Search

Despite efforts from various endoscopy societies, reporting in the field of endoscopy remains extremely heterogeneous. Harmonisation of clinical practice in endoscopy has been highlighted by application of many clinical practice guidelines and standards pertaining to the endoscopic procedures and reporting are underlined. The aim of the proposed "standardised reporting" is to (1) facilitate recognition of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) on initial endoscopy, (2) to enable interdisciplinary decision making for treatment by a multidisciplinary team, (3) to provide a basis for a standardised endoscopic follow-up which allows detection of recurrence or progression reliably, (4) to make endoscopic reports on NEN comparable between different units, and (5) to allow research collaboration between NEN centres in terms of consistency of their endoscopic data. The ultimate goal is to improve disease management, patient outcome and reduce the diagnostic burden on the side of the patient by ensuring the highest possible diagnostic accuracy and validity of endoscopic exams and possibly interventions.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in Billroth II patients is challenging and different endoscopes can be used. We retrospectively analysed 67 ERCP procedures in 38 Billroth II patients focussing on endoscope type and respective technical success and adverse event rate. 33 (49.2 %) ERCPs were performed using a duodenoscope, 87.9 % were successful and 3 were completed with the single-balloon enteroscope. 28 (41.8 %) ERCPs were performed with the single-balloon enteroscope, 82.1 % were successful and 2 were completed with a paediatric colonoscope. For 6 (9.0 %) ERCPs a paediatric colonoscope was used but only 3 (50.0 %) were successful. Overall technical success rate was 82.1 % without difference between the success rate of the duodenoscope and the single-balloon enteroscope. Overall adverse event rate was 10.5 %: 6.1 % duodenoscope,10.7 % single-balloon enteroscope, 33.3 % paediatric colonoscope. The duodenoscope allowed all conventional ERCP procedures, whereas the single-balloon enteroscope required dedicated ERCP catheters and did not allow? metallic stent placement. However, the single-balloon enteroscope facilitated access to the papilla and sphincteroplasty allowed direct cholangioscopy. ERCP indications were hile duct stones (53.7 %), cholangitis (20.9 %), chronic pancreatitis (20.9 %), pancreatic cancer (1.5 %) and liver transplantation (3%). Therapeutic ERCP success rate is high in patients with Billroth II gastrectomy using either a conventional duodenoscope or the single-balloon enteroscope, with an acceptable and comparable adverse event rate. The choice of endoscope may depend on local experience, post operative anatomy and therapeutic indication.

Background and Objectives: The diagnostic role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in children has been demonstrated only recently. Data on the technique’s therapeutic indications remain scarce. We evaluated diagnostic and interventional EUS indications, safety, and impact in children with pancreaticobiliary disorders. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our single pediatric center experience covering a 14-year period. Results: Between January 2000 and 2014, 52 EUS procedures were performed on 48 children (mean age 12 years) with pancreaticobiliary disorders for suspected biliary obstruction (n = 20/52), acute/chronic pancreatitis (n = 20), pancreatic mass (n = 3), pancreatic blunt trauma (n = 7), and ampullary adenoma (n = 2). Positive impact of EUS was observed in 51/52 procedures (98%), precluding using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (n = 9), focusing on endotherapy (n = 21), or reorienting therapy toward surgery (n = 7). EUS-guided fine needle aspiration was carried out on 12 patients. Thirteen therapeutic EUS procedures were conducted, nine of which were combined EUS-ERCP procedures (three EUS-guided pseudocyst drainage, one EUS-guided transgastric biliary drainage of a metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma). Conclusions: We report on a large pediatric EUS series for diagnostic and therapeutic pancreaticobiliary disorders, showing a significant impact of diagnostic EUS and affording insights into novel EUS and combined EUS-ERCP therapeutic applications. We suggest considering EUS as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of pediatric biliopancreatic diseases.

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is an inflammatory disorder characterized by inflammation and fibrosis, resulting in a progressive and irreversible destruction of exocrine and endocrine pancreatic tissue. Clinicians should attempt to classify patients into one of the six etiologic groups according to the TIGARO classification system. MRI/MRCP, if possible with secretin enhancement, is considered the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of early-stage disease. In CP, pain is the most disabling symptom, with a significant impact on quality of life. Pain should be assessed using the Izbicki score and preferably treated using the "pain ladder" approach. In painful CP, endoscopic therapy (ET) can be considered as early as possible. This procedure can be combined with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the presence of large (> 4 mm), obstructive stone(s) in the pancreatic head, and with ductal stenting in the presence of a single main pancreatic duct (MPD) stricture in the pancreatic head with a markedly dilated MPD. Pancreatic stenting should be pursued for at least 12 months in patients with persistent pain relief. On-demand stent exchange should be the preferred strategy. The simultaneous placement of multiple, side-by-side, pancreatic stents can be recommended in patients with MPD strictures persisting after 12 months of single plastic stenting. We recommend surgery in the following cases : a) technical failure of ET; b) early (6 to 8 weeks) clinical failure; c) definitive biliary drainage at a later time point; d) pancreatic ductal drainage when repetitive ET is considered unsuitable for young patients; e) resection of an inflammatory pancreatic head when pancreatic cancer cannot be ruled out; f) duodenal obstruction. Duodenopan-createctomy or oncological distal pancreatectomy should be considered for patients with suspected malignancy. Pediatricians should be aware of and systematically search for CP in the differential diagnosis of chronic abdominal pain. As malnutrition is highly prevalent in CP patients, patients at nutritional risk should be identified in order to allow for dietary counseling and nutritional intervention using oral supplements. Patients should follow a healthy balanced diet taken in small meals and snacks, with normal fat content. Enzyme replacement therapy is beneficial to symptomatic patients, but also in cases of subclinical insufficiency. Regular follow-up should be considered in CP patients, primarily to detect subclinical maldigestion and the development of pancreatogenic diabetes. Screening for pancreatic cancer is not recommended in CP patients, except in those with the hereditary form.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONSFor pancreatic solid lesions, ESGE recommends performing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling as first-line procedure when a pathological diagnosis is required. Alternatively, percutaneous sampling may be considered in metastatic disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In the case of negative or inconclusive results and a high degree of suspicion of malignant disease, ESGE suggests re-evaluating the pathology slides, repeating EUS-guided sampling, or surgery.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.In patients with chronic pancreatitis associated with a pancreatic mass, EUS-guided sampling results that do not confirm cancer should be interpreted with caution.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.For pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), ESGE recommends EUS-guided sampling for biochemical analyses plus cytopathological examination if a precise diagnosis may change patient management, except for lesions ≤ 10 mm in diameter with no high risk stigmata. If the volume of PCL aspirate is small, it is recommended that carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level determination be done as the first analysis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.For esophageal cancer, ESGE suggests performing EUS-guided sampling for the assessment of regional lymph nodes (LNs) in T1 (and, depending on local treatment policy, T2) adenocarcinoma and of lesions suspicious for metastasis such as distant LNs, left liver lobe lesions, and suspected peritoneal carcinomatosis.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.For lymphadenopathy of unknown origin, ESGE recommends performing EUS-guided (or alternatively endobronchial ultrasound [EBUS]-guided) sampling if the pathological result is likely to affect patient management and no superficial lymphadenopathy is easily accessible.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In the case of solid liver masses suspicious for metastasis, ESGE suggests performing EUS-guided sampling if the pathological result is likely to affect patient management, and (i) the lesion is poorly accessible/not detected at percutaneous imaging, or (ii) a sample obtained via the percutaneous route repeatedly yielded an inconclusive result.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.