fee form from Cook Medical. Lecturer Viatris and Zambon. Nauzer Forbes – Speaker for Boston Scientific, Pentax Medical. Consultant for Boston Scientific, Pentax Medical and AstraZeneca. Mariano Villarroel – Consultant for Boston Scientific. Yen-I Chen – Consultant for Boston Scientific. President of Chess Medical. Robert Bechara – Consultant for Olympus, Pentax, Vantage, Medtronic, Pendopharm. Payal Saxena – Consultant for Boston Scientific, Ambu, Erbe. Amrita Sethi – Consultant for Boston Scientific, Interscope, Medtronic, Olympus; Research Support for Boston Scientific, Fujifilm and ERBE. Cesare Hassan: Fujifilm Co. (consultancy); Medtronic Co. (consultancy). Alessandro Repici: Fujifilm Co. (consultancy); Olympus Corp (consultancy); Medtronic Co. (consultancy). Bret Peterson – Consultant for Olympus, Pentax. Investigator for Boston Scientific and Ambu. Silvia Carrara – Consultant for Olympus and Aboca. Jeffrey D. Mosko – Speaker for Boston Scientific, Pendopharm, SCOPE rounds, Vantage, Medtronic. Medical Advisory Board for Pendopharm, Boston Scientific, Janssen, Pentax, Fuji. Grants and Research support from CAG. Christopher W. Teshima – Speaker for Medtronic and Boston Scientific, Consultant for Boston Scientific. Gary R. May – Consultant for Olympus. Speaker for Pentax, Fuji and Medtronic. Samir C Grover –Research grants and personal fees from AbbVie and Ferring Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Takeda, Sanofi, and BioJAMP, education grants from Janssen, and has equity in Volo Healthcare. All the authors have no relevant financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to declare., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a minimally invasive technique for treating gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of EUS-GE in managing benign GOO caused by duodenal stenosis in patients with acute pancreatitis., Methods: This international retrospective study analyzed patients treated with EUS-GE for GOO caused by acute pancreatitis until December 2023, evaluating technical and clinical success, adverse events, and reintervention., Results: 39 patients (median age 55 years, 15 women) were included. There was a 92.3% technical success rate, with only three patients unable to undergo EUS-GE owing to a long distance between the stomach and small bowel or an inadequate window for puncture. Clinical success was observed in 34 patients (87.2%). The median Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System (GOOSS) improved from 0 before EUS-GE to 2 afterward ( P <0.001). Follow-up (≥3 months) was available in 25 patients. During a median follow-up of 23 months, four patients required reintervention. It was possible to remove the lumen-apposing metal stent in 18 patients. The only adverse event was a gastrocolic fistula detected incidentally after 3 months., Conclusion: EUS-GE is an effective and safe method for managing benign GOO in the setting of acute pancreatitis., Competing Interests: A. Wannhoff received a research grant from Fujifilm Medwork GmbH and OVESCO Endoscopy AG and received lecture fees from OVESCO Endoscopy AG. R.Z. Sharaiha is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Olympus, Cook Medical, and Surgical Intuitive. T.H. Baron is a consultant and speaker for Boston Scientific, W.L.Gore, Cook Endoscopy, and Olympus America. S.S. Irani is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Gore. A. Canakis, F. Fayyaz, C. Schlag, N. Sharma, I. Elsayed, M.A. Khashab, and K. Caca declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure This author disclosed financial relationships: T. H. Baron: Consultant for Boston Scientific, W. L. Gore, and Cook Endoscopy. The other author disclosed no financial relationships. Commentary Here, the authors present an interesting case of using a lumen-apposing metallic stent (LAMS) for the management of splenic necrosis/abscess. Since the introduction of LAMSs for the management of peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopists have explored their use in a variety of other GI conditions, such as perigastric abscess drainage, GI stricture, anastomotic stricture, and the management of chronic fistula. Although the authors describe a successful case of using a LAMS for the management of a splenic necrosis/abscess, this procedure should be performed with caution because puncturing the splenic capsule could be associated with subcapsular hematoma and devastating bleeding. Also, in cases where the collection is within the center of the spleen, there is a risk of direct injury to the splenic artery if proper assessment with Doppler is not performed during the procedure. As described here, preemptive or concurrent embolization of the splenic artery by international radiology should be performed to limit this life-threatening adverse event. Another issue to consider is that the current available LAMS design has 2 large phalanges to prevent migration—with a larger inner diameter in comparison to the plastic stents. While deploying a stent within a solid cavity, endoscopists may face challenges because the phalanges may not open, not only because of lack of space but also as the result of solid components and higher pressure within the cavity. Although not needed routinely, expansion and liquefying of the necrotic collection with sterile water using an FNA needle can be performed by an experienced endoscopist to ease the procedure. Finally, timely necrosectomy is the key because the job is not done after placing the stent—the journey is long! Perhaps it is safer to avoid keeping the LAMS beyond 4 weeks within the abscess in solid organs to prevent delayed adverse events, such as stent migration and bleeding—although the stent can be kept longer if medically necessary with close observation! Tara Keihanian, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA Amy Tyberg, MD, FASGE, FACG, Associate Editor for Focal Points

Competing Interests: Disclosure The following authors disclosed financial relationships: N. B. Marya: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation and Apollo Endosurgery US Inc. S. Pawa: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation. N. R. Thiruvengadam: Research support from Boston Scientific Corporation. S. Ngamruengphong: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus, and Neptune Medical. T. H. Baron: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation, Medtronic, Inc, WL Gore & Associates, Inc, Cook Endoscopy, and CONMED Corporation; speaker for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation, Medtronic, Inc, and WL Gore & Associates; travel compensation from CONMED Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Olympus Corporation of the Americas, Ambu, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and Cook Medical LLC. A. Y. B. Teoh: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Cook Medical LLC, Taewoong and Microtech, MI Tech, and CMR Medical Corporations. W. Abidi: Consultant for Ambu Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, and CONMED Corporation; research support from GI Dynamics; food and beverage compensation from Ambu Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, CONMED Corporation, Olympus America Inc, AbbVie Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, RedHill Biopharma Inc, and Salix Pharmaceuticals. S. K. Amateau: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Merit Medical, Olympus Corporation of the Americas, MTEndoscopy, US Endoscopy, Heraeus Medical Components, LLC, and Cook Medical LLC; travel compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation of the Americas, and Cook Medical LLC; advisory board for Merit Medical. J. M. Chalhoub: Travel compensation from Olympus Corporation of the Americas; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation. N. Coelho-Prabhu: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation and Alexion Pharma; research support from Cook Endoscopy and FujiFilm; food and beverage compensation from Olympus America Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation. N. Cosgrove: Consultant for Olympus Corporation of the Americas and Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation and Ambu Inc. S. E. Elhanafi: Food and beverage compensation from Medtronic, Inc, Nestle HealthCare Nutrition Inc, Ambu Inc, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, and Merit Medical Systems Inc. N. Forbes: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Pentax of America, Inc, AstraZeneca, and Pendopharm Inc; speaker for Pentax of America, Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation; research support from Pentax of America, Inc. L. L. Fujii-Lau: Food and beverage compensation from Pfizer Inc and AbbVie Inc; consultant for Boston Scientific. D. R. Kohli: Research support from Olympus Corporation of the Americas. J. D. Machicado: Consultant for Mauna Kea Technologies, Inc; food and beverage compensation from Mauna Kea Technologies, Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation. U. Navaneethan: Consultant for ER Squibb & Sons, LLC; travel compensation from ER Squibb & Sons, LLC, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, and AbbVie Inc; food and beverage compensation from ER Squibb & Sons, LLC, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, AbbVie Inc, Pfizer Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, Celgene Corporation, and Olympus America Inc; speaker for Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, AbbVie Inc, and Pfizer Inc. S. G. Sheth: Consulted for Janssen Research & Development, LLC. N. C. Thosani: Consultant for Pentax of America, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and Ambu Inc; travel compensation and food and beverage compensation from Pentax of America, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and AbbVie Inc; speaker for AbbVie Inc. B. J. Qumseya: Consultant for Medtronic, Inc and Assertio Management, LLC; food and beverage compensation from Medtronic, Inc, Fujifilm Healthcare Americas Corporation, and Boston Scientific Corporation; speaker for Castle Biosciences. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships.

Objectives: Bariatric surgery can greatly ameliorate obesity and its associated metabolic disorders. Alteration of foregut anatomy, as is seen after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, renders traditional access to the biliary tree difficult, if not impossible. This may complicate management of anastomotic biliary complications after liver transplant., Materials and Methods: In this single-center study, we retrospectively reviewed all adult patients with a history of any bariatric surgery who underwent liver transplant during the period January 2017 to December 2022. We obtained demographic information of donors and recipients. Outcomes of interest included the modality in which the anastomotic biliary complications were managed., Results: Of 261 patients who underwent liver transplant at our center during the study period, 9 had a history of bariatric surgery. Anastomotic biliary complications occurred in 3 of 9 patients (33%). No significant differences were shown in donor age, ischemia time, etiology of liver disease, or Model for End-Stage Liver Disease sodium score at time of transplant between the 2 groups. All anastomotic biliary complications occurred in patients with a history of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch. Interventions included advanced endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography, and lumen-apposing metal stent to access the remnant stomach and biliopancreatic limb (n = 2) and surgical revision following percutaneous transhepatic biliary drain placement (n = 1). At the end of the study, none experienced recurrent stricture., Conclusions: Anastomotic biliary complications are well-described after liver transplant. A multidisciplinary approach with interventional radiology and inter-ventional gastroenterology can be beneficial to address strictures that arise in recipients with a history of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch.

Background: Closure of gastrointestinal defects can reduce postprocedural adverse events. Over-the-scope clips and an over-the-scope suturing system are widely available, yet their use may be limited by defect size, location, operator skill level, and need to reinsert the endoscope with the device attached. The introduction of a through-the-scope helix tack suture system (TTSS) allows for closure of large irregular defects using a gastroscope or colonoscope, without the need for endoscope withdrawal. Since its approval 3 years ago, only a handful of studies have explored outcomes using this novel device., Methods: Multiple databases were searched for studies looking at TTSS closure from inception until August 2023. The primary outcomes were the success of TTSS alone and TTSS with clips for complete defect closure. Secondary outcomes included complete closure based on procedure type (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR], endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) and adverse events., Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria (449 patients, mean defect size 34.3 mm). Complete defect closure rates for TTSS alone and TTSS with adjunctive clips were 77.2% (95%CI 66.4-85.3; I2=79%) and 95.2% (95%CI 90.3-97.7; I2=42.5%), respectively. Complete defect closure rates for EMR and ESD were 99.2% (95%CI 94.3-99.9; I2 = 0%) and 92.1% (95%CI 85-96; I2=0%), respectively. The adverse event rate was 5.4% (95%CI 2.7-10.3; I2=55%)., Conclusion: TTSS is a novel device for closure of postprocedural defects, with relatively high technical and clinical success rates. Comparative studies of closure devices are needed., Competing Interests: T.H. Baron is a consultant and speaker for Boston Scientific, W.L. Gore, Cook Endoscopy, and Olympus America. S.S. Irani is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Conmed, and Gore. A. Canakis, S.S. Deliwala, M. Frohlinger, B. Twery, J.P. Canakis, M.R. Shaik, E. Gunnarsson, O. Ali, D.S. Dahiya, and E. Gorman declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Goals: To describe the long-term outcomes of patients after EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), including those who underwent standardized stent exchanges for permanent plastic stents., Background: EUS-GBD has become one of the first-line alternatives for gallbladder decompression, with outcomes and safety profiles comparable to that of percutaneous gallbladder drainage. However, the long-term outcomes of EUS-GBD are not well-described. We report our single-center experience of a large cohort who underwent EUS-GBD., Study: Patients who underwent EUS-GBD from August 2014 to December 2022 were included in the study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and procedure details were recorded. Patients were followed until complete stent removal, end of study period, or death. Short and long-term outcomes include technical and clinical success, stent patency, recurrent cholecystitis, cholecystectomy, and death., Results: During the study period, 128 patients were included. One hundred and one patients had benign indications for EUS-GBD, including cholecystitis and choledocholithiasis. Of those with malignant indications, 23 of 27 had distal malignant biliary obstruction. Technical and clinical successes were 95.3% and 95.1%, respectively. Stents were exchanged for 2 permanent double pigtail plastic stents in 43.0%. The mean stent patency was 421 days (488 d among those still alive) without any recurrent cholecystitis., Conclusion: EUS-GBD demonstrates prolonged stent patency and minimal long-term adverse events, particularly among patients who underwent stent exchanges for permanent plastic stents. EUS-GBD is also promising for patients presenting with choledocholithiasis and biliary colic who are not surgical candidates., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the following: 1: The role of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients after failed ERCP. 2: The role of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy in resolving distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. 3: The role of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy. 4: The role of EUS-BD versus E-ERCP and PTBD in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy other than RYGB. 5: The role of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary transcystic gallbladder drainage in resolving acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy., Competing Interests: Disclosure The following authors disclosed financial relationships: S. Pawa: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation. N. B. Marya: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation and Apollo Endosurgery US Inc. N. R. Thiruvengadam: Research support from Boston Scientific Corporation. S. Ngamruengphong: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus, and Neptune Medical. T. H. Baron: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation, Medtronic, Inc, WL Gore & Associates, Inc, Cook Endoscopy, and CONMED Corporation; speaker for Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation, Medtronic, Inc, and WL Gore & Associates; travel compensation from CONMED Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Olympus Corporation of the Americas, Ambu, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and Cook Medical LLC. A. Y. B. Teoh: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Cook Medical LLC, Taewoong and Microtech, MI Tech, and CMR Medical Corporations. W. Abidi: Consultant for Ambu Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, and CONMED Corporation; research support from GI Dynamics; food and beverage compensation from Ambu Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, CONMED Corporation, Olympus America Inc, AbbVie Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, RedHill Biopharma Inc, and Salix Pharmaceuticals. S. K. Amateau: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Merit Medical, Olympus Corporation of the Americas, MTEndoscopy, US Endoscopy, Heraeus Medical Components, LLC, and Cook Medical LLC; travel compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation, Olympus Corporation of the Americas, and Cook Medical LLC; advisory board for Merit Medical. J. M. Chalhoub: Travel compensation from Olympus Corporation of the Americas; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation. N. Coelho-Prabhu: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation and Alexion Pharma; research support from Cook Endoscopy and FujiFilm; food and beverage compensation from Olympus America Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation. N. Cosgrove: Consultant for Olympus Corporation of the Americas and Boston Scientific Corporation; food and beverage compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation and Ambu Inc. S. E. Elhanafi: Food and beverage compensation from Medtronic, Inc, Nestle HealthCare Nutrition Inc, Ambu Inc, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, and Merit Medical Systems Inc. N. Forbes: Consultant for Boston Scientific Corporation, Pentax of America, Inc, AstraZeneca, and Pendopharm Inc; speaker for Pentax of America, Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation; research support from Pentax of America, Inc. L. L. Fujii-Lau: Food and beverage compensation from Pfizer Inc and AbbVie Inc; consultant for Boston Scientific. D. R. Kohli: Research support from Olympus Corporation of the Americas. J. D. Machicado: Consultant for Mauna Kea Technologies, Inc; food and beverage compensation from Mauna Kea Technologies, Inc and Boston Scientific Corporation. U. Navaneethan: Consultant for ER Squibb & Sons, LLC; travel compensation from ER Squibb & Sons, LLC, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, and AbbVie Inc; food and beverage compensation from ER Squibb & Sons, LLC, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, AbbVie Inc, Pfizer Inc, Apollo Endosurgery US Inc, Celgene Corporation, and Olympus America Inc; speaker for Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, AbbVie Inc, and Pfizer Inc. S. G. Sheth: Consulted for Janssen Research & Development, LLC. N. C. Thosani: Consultant for Pentax of America, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and Ambu Inc; travel compensation and food and beverage compensation from Pentax of America, Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, and AbbVie Inc; speaker for AbbVie Inc. B. J. Qumseya: Consultant for Medtronic, Inc and Assertio Management, LLC; food and beverage compensation from Medtronic, Inc, Fujifilm Healthcare Americas Corporation, and Boston Scientific Corporation; speaker for Castle Biosciences. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Groove pancreatitis (GP) is a rare and clinically distinct form of chronic pancreatitis affecting the pancreaticoduodenal groove comprising the head of the pancreas, duodenum, and the common bile duct. It is more prevalent in individuals in their 4-5th decade of life and disproportionately affects men compared with women. Excessive alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking, pancreatic ductal stones, pancreatic divisum, annular pancreas, ectopic pancreas, duodenal wall thickening, and peptic ulcers are significant risk factors implicated in the development of GP. The usual presenting symptoms include severe abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, weight loss, and jaundice. Establishing a diagnosis of GP is often challenging due to significant clinical and radiological overlap with numerous benign and malignant conditions affecting the same anatomical location. This can lead to a delay in initiation of treatment leading to increasing morbidity, mortality, and complication rates. Promising research in artificial intelligence (AI) has garnered immense interest in recent years. Due to its widespread application in diagnostic imaging with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity, AI has the potential of becoming a vital tool in differentiating GP from pancreatic malignancies, thereby preventing a missed or delayed diagnosis. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of GP, covering the etiology, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, radiological and endoscopic evaluation, management strategies, and future directions. This article also aims to increase awareness about this lesser known and often-misdiagnosed clinical entity amongst clinicians to ultimately improve patient outcomes., (© 2024 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a method of decompressing the pancreatic duct (PD) if unable to access the papilla or surgical anastomosis, particularly in nonsurgical candidates. The 2 types of EUS-PDD are EUS-assisted pancreatic rendezvous (EUS-PRV) and EUS-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (EUS-PG). EUS-PRV should be considered in patients with accessible papilla or anastomosis, while EUS-PG is a comparable alternative in surgically altered foregut anatomy. While technical and clinical successes range from 79% to 100%, adverse events occur in approximately 20%. A multidisciplinary approach that considers the patient's anatomy, clinical indication, and long-term goals should be discussed with surgical and interventional radiology colleagues., Competing Interests: Disclosures The article has been read and approved by all the authors. G. Seven and J.A. Trieu have nothing to disclose. T.H. Baron is a consultant and speaker for Ambu, Boston Scientific, Cook Endoscopy, Medtronic, Olympus America, ConMed, and W.L. Gore., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Following liver transplant (LT) with duct-to-duct anastomosis, biliary strictures and leaks are typically managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and stenting. While multiple side-by-side plastic stents are typically used for management of anastomotic strictures, fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) can be used to decrease the number of ERCPs with longer periods of stent patency. The risk of migration can limit their use. FCSEMS with antimigration fins to manage benign biliary complications following LT may provide stricture resolution with limited adverse events (AEs)., Methods: Single center retrospective study of LT patients who required FCSEMS from 1/2014 to 4/2022. Primary outcomes included stricture resolution and recurrence. Secondary outcomes were stent migration, occlusion, removability, and number of ERCPs., Results: Forty-three patients (mean age 55.5 years) with anastomotic strictures (N.=37), bile leaks (N.=4) or both (N.=2) were included. The median time from LT to FCSEMS placement was 125 days. Within one year of LT, 31 patients required intervention; early intervention at less than 30 and 90 days was needed in 7 and 19 patients, respectively. The median length of follow-up was 816.5 days. Stricture resolution was seen in 35 patients (81%) after a median stent dwell time of 130.5 days; recurrence occurred in 8 patients. There were three instances of partial stent migration that did not require reintervention or interfere with removability. The mean number of ERCPs required was 2.5., Conclusions: The use of a FCSEMS with antimigration features yields effective stricture resolution with longer stent dwell times and fewer ERCPs.

Introduction: The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications., Methods: Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round., Results: Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events., Discussion: Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS., (Copyright © 2023 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background and study aims EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) by transduodenal placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) into the extrahepatic bile duct. To identify factors that contribute to safe and effective EUS-CDS using LAMS, we performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Methods The methodology of our analysis was based on PRISMA recommendations. Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to November 2022. Full articles that included patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS using LAMS after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were eligible. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed reporting pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) by means of a random model. Multivariate meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to assess possible associations between the outcomes and selected variables to assess the correlation between outcomes and different variables. Results were also stratified according to stent size. Results Twelve studies with 845 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled technical and clinical success rates were 96% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94%-98%; I 2 = 52.29%) and 96% (95%CI 95%-98%), respectively, with no significant association with baseline characteristics, such are sex, age, common bile duct diameter, or stent size. The pooled AE rate was 12% (95%CI: 8%-16%; I 2 = 71.62%). The AE rate was significantly lower when using an 8 × 8 mm stent as compared with a 6 × 8 mm LAMS (odds ratio 0.59, 0.35-0.99; P = 0.04), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). Conclusions EUS-CDS with LAMS is a safe and effective option for relief of MBO. Selecting an appropriate stent size is crucial for achieving optimal safety outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Alessandro Fugazza: Consulting fees for Boston Scientific, Cecilia Binda Lecturer for Steris, Q3 Medical, and Boston Scientific, Carlo Fabbri Lecturer for Steris, Q3 Medical, Fuji, and Boston Scientific, Andrea Anderloni: Consulting fees for Olympus and Boston Scientific, Cesare Hassan: Consulting fees for Fuji, and Medtronic, Todd H Baron: Consultant and speaker for Boston Scientific, Cook Endoscopy, Olympus, W.L. Gore, Medtronic, ConMed, Alessandro Repici: Consulting fees for Fuji, Olympus, and Medtronic and receiving research grant and speaker fees from Boston Scientific, ERBE, Alfasigma, Norgine. Other authors have no conflict of interests., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Competing Interests: Disclosure T. H. Baron is a consultant for Cook Endoscopy, Boston Scientific, Olympus, Medtronic, ConMed, and W.L. Gore. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships. Commentary GI perforations, once thought to be a surgical emergency, can now commonly be managed endoscopically, thanks to CO(2) insufflation and improved closure devices such as larger through-the-scope clips, OTSCs, and endoscopic suturing. In this case, a duodenal perforation occurred during advancement of a duodenoscope before ERCP. Rather than aborting the procedure and sending the patient to surgery, the authors were able to successfully close the perforation with an OTSC and then complete the indicated ERCP. Interestingly, a piece of colon was noted to be entrapped within the OTSC after closure, with evidence of tethering of the colon to the duodenum on follow-up imaging. However, the patient experienced no symptoms related to this event and did not require repeated intervention in 6 years of follow-up observation. This case emphasizes not only the efficacy of therapeutic endoscopy in perforation closure but also the importance of using the patient’s symptoms as the most important factor in guiding treatment interventions. Amy Tyberg, MD, FASGE, FACG, Associate Editor for Focal Points

Background and Aims: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is effective in relieving gastric outlet obstruction. Several techniques used to create EUS-GEs have been described. However, these techniques are dependent on passing a guidewire beyond the obstruction. We describe a direct needle-puncture technique that allows for successful EUS-GE creation without a guidewire., Methods: The direct antegrade EUS-GE method often involves passing a guidewire and tube beyond the obstruction to distend the small bowel. An oblique echoendoscope is then positioned in the stomach to locate the distended small bowel. An electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is used to create the anastomosis. However, in cases when neither endoscope nor guidewire can be passed across the obstruction, the direct needle-puncture technique can be used. With the oblique echoendoscope positioned in the stomach, a collapsed loop of small bowel is located adjacent to the gastric wall. A 19-gauge needle is used to puncture the gastric and small bowel wall. The small bowel is distended with a mixture of saline, methylene blue, and contrast via a standard water pump connected to the needle. An antispasmodic is administered, and an electrocautery-enhanced LAMS is then introduced into the working channel to create a gastroenterostomy using the freehand method., Results: The direct needle-puncture technique was performed in 4 patients for these indications: postsurgical inflammation causing gastric outlet obstruction (case 1), tumor infiltration causing gastric outlet obstruction (cases 2A and 2B), and pancreaticobiliary limb access in a duodenal switch (case 3). The video shows the technique performed in a patient with postsurgical inflammation and a patient with duodenal tumor infiltration., Conclusions: The direct needle-puncture technique is useful for performing gastroenterostomy when the guidewire cannot be passed beyond the obstruction. It can also be used to gain access to a targeted bowel limb in altered anatomy for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes., Competing Interests: Dr Baron is a consultant for Cook Endoscopy, Boston Scientific, Olympus, Medtronic, ConMed, and W.L. Gore. Dr Trieu disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication., (© 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background/aims: Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) are widely adopted for the palliation of dysphagia in patients with malignant esophageal strictures. An important adverse event is the development of SEMS-induced esophagorespiratory fistulas (SEMS-ERFs). This study aimed to assess the risk factors related to the development of SEMS-ERF after SEMS placement in patients with esophageal cancer., Methods: This retrospective study was performed at the Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo. All patients with malignant esophageal strictures who underwent esophageal SEMS placement between 2009 and 2019 were included in the study., Results: Of the 335 patients, 37 (11.0%) developed SEMS-ERF, with a median time of 129 days after SEMS placement. Stent flare of 28 mm (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-5.51; p=0.02) and post-stent chemotherapy (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.01-4.00; p=0.05) were associated with an increased risk of developing SEMS-ERF, while lower-third tumors were a protective factor (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.26-0.85; p=0.01). No difference was observed in overall survival., Conclusion: The incidence of SEMS-ERFs was 11%, with a median time of 129 days after SEMS placement. Post-stent chemotherapy and a 28 mm stent flare were associated with a higher risk of SEMS-ERF.

Purpose of Review: Diseases of the gallbladder can be increasingly managed through endoscopic interventions, either serving as an alternative to or obviating the need for cholecystectomy. In this review, we aim to review the most recent data on endoscopic management of the most common gallbladder diseases., Recent Findings: The development of lumen-opposing metal stents (LAMS) marked a major shift in gallbladder management, with transmural techniques now well studied for management of cholecystitis. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is also a well-developed technique for gallbladder imaging, comparable or superior to transabdominal ultrasound. Novel techniques with LAMS for gallbladder lesion/polyp resection and treatment of non-cholecystitis gallbladder diseases mark important milestones in gallbladder preservation and increasingly less invasive management of diseases of the gallbladder. There are multiple interventional endoscopic techniques that can be used to manage common gallbladder diseases including cholecystitis, cholelithiasis, gallbladder lesions/polyps, and gallbladder cancer. Ongoing development of novel therapeutic techniques holds promise for additional minimally invasive techniques in the future., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

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., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and study aims Recently studies have compared early (<4 weeks) vs. late or standard (>4 weeks) endoscopic treatment of pancreatic necrotic collections (PNC) and have reported favorable results for early treatment. In this meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy and safety of early vs. late endoscopic treatment of PNC. Patients and methods We reviewed several databases from inception to September 30, 2021 to identify studies that compared early with late endoscopic treatment of PNC. Our outcomes of interest were adverse events (AEs), resolution of PNC, performance of direct endoscopic necrosectomy, need for further interventions, and mean number of endoscopic necrosectomy sessions. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categorical variables and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous variables. Data were analyzed by random effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 statistic. Results We included four studies with 427 patients. We found no significant difference in rates of AEs, RR (95% CI) 1.70 (range, 0.56-5.20), resolution of necrotic or fluid collections, RR (95% CI) 0.89 (range, 0.71-1.11), need for further interventions, RR (95% CI) 1.47 (range, 0.70-3.08), direct necrosectomy, RR (95% CI) 1.39 (range, 0.22-8.80), mortality, RR (95% CI) 2.37 (range, 0.26-21.72) and mean number of endoscopic necrosectomy sessions, MD (95% CI) 1.58 (range,-0.20-3.36) between groups. Conclusions Early endoscopic treatment of PNC can be considered for indications such as infected necrosis or sterile necrosis with symptoms or complications; however, future large multicenter studies are required to further evaluate its safety., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr. Todd Baron is a speaker and consultant for Boston Scientific, Cook Endoscopy, W.L. Gore and CONMED. Other authors have no relevant conflicts of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS)., Background: For patients with acute cholecystitis who are poor surgical candidates, EUS-GBD using a LAMS is an important treatment alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage., Methods: We conducted a regulatory-compliant, prospective multicenter trial at 7 tertiary referral centers in the United States of America and Belgium. Thirty consecutive patients with mild or moderate acute cholecystitis who were not candidates for cholecystectomy were enrolled between September 2019 and August 2021. Eligible patients had a LAMS placed transmurally with 30 to 60-day indwell if removal was clinically indicated, and 30-day follow-up post-LAMS removal. Endpoints included days until acute cholecystitis resolution, reintervention rate, acute cholecystitis recurrence rate, and procedure-related adverse events (AEs)., Results: Technical success was 93.3% (28/30) for LAMS placement and 100% for LAMS removal in 19 patients for whom removal was attempted. Five (16.7%) patients required reintervention. Mean time to acute cholecystitis resolution was 1.6±1.5 days. Acute cholecystitis symptoms recurred in 10.0% (3/30) after LAMS removal. Five (16.7%) patients died from unrelated causes. Procedure-related AEs were reported to the FDA in 30.0% (9/30) of patients, including one fatal event 21 days after LAMS removal; however, no AEs were causally related to the LAMS., Conclusions: For selected patients with acute cholecystitis who are at elevated surgical risk, EUS-GBD with LAMS is an alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage. It has high technical and clinical success, with low recurrence and an acceptable AE rate. Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT03767881., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background and Aims: Palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO) allows resumption of peroral intake. Although surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ) provides durable relief, it may be associated with a higher morbidity, interfere with chemotherapy, and require an optimum nutritional status. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. We aimed to conduct the largest comparative series to date between EUS-GE and SGJ for mGOO., Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing SGJ or EUS-GE at 6 centers. Primary outcomes included time to resumption of oral intake, length of stay (LOS), and mortality. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success, reintervention rates, adverse events (AEs), and resumption of chemotherapy., Results: A total of 310 patients were included (EUS-GE, n = 187; SGJ, n = 123). EUS-GE exhibited significantly lower time to resumption of oral intake (1.40 vs 4.06 days, P < .001), at lower albumin levels (2.95 vs 3.33 g/dL, P < .001), and a shorter LOS (5.31 vs 8.54 days, P < .001) compared with SGJ; there was no difference in mortality (48.1% vs 50.4%, P = .78). Technical (97.9% and 100%) and clinical (94.1% vs 94.3%) success was similar in the EUS-GE and SGJ groups, respectively. EUS-GE had lower rates of AEs (13.4% vs 33.3%, P < .001) but higher reintervention rates (15.5% vs 1.63%, P < .001). EUS-GE patients exhibited significantly lower interval time to resumption of chemotherapy (16.6 vs 37.8 days, P < .001). Outcomes between the EUS-GE and laparoscopic (n = 46) surgical approach showed that EUS-GE had shorter interval time to initiation/resumption of oral intake (3.49 vs 1.46 days, P < .001), decreased LOS (9 vs 5.31 days, P < .001), and a lower rate of AEs (11.9% vs 17.9%, P = .003)., Conclusions: This is the largest study to date showing that EUS-GE can be performed among nutritionally deficient patients without affecting the technical and clinical success compared with SGJ. EUS-GE is associated with fewer AEs while allowing earlier resumption of diet and chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Video 1A 51-year-old woman underwent orthotopic liver transplant with duct-to-duct anastomosis for primary biliary cholangitis 8 months prior to presentation. Two months postoperatively, she presented with clinical biliary pancreatitis. An MRCP performed on admission demonstrates dilated donor biliary tree and a severe stricture at the anastomosis. An index ERCP shows an indwelling surgical biliary "stent" exiting the duodenal papillae and anastomotic stricture. The surgical stent was removed, a sphincterotomy was performed, and there was an inability to traverse the anastomotic stricture. A representative cholangiogram shown here demonstrates the presence of a severe stricture completely obstructing the biliary tree. ERCP was done the next day, placing a 10-mm × 8-cm fully covered metal stent throughout the anastomosis. Three months later, the stent was removed because there was recurrent stricture at the site of anastomosis. Four months after stent removal, the patient again presented with clinical and laboratory obstructive biliary disease. A follow-up MRCP showed a severe anastomotic biliary stricture with an upstream stone. Several attempts were made to pass ERCP antegrade through the stenosis. However, they were unsuccessful. The rate-limiting step for successful recanalization was guidewire passage across the stricture. In this case, there was complete obliteration of the lumen by fibrosis. Efforts to pass 0.025-inch and 0.035-inch angled hydrophilic guidewires were unsuccessful. Recurrent stricturing was believed to be because of ischemia or inadequate recanalization. Our approach was to attempt antegrade recanalization and biliary decompression through an EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy. However, antegrade recanalization was unsuccessful and led to retrograde cholangioscopy using a single-use endoscope (SpyScope DS-2; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA) 4 weeks later. This video shows the cholangioscopic recanalization process. There was no passage of contrast antegrade or retrograde. During the cholangioscopy, there was no visible lumen. The area of suspected anastomosis based on the pearly white appearance of scar tissue was approached using mini-forceps (SpyBite; Boston Scientific) and a bite-on-bite approach to re-establish a lumen for stent placement. We used the pearly scar tissue as a guide to ensure the correct site for recanalization. We felt comfortable doing this because a hepatogastrostomy and sphincterotomy were thought to be protective against any bile leak if tunneling had dissected out of the duct. Moreover, contrast injection was used periodically to monitor progression into the duct. Eventually, the forceps were advanced into the proximal biliary tree under cholangioscopic direction, re-establishing a lumen. Bile is seen flowing through the identified lumen. While a rendezvous approach with antegrade transillumination and a percutaneous SpyScope DS-2 might be safer for recanalization of complete obstruction, the process would require multiple admissions and procedures for percutaneous access and fistula maturation. This might increase morbidity for this patient with no difference in outcome. We propose that cholangioscopic recanalization along with protection from bile leakage would be a reasonable approach in this case and similar cases with altered anatomy, hepatogastrostomy in place, or unavailability for follow-up or multiple procedures. This is an intraoperative radiographic representation. On the left, the cholangiogram is seen in place and the mini-forceps are passing through it into the proximal biliary tree. On the right, passage of the guidewire with balloon dilation of the stricture is shown. The stone previously seen on MRCP passed spontaneously. A follow-up cholangiogram showed luminal patency. A 10-mm × 10-cm fully covered metal stent (Viabil; W.L. Gore, Flagstaff, Ariz, USA) was placed across anastomosis., Competing Interests: Dr Baron is a consultant and speaker for Ambu, Boston Scientific, Cook Endoscopy, Medtronic, Olympus America, and W.L. Gore. The other authors did not disclose any financial relationships., (© 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr. Todd Baron is a consultant and speaker for Boston Scientific, W.L. Gore, Cook Endoscopy, and Olympus America

Background and Aims: Interventions for malignant small-bowel obstruction (SBO) may be limited by extent of peritoneal disease, rendering surgical or traditional endoscopic methods (ie, luminal stenting or decompressive gastrostomy) unfeasible. We demonstrated the novel use of EUS-guided lumen-apposing metal stent placement for enterocolonic bypass in patients with malignant SBO who were deemed high risk for surgery., Methods: Across 3 tertiary U.S. centers, a retrospective series of consecutive patients underwent attempted EUS-guided enterocolostomy (EUS-EC) for palliation of acute SBO because of malignant causes. Technique and devices used were described, and patient demographics and outcome data were collected., Results: Ten patients were included, of whom 9 (90.0%) were men, with a mean age of 64.5 ± 14.0 years and who were 1.5 ± 2.1 years postdiagnosis. Technical success was achieved in 8 of 10 patients (80.0%) and clinical success in 7 of 10 (70.0%), with a single major adverse event (10.0%) of aspiration. Median time until resumption of oral intake was 1.0 day (range, 0-8) after the procedure, with an interval to discharge home of 6.5 days and survival of 57.0 days., Conclusions: EUS-EC is a new alternative for palliation of acute SBO because of advanced malignant disease when conservative measures fail and other surgical or endoscopic options are not possible. Additional larger studies with longer duration of follow-up are needed to further define efficacy and safety of this approach., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pancreatic cancer (PC) carries a poor prognosis with an overall 5-year survival of less than 10%. Early diagnosis, though cumbersome, is essential to allow complete surgical resection. Therefore, primary and secondary prevention are critical to reduce the incidence and to potentially prevent mortality. Given a relatively low lifetime risk of developing PC, identification of high-risk individuals is crucial to allow identification of pre-malignant lesions and small, localized tumors. Although 85-90% of PC cases are sporadic, we could consider risk stratification for the 5-10% of patients with a family history and the 3-5% of cases due to inherited genetic syndromes. These high-risk populations should be considered for screening and surveillance of PC. MRI/MRCP and EUS are the preferred modalities, due to their high sensitivity in lesion detection. Surveillance should be personalized, considering genetics and family history, and assessment of risk factors that may increase cancer risk. Screening programs should be limited to tertiary referral center, with high-volumes and adequate facilities to manage these patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Dr. Todd H. Baron is a consultant and speaker for Boston Scientific, W.L. Gore, Cook Endoscopy, and Olympus America. Dr. Andrew Canakis declares no relevant funding for this work. All authors disclosed no financial relationships., (Copyright © 2023 by The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background and Aims: Piecemeal EMR of colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) >20 mm is effective. Experience is limited in the use of cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) for resection of colonic lesions. We compared the efficacy and the safety of EMR-C for the removal of colonic LSTs ≥30 mm with "inject-and-cut" standard EMR (EMR-S)., Methods: In this randomized trial from 4 Italian centers, 138 patients were treated with EMR-C and 102 with EMR-S. The rates of residual lesions, percentage of recurrence after 12 months, and adverse events were evaluated., Results: One hundred forty-three lesions were resected with EMR-C and 102 with EMR-S. Argon plasma coagulation (APC) was used as adjunctive treatment in 2.9% of EMR-Cs and in 22.5% of EMR-Ss (P < .001). The median time required was 20 minutes for EMR-C and 30 minutes for EMR-S (P < .001). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 14 EMR-Cs (10.1%; 2 perforations, 11 bleeding events, and 1 stenosis) and in 22 EMR-Ss (21.6%; 1 perforation and 21 bleeding events) (P = .017). Intraprocedural AEs occurred in 3.6% of EMR-Cs and 16.7% of EMR-Ss (P = .001). Overall, residual lesions within 12 months were found to be significantly higher with EMR-S (32 patients, 31.4%) than with EMR-C (8 patients, 5.8%) (P < .001). Recurrence at follow-up colonoscopy in 12 months occurred in 7 EMR-Cs (5.1%) and 17 EMR-Ss (16.7%; P < .001)., Conclusions: The study demonstrated the feasibility and safety of EMR-C for removing large colorectal LSTs, with higher eradication rates, shorter resection time, and less use of APC when compared with EMR-S. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03498664.)., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Endoscopy plays a critical role in caring for and evaluating the patient with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Endoscopy is essential for diagnosis, assessment of response to therapy, treatment of esophageal strictures, and ongoing monitoring of patients in histologic remission. To date, less-invasive testing for identifying or grading EoE severity has not been established, whereas diagnostic endoscopy as integral to both remains the criterion standard. Therapeutic endoscopy in patients with adverse events of EoE may also be required. In particular, dilation may be essential to treat and attenuate progression of the disease in select patients to minimize further fibrosis and stricture formation. Using a modified Delphi consensus process, a group of 20 expert clinicians and investigators in EoE were assembled to provide guidance for the use of endoscopy in EoE. Through an iterative process, the group achieved consensus on 20 statements yielding comprehensive advice on tissue-sampling standards, gross assessment of disease activity, use and performance of endoscopic dilation, and monitoring of disease, despite an absence of high-quality evidence. Key areas of controversy were identified when discussions yielded an inability to reach agreement on the merit of a statement. We expect that with ongoing research, higher-quality evidence will be obtained to enable creation of a guideline for these issues. We further anticipate that forthcoming expert-generated and agreed-on statements will provide valuable practice advice on the role and use of endoscopy in patients with EoE., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Concomitant malignant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction can be difficult to manage endoscopically with traditional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and luminal stenting. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HG) and gastrojejunostomy (GJ) are novel techniques that can relieve both obstructions in a single session. This study aims to describe the outcomes of combined, single session EUS-HG and EUS-GJ., Methods: This is a two-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent same session EUS-HG and EUS-GJ. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AE), reduction in total serum bilirubin, length of hospital stay (LOS), and re-intervention rates., Results: A total of 23 patients underwent EUS-HG and EUS-GJ (12 males, mean age 66.4 years). Twenty-one were performed for malignant obstruction. Technical success was 100% and 95.6% for HG and GJ, respectively. All patients subsequently tolerated a soft diet and 72.7% (16/22) of patients had a 50% reduction in bilirubin post-procedure. The median LOS for the 17 patients who were not discharged home immediately following the procedure was 2 (range 1-20) days. There were five AEs (2 mild, 3 moderate). Only three patients required reintervention (interventional radiology-guided biliary drainage, stent exchange for a benign biliary stricture, and placement of a second stent through an occluded distal common bile duct stent) over a median follow-up of 78 days. One patient with pancreatic cancer underwent successful tumor resection., Conclusion: Single session EUS-guided double bypass (HG and GJ) is technically feasible and safe when conducted by experienced endosonographers. Larger, comparative studies are needed., (© 2021 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.)

Background and Aims: Persistent gastrogastric or jejunogastric fistula is theoretically a concerning sequela of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP/EUS (EDGE), as it may functionally reverse the malabsorptive mechanism of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Prior EDGE studies, using predominantly 15-mm (diameter) lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) and fistula closure by primary intent, collectively report 9% persistent fistula rate, without a clear weight gain association. Our study determines the incidence of persistent fistula, and its association with unintentional weight gain, among recipients of EDGE via 20-mm LAMS followed by spontaneous fistula closure (secondary intent)., Methods: We conducted a dual-center prospective cohort study of 22 RYGB patients who underwent EDGE using 20-mm between 3/2018 and 10/2019. After LAMS extraction, all GGFs/JGFs were allowed to heal spontaneously. Objective testing for persistent fistula and total body weight (TBW) occurred a minimum of 8 weeks after LAMS extraction., Results: Persistent fistula was identified in 9 patients (41%). Longer LAMS dwell time (median 77-days) was observed in the persistent fistula group, compared to those with durable spontaneous fistula closure (median 35-days) (p = 0.03). Weight gain of ≥ 5% TBW occurred in 56% (n = 5) of patients with persistent fistula, compared to 15% (n = 2) of patients with spontaneous fistula closure (p = 0.128). Four patients with symptomatic persistent fistulas underwent attempted endoscopic fistula closure a median 7.5 months after LAMS extraction. Durable fistula closure occurred in the single patient who received argon plasma coagulation plus endoscopic suturing, whereas fistula dehiscence occurred in 3/3 (100%) patients with endoscopic suturing monotherapy., Conclusions: Larger LAMS diameter (20-mm), longer LAMS dwell time, and spontaneous fistula closure may be technical factors that increase the likelihood of post-EDGE persistent fistula. Post-EDGE persistent fistula has not been shown by ours or other studies to be significantly associated with unintentional weight gain; however, this may be due to small sample size. We question the utility of routine fistula closure by primary intent and suggest a personalized approach to post-EDGE fistula management., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background and Objectives: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD) are alternate therapies to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement for biliary decompression. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the technical and clinical success of PTBD to EUS-CD in patients with distal biliary obstruction. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), need for reintervention, and survival., Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study from three different centers was performed. Cox regression was used to compare time to reintervention and survival and logistic regression to compare technical and clinical success and AE rates. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO)., Results: A total of 86 patients (58 PTBD and 28 EUS-CD) were included. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and cause of biliary obstruction, with malignancy being the most common etiology (80.2%). EUS-CD utilized lumen-apposing metal stents in 15 patients and self-expandable metal biliary stents in 13 patients. Technical success was similar been EUS-CD (100%) and PTBD (96.6%; P = 0.3). EUS-CD was associated with higher clinical success compared to PTBD (84.6% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.04). There was a trend toward lower rates of AEs with EUS-CD 14.3% versus PTBD 29.3%, odds ratio: 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12-1.33, P = 0.14). The need for reintervention was significantly lower among patients who underwent EUS-CD (10.7%) compared to PTBD (77.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.24; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis of only patients with MBO demonstrated similar rate of reintervention between the groups in individuals who survived 50 days or less after the biliary decompression. However, reintervention rates were lower for EUS-CD in those with longer survival., Conclusion: EUS-CD is a technically and clinically highly successful procedure with a trend toward lower AEs compared to PTBD. EUS-CD minimizes the need for reintervention, which may enhance end-of-life quality in patients with MBO and expected survival longer than 50 days., Competing Interests: None

Background: The selection of surgery between parenchymal preserving (PPS) and total pancreatectomy (TP) with/without islet cell autotransplantation (IAT) for chronic pancreatitis (CP) patients varies based on multiple factors with a scarcity in literature addressing both at the same time. The aim of this manuscript is to present an algorithm for the surgery selection based on dominant area of disease, ductal dilatation, and glycemic control and compare outcomes., Methods: From 2017 to 2021, CP patients offered surgery at a single institution were retrospectively evaluated., Results: 51 patients underwent surgery (20 [39.2%] TPIAT, 4 [7.8%] TP, and 27 [52.9%] PPS - 9 Whipple procedures, 15 distal pancreatectomies, and 3 duct drainage procedures). No significant difference was observed in baseline characteristics or perioperative outcomes except median length of stay (8 days [IQR 6-10] vs. 13 days [IQR 9-15.5], p < 0.001), attributed to insulin requirement and education for TPIAT group. No differences in postoperative complications, such as clinically significant leak and intrabdominal fluid collection (3 [11.1%] vs 2 [10%], p = 1.0), hemorrhage (0 vs. 2 [10.0%], p = 0.2), delayed feeding (1 [3.7%] vs. 5 [25.0%], p = 0.07), or wound infection (4 [14.8%] vs. 0, p = 0.1) between PPS and TPIAT groups, respectively, were observed nor requirement of long-acting insulin at discharge (2 [15.4%] vs. 7 [43.8%], p = 0.1) for pre-operatively non-diabetic patients. No significant difference in weaning off narcotics and no mortality observed., Conclusion: The most appropriate selection of surgery based on the algorithm yields good and comparable outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2022 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The benefit of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the treatment of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) remains controversial. To identify predictors of jaundice resolution after ERCP and whether resolution is associated with improved patient outcomes, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 124 patients with jaundice and PSC. These patients underwent endoscopic biliary balloon dilation and/or stent placement at an American tertiary center, with validation in a separate cohort of 102 patients from European centers. Jaundice resolved after ERCP in 52% of patients. Median follow-up was 4.8 years. Independent predictors of jaundice resolution included older age (P = 0.048; odds ratio [OR], 1.03 for every 1-year increase), shorter duration of jaundice (P = 0.059; OR, 0.59 for every 1-year increase), lower Mayo Risk Score (MRS) (P = 0.025; OR, 0.58 for every 1-point increase), and extrahepatic location of the most advanced biliary stricture (P = 0.011; OR, 3.13). A logistic regression model predicted jaundice resolution with area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.79) in the validation set. Independent predictors of death or transplant during follow-up included higher MRS at the time of ERCP (P < 0.0001; hazard ratio [HR], 2.33 for every 1-point increase), lower total serum bilirubin before ERCP (P = 0.031; HR, 0.91 for every 1 mg/dL increase), and persistence of jaundice after endoscopic therapy (P = 0.003; HR, 2.30). Conclusion: Resolution of jaundice after endoscopic treatment of biliary strictures is associated with longer transplant-free survival of patients with PSC. The likelihood of resolution is affected by demographic, hepatic, and biliary variables and can be predicted using noninvasive data. These findings may refine the use of ERCP in patients with jaundice with PSC., (© 2021 The Authors. Hepatology Communications published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background and Aims: EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy has been performed for many years with most published experience from outside the United States. The luminal access point can be from the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, or jejunum; biliary access can be either into the right or left intrahepatic system. Thus, we prefer the term EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (ETBD). We describe what is believed to be the largest single-center U.S. experience of ETBD for management of benign and malignant biliary disease., Methods: This was a retrospective study of all ETBD conducted by 1 endoscopist between September 2014 and May 2021., Results: Two hundred fifteen patients underwent attempted ETBD: 85 for benign disease and 130 for malignant disease. Ninety-two patients (43%) had surgically altered anatomy (SAA). In 94 patients previously endoscopic attempts failed. The approach was transesophageal in 9, transgastric in 188, transduodenal in 5, and transjejunal in 5 patients. In 1 patient a bilateral approach was used. Standard fully covered self-expandable stents of 4- to 10-cm lengths and 8- or 10-mm diameters were used. Technical success was 95.3% and clinical success was 87.25%. Forty patients (18.6%) experienced adverse events (13 mild, 21 moderate, and 6 severe according to the modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon). Mean follow-up was 257.31 ± 308.11 days for all patients (124.53 ± 229.86 days for benign disease and 457.27 ± 466.31 days for malignant disease). Seventy-four patients (34.4%) had died at the time of data collection (66 in the malignant cohort, 8 in the benign cohort). Of those with malignancy surviving >6 months, 17.4% required reintervention., Conclusions: ETBD is effective in the management of benign and malignant biliary obstruction for patients with SAA as well as native anatomy, with a modest adverse event rate., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Gastrointestinal diseases account for considerable health care use and expenditures. We estimated the annual burden, costs, and research funding associated with gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States., Methods: We generated estimates using data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; Nationwide Emergency Department Sample; National Inpatient Sample; Kids' Inpatient Database; Nationwide Readmissions Database; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; National Vital Statistics System; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research; MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data; MarketScan Medicare Supplemental data; United Network for Organ Sharing registry; Medical Expenditure Panel Survey; and National Institutes of Health (NIH)., Results: Gastrointestinal health care expenditures totaled $119.6 billion in 2018. Annually, there were more than 36.8 million ambulatory visits for gastrointestinal symptoms and 43.4 million ambulatory visits with a primary gastrointestinal diagnosis. Hospitalizations for a principal gastrointestinal diagnosis accounted for more than 3.8 million admissions, with 403,699 readmissions. A total of 22.2 million gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed, and 284,844 new gastrointestinal cancers were diagnosed. Gastrointestinal diseases and cancers caused 255,407 deaths. The NIH supported $3.1 billion (7.5% of the NIH budget) for gastrointestinal research in 2020., Conclusions: Gastrointestinal diseases are responsible for millions of health care encounters and hundreds of thousands of deaths that annually costs billions of dollars in the United States. To reduce the high burden of gastrointestinal diseases, focused clinical and public health efforts, supported by additional research funding, are warranted., (Copyright © 2022 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)