Search

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) behavior assessment is a daily challenge for physicians. Modern PNET management varies from a watch-and-wait strategy to surgery depending on tumor aggressiveness. Therefore, the aggressiveness definition plays a pivotal role in the PNET work-up. The aggressiveness of PNETs is mainly based on the dimensions and histological grading, with sometimes a lack of specificity and sensibility. In the last twenty years, EUS has become a cornerstone in the diagnostic phase of PNET management for its high diagnostic yield and the possibility of obtaining a histological specimen. The number of EUS applications in the PNET work-up has been rapidly increasing with new and powerful possibilities. The application of contrast has led to an important step in PNET detection; in recent years, it has been gaining interesting applications in aggressiveness assessment. In this review, we underline the latest experiences and opportunities in the behavior assessment of PNETs using contact-enhanced EUS and contested enhanced harmonic EUS with a particular focus on the future application and possibility that these techniques could provide.

There is scarce evidence on the comparison between different methods for the drainage of distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of these techniques. We searched main databases through September 2021 and identified five randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was clinical success. The secondary outcomes were technical success, overall and serious adverse event rate. Percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage was found to be inferior to other interventions (PTBD: RR 1.01, 0.88–1.17 with EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD); RR 1.03, 0.86–1.22 with EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HG); RR 1.42, 0.90–2.24 with surgical hepaticojejunostomy). The comparison between EUS-HG and EUS-CD was not significant (RR 1.01, 0.87–1.17). Surgery was not superior to other interventions (RR 1.40, 0.91–2.13 with EUS-CD and RR 1.38, 0.88–2.16 with EUS-HG). No difference in any of the comparisons concerning adverse event rate was detected, although PTBD showed a slightly poorer performance on ranking analysis (SUCRA score 0.13). In conclusion, all interventions seem to be effective for the drainage of DMBO, although PTBD showed a trend towards higher rates of adverse events.