Search

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.

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.

Pancreatitis may be acute or chronic, mild or severe. Acute necrotizing pancreatitis remains the most serious form of acute pancreatitis and accounts for the majority of complications. Although there is an established nomenclature for pancreatitis and pancreatic fluid collections, such as pancreatic pseudocysts, it is not widely understood or recognized by physicians, including gastroenterologists. Because nonspecialists will be increasingly called upon to treat and appropriately refer patients with pancreatitis and its complications for more specialized care, it is important to understand the evolving treatment options for managing these patients. This article addresses and summarizes pancreatitis and its complications, particularly pancreatic collections. Am J Med. 1997;102:555-563.[C] 1997 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

* Purpose: To review the pathophysiology of gastrointestinal motility disorders during pregnancy, their clinical manifestations, and their management. * Data Sources: Studies published from 1963 to 1992 identified by computerized literature searches of Index Medicus and MEDLINE; hand searches; contact with pharmaceutical representatives for information on drug therapy during pregnancy; and selected texts on drugs and obstetrics. * Study Selection: Selected studies were those involving controlled design of physiology related to pregnancy or to hormonal effects on the gastrointestinal tract or both, and clinical studies or previous reviews that contributed to the understanding of the gastrointestinal effects of pregnancy. * Data Extraction: Data concerning the epidemiology, causes, clinical manifestations, and complications of altered gastrointestinal motility during pregnancy as well as the strength of association between gastrointestinal disorders of pregnancy and hormonal changes were evaluated and used to develop a practical approach to evaluate and manage these patients. * Results of Data Synthesis: Effects on the gastrointestinal tract during pregnancy are caused primarily by hormonal changes and not the physical effects of the gravid uterus. Motility changes occur throughout the gastrointestinal tract, including a reduction in lower esophageal sphincter pressure and its physiologic function with resulting gastroesophageal reflux and the risk for aspiration; alterations in gastric motor function associated with nausea and vomiting; and a decrease in the rate of small-bowel and colonic transit manifested primarily as abdominal bloating and constipation. These effects are mediated by progesterone, with estrogen probably acting as a primer. * Conclusions: Given the large number of pregnancies each year complicated by gastrointestinal motility disorders, many physicians (including internists and gastroenterologists) must manage these problems. Knowledge of the underlying physiologic alterations in gastrointestinal motility during pregnancy and of safe treatment options is essential to the care of the pregnant patient., Motility disorders in the gastrointestinal tract are common during pregnancy. They appear to result from increasing levels of female sex hormones and not from the enlarging uterus. Pregnancy does not seem to affect secretion or absorption in the gastrointestinal tract. Heartburn occurs in an estimated 30% to 50% of all pregnancies. Eating small frequent meals, raising the head of the bed and avoiding stooping and bending may alleviate heartburn. Nausea and vomiting commonly affect pregnant women. Changes in diet may be all the treatment needed for mild cases, but more severe cases may be helped with antiemetic drugs or vitamin B6. Pregnant women often experience constipation and bloating, but use of laxatives may cause harm to both the mother and fetus. Increasing dietary fiber or taking bulk agents should relieve constipation. Bulk agents should also be used instead of medication to treat diarrhea in pregnancy.

Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) have increasingly been used in the endoscopic management of malignant and benign gastrointestinal diseases.

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.

Recent literature has demonstrated effectiveness and safety of endoscopic ultrasound–guided gallbladder drainage, both as a primary intervention in patients with cholecystitis who are unfit for urgent surgical intervention and as a secondary intervention to internalize biliary drainage after initial placement of a percutaneous cholecystostomy catheter.

Bile leak after liver transplantation (LT) is commonly treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, there are limited data regarding the optimal treatment strategy. We aimed to examine the role of ERCP in LT recipients with bile leaks at two large institutions. We reviewed all ERCPs performed in LT recipients with bile leak and duct-to-duct biliary anastomosis at two high-volume transplant centers. Eighty patients were included. Forty-seven (59%) patients underwent ERCP with plastic stent placement (with or without sphincterotomy) and 33 patients (41%) underwent sphincterotomy alone. Complete resolution was obtained in 94% of the stent group vs. 58% of the sphincterotomy group (p?

ObjectiveMinimally invasive surgical necrosectomy and endoscopic necrosectomy, compared with open necrosectomy, might improve outcomes in necrotising pancreatitis, especially in critically ill patients. Evidence from large comparative studies is lacking.DesignWe combined original and newly collected data from 15 published and unpublished patient cohorts (51 hospitals; 8 countries) on pancreatic necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis. Death rates were compared in patients undergoing open necrosectomy versus minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic necrosectomy. To adjust for confounding and to study effect modification by clinical severity, we performed two types of analyses: logistic multivariable regression and propensity score matching with stratification according to predicted risk of death at baseline (low: <5%; intermediate: ≥5% to <15%; high: ≥15% to <35%; and very high: ≥35%).ResultsAmong 1980 patients with necrotising pancreatitis, 1167 underwent open necrosectomy and 813 underwent minimally invasive surgical (n=467) or endoscopic (n=346) necrosectomy. There was a lower risk of death for minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy (OR, 0.53; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.84; p=0.006) and endoscopic necrosectomy (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63; p=0.006). After propensity score matching with risk stratification, minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy remained associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the very high-risk group (42/111 vs 59/111; risk ratio, 0.70; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95; p=0.02). Endoscopic necrosectomy was associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the high-risk group (3/40 vs 12/40; risk ratio, 0.27; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.88; p=0.03) and in the very high-risk group (12/57 vs 28/57; risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.77; p=0.005).ConclusionIn high-risk patients with necrotising pancreatitis, minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic necrosectomy are associated with reduced death rates compared with open necrosectomy.

In recent years, the management of symptoms of pancreatic fluid collections has shifted from surgical and percutaneous interventions to endoscopic techniques. Available data show that endoscopic drainage can be achieved with minimal morbidity and procedural-related mortality, a high degree of technical and clinical success, and acceptable risk of adverse events. Although endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis provides a durable, minimally invasive treatment option, it is still generally performed only in tertiary care medical centers because of the overall complexity of this clinical scenario.

Endoscopic enteral stenting (ES) in malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is limited by high rates of stent obstruction. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel procedure that potentially offers sustained patency without tumor ingrowth/overgrowth. The aim of this study is to compare EUS-GE with ES in terms of (1) symptom recurrence and need for re-intervention, (2) technical success (proper stent positioning as determined via endoscopy and fluoroscopy), (3) clinical success (ability to tolerate oral intake without vomiting), and (4) procedure-related adverse events (AEs). Multicenter retrospective study of all consecutive patients who underwent either EUS-GE at four centers between 2013 and 2015 or ES at one center between 2008 and 2010. A total of 82 patients (mean age 66-years ± 13.5 and 40.2% female) were identified: 30 in EUS-GE and 52 in ES. Technical and clinical success was not significantly different: 86.7% EUS-GE versus 94.2% ES (p= 0.2) and 83.3% EUS-GE versus 67.3% ES (p= 0.12), respectively. Symptom recurrence and need for re-intervention, however, was significantly lower in the EUS-GE group (4.0 vs. 28.6%, (p= 0.015). Post-procedure mean length of hospitalization was comparable at 11.3 days ± 6.6 for EUS-GE versus 9.5 days ± 8.3 for ES (p= 0.3). Rates and severity of AEs (as per the ASGE lexicon) were also similar (16.7 vs. 11.5%, p= 0.5). On multivariable analysis, ES was independently associated with need for re-intervention (OR 12.8, p= 0.027). EUS-GE may be ideal for malignant GOO with comparable effectiveness and safety to ES while being associated with fewer symptom recurrence and requirements for re-intervention.

Pancreatitis is the most common adverse event of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with the potential for clinically significant morbidity and mortality. Several patient and procedural risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of post–endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). Considerable research efforts have identified several pharmacologic and procedural interventions that can drastically affect the incidence of PEP. This review article addresses the underlying mechanisms at play for the development of PEP, identifying patient and procedural risk factors and meaningful use of risk-stratification information, and details current interventions aimed at reducing the risk of this complication.

•Approximately 5–10% of pancreatic cancer cases have a genetic background.•Familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) is defined as families with two or more first-degree relatives with PC that don't meet the criteria of other hereditary cancer syndromes.•Pancreatic cancer screening isn't feasible for general population but may be suggest in high-risk individuals.

Removal of embedded partially covered self-expanding metal stents (PCSEMS) is associated with an increased risk of adverse events compared with removal of fully covered self-expanding stents (FCSES) due to tissue ingrowth. Successful removal of embedded PCSEMS has been described by the stent-in-stent (SIS) technique. To report the first US experience from three high-volume quaternary care centers on the safety and efficacy of the SIS technique for removal of embedded PCSEMS. Retrospective study of outcomes for consecutive patients who underwent the SIS for removal of embedded PCSEMS over a 5-year period. Twenty-seven embedded PCSEMS were successfully removed using the SIS technique (100 %) from 25 patients (11 males), median age 65 (range 37–80). All stents were successfully removed in one endoscopic session (no repeat SIS procedures were required for persistently embedded stents). The embedded PCSEMS had been in situ for a median of 76 days (range 26–501). Median SIS dwell time (FCSES in situ of PCSEMS) was 13 days (interquartile range 8–16 days; range 4–212 days). One adverse event (self-limited bleeding) occurred during a median follow-up period of 3 months (range 1–32). No patients died, required surgery, or had long-term disability due to adverse events attributed to the SIS technique. Twelve patients required additional interventions following SIS procedure for persistence or recurrence of the underlying pathology. When performed by experienced endoscopists, safe and effective removal of embedded PCSEMS can be achieved via the SIS technique.

Colonoscopy is one of the most common procedures. Sedation and analgesia decrease anxiety and discomfort and minimize risks. Therefore, patients prefer to be sedated when undergoing examination, although the best combination of drugs has not been determined. The combination of opioids and benzodiazepines is used to relieve the patient's pain and discomfort. More recently, propofol has assumed a prominent position. This randomized prospective study is unique in medical literature that specifically compared the use of propofol and fentanyl with or without midazolam for colonoscopy sedation performed by anesthesiologists. The aim of this study was to evaluate the side effects of sedation, discharge conditions, quality of sedation, and propofol consumption during colonoscopy, with or without midazolam as preanesthetic. The study involved 140 patients who underwent colonoscopy at the University Hospital of the Federal University of Juiz de Fora. Patients were divided into two groups: Group Ireceived intravenous midazolam as preanesthetic 5min before sedation, followed by fentanyl and propofol; Group IIreceived intravenous anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol. Patients in Group IIhad a higher incidence of reaction (motor or verbal) to the colonoscope introduction, bradycardia, hypotension, and increased propofol consumption. Patient satisfaction was higher in Group I. According to the methodology used, the combination of midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol for colonoscopy sedation reduces propofol consumption and provides greater patient satisfaction.

A colonoscopia é um dos procedimentos mais feitos. Sedação e analgesia diminuem a ansiedade e o desconforto e minimizam riscos. Em razão disso, os pacientes preferem que o exame seja feito sob anestesia, embora não tenha sido determinada a melhor combinação de fármacos. A associação de benzodiazepínicos com opioides é usada para aliviar a dor e o desconforto do paciente. Mais recentemente, o propofol assumiu posição de destaque. Este estudo, prospectivo e randomizado, é único na literatura médica e especificamente comparou o uso do propofol e fentanil associado ou não ao midazolam na sedação para colonoscopia feita por anestesiologistas. Os objetivos do estudo foram avaliar os efeitos colaterais da sedação, as condições de alta, a qualidade da sedação e o consumo de propofol durante a colonoscopia, com ou sem o midazolam como pré‐anestésico. Envolveu 140 pacientes submetidos à colonoscopia, no Hospital Universitário da Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora. Os pacientes foram divididos em dois grupos. O Grupo Irecebeu, por via endovenosa, midazolam como pré‐anestésico, cinco minutos antes da sedação, seguido do fentanil e propofol. O Grupo IIrecebeu, por via endovenosa, anestesia com fentanil e propofol. Os pacientes do Grupo IIapresentaram maior incidência de reação (motora ou verbal) à introdução do colonoscópio, bradicardia, hipotensão arterial e maior consumo de propofol. A satisfação dos pacientes foi maior no Grupo I. De acordo com a metodologia empregada, a associação de midazolam ao propofol e fentanil para sedação em colonoscopia reduz o consumo de propofol e cursa com maior satisfação do paciente.

Luminal perforations and anastomotic leaks of the gastrointestinal tract are life-threatening events with high morbidity and mortality. Early recognition and prompt therapy is essential for a favourable outcome. Surgery has long been considered the “gold standard” approach for these conditions; however it is associated with high re-intervention morbidity and mortality. The recent development of endoscopic techniques and devices to manage perforations, leaks and fistulae has made non-surgical treatment an attractive and reasonable alternative approach. Although endoscopic therapy is widely accepted, comparative data of the different techniques are still lacking. In this review we describe, benefits and limitations of the current options in the management of patients with perforations and leaks, in order to improve outcomes.

An over-the-scope clip (OTSC) device was designed for closure of acute perforations, fistulas, leaks, and non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding. Previous data show a high rate of early fistula closure using the OTSC; however, data on long-term fistula closure are scant. We report our experience using an OTSC for closure of chronic gastrointestinal fistulas. Retrospective review of all patients, who underwent OTSC placement at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Virginia Mason Medical Center for closure of chronic fistulas from October 2011 to September 2012, was performed. Initial technical success was defined by lack of contrast extravasation immediately after OTSC placement. Delayed success was defined by resolution of the fistula without the need for additional therapies. Recurrent fistula was defined by the recurrence of symptoms and/or re-demonstration of fistula after initial success. Forty-seven unique patients (24 men; mean age 57 ± 14 years) underwent 60 procedures using the OTSC for closure of gastrointestinal fistulas. Fistula locations were: small bowel (n= 18), stomach (n= 16), colo-rectum (n= 10), and esophagus (n= 3). Fistulas related to previous percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy (n= 10) or prior bariatric procedure (n= 10) were the most common etiologies. Initial technical success occurred in 42/47 (89 %) index cases; however, 19/41 (46 %) patients developed fistula recurrence at a median of 39 days (IQR 26–86 days). The retained OTSC was present adjacent to the fistula in 16/19 (84 %) at repeat intervention. Patients were followed for a median length of 178 days (IQR 63–326 days), and only 25/47 (53 %) patients demonstrated delayed clinical success using OTSC. Initial technical fistula closure can be achieved using OTSCs. Recurrent fistulas at the same location occur in approximately 50 % of cases despite frequent OTSC clip retention.

Adequate bowel cleansing is essential for complete examination of the colon mucosa during colonoscopy. Suboptimal bowel preparation has potential adverse consequences, such as missed pathologic abnormalities, the need for repeated procedures, and increased procedure-related complications. Several factors can predict individuals at increased risk for inadequate bowel preparation. If predictors of inadequate bowel preparation are identified, then education should be intensified and a more aggressive bowel regimen recommended. On completion of this article, you should be able to (1) define the frequency of inadequate colon preparations, (2) identify predictors of poor bowel preparation, and (3) use a more aggressive bowel regimen when clinically indicated.

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.

Cholangiocarcinoma is an increasingly common malignancy. Patients usually present with biliary obstruction. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is almost exclusively for drainage of the biliary tree, although diagnostic ERCP is still performed at the time of drainage to obtain a tissue diagnosis using brush cytology and intraductal biopsies. Peroral cholangioscopy may facilitate tissue diagnosis by allowing for directed biopsies. Biliary drainage is achieved by endoscopic stent placement. Careful preprocedural planning is necessary to select the ideal areas for drainage and to minimize contrast injection and subsequent cholangitis in hilar lesions.

To determine trends in pancreaticobiliary stents over the past 12–18 months.

BackgroundOutbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms have been linked to endoscope reprocessing lapses. Meticulous manual cleaning before high-level disinfection (HLD) is essential in reducing residual contamination that can interfere with HLD. Current reprocessing guidelines state that visual inspection is sufficient to confirm adequate cleaning.ObjectiveOur aim was to evaluate contamination of clinically used endoscopes, using visual inspection and rapid indicator tests before and after manual cleaning. A second objective was to determine which rapid indicator instruments and methods could be used for quality improvement initiatives in endoscope reprocessing.DesignClinical use study of endoscope reprocessing effectiveness.SettingTertiary care teaching hospital with an inpatient endoscopy center.MethodsResearchers sampled endoscopes used for gastrointestinal procedures before and after manual cleaning. The external surfaces and 1 channel of each endoscope were visually inspected and tested with rapid indicators to measure protein, blood, and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) contamination levels.ResultsMultiple components were sampled during 37 encounters with 12 unique endoscopes. All bedside-cleaned endoscopes had high levels of ATP and detectable blood or protein, whether or not any residue was visible. Although there was no visible residue on any endoscopes after manual cleaning, 82% had at least 1 positive rapid indicator test.ConclusionsRelying solely on visual inspection of endoscopes prior to HLD is insufficient to ensure reprocessing effectiveness. For quality assurance initiatives, tests of different endoscope components using more than 1 indicator may be necessary. Additional research is needed to validate specific monitoring protocols.

Colonoscopy has become the mainstay for screening and surveillance of colorectal cancer. The guidelines for screening and surveillance colonoscopy have recently been updated, particularly in light of greater recognition of the importance of sessile serrated lesions in the role of cancer. It is important for practitioners to be aware of and understand the recommendations for screening and surveillance to optimize patient safety and to decrease health care use. We searched PubMed for articles and guidelines related to screening and surveillance of colonic polyps and serrated adenomas. The related citations feature was also used. The search was conducted from February 22, 2013, to March 2, 2013, and we included the search terms colorectal cancer screening, colonoscopy, guidelines, colorectal polyps,and colorectal surveillance. We selected the most recent guidelines and pertinent articles for this review, in which we discuss the basis of screening and surveillance colonoscopy and provide recommendations for colonoscopy intervals.

Ulcer perforation carries up to a 30 % 1-year mortality rate. Intervention-related adverse events are among statistically significant predictors of 1-year mortality. A natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgical (NOTES) approach may be less invasive and may decrease procedure-related adverse events by diminishing the so-called second hit, thus leading to decreased morbidity and mortality. We sought to assess the feasibility of an endoscopic transluminal omental plug technique in patients with perforated gastroduodenal ulcers under laparoscopic guidance.Patients with suspected acute gastroduodenal ulcer perforations were offered participation in this prospective pilot study. Closure of the perforation was attempted using the NOTES omental plug technique. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and radiographic data were abstracted, as were data for morbidity, mortality, and pilot data regarding quality of life (QOL).From February 2010 through February 2012, a total of 17 patients presented to a tertiary care center with clinically suspected perforated ulcer. Of seven patients (mean age 79 years, range 64–89 years) who consented to the study, three underwent the study procedure. All patients had multiple comorbidities. Two patients presented with 4–6 mm perforated peptic ulcers and underwent successful laparoscopic-assisted NOTES omental and falciform ligament patch closure, respectively. Postoperative radiographic contrast studies showed no leak, and patients were discharged home on postoperative days 3 and 4. The third patient had undergone enterocutaneous fistula repair with herniorrhaphy 6 weeks before. Although a transluminal endoscopic approach was feasible, the omentum was under too much tension to be secured. This procedure was converted to an open omental patch repair. For all but one patient who provided consent, obtaining QOL data was feasible.Initial results from a laparoscopic-assisted NOTES approach for closure of perforated peptic ulcers appear promising and enable swift recovery in selected patients. This is especially important in elderly and/or immunocompromised patients. Technical details and patient selection criteria continue to evolve.

Pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis may result in significant morbidity and mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis. Many recommendations have been made for management of necrotizing pancreatitis, but no published guidelines have incorporated the many recent developments in minimally invasive techniques for necrosectomy. Hence, a multidisciplinary conference was convened to develop a consensus on interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis. Participants included most international experts from multiple disciplines. The evidence for efficacy of interventions was reviewed, presentations were given by experts, and a consensus was reached on each topic. In summary, intervention is primarily indicated for infected necrosis, less often for symptomatic sterile necrosis, and should ideally be delayed as long as possible, preferably 4 weeks or longer after the onset of disease, for better demarcation and liquefaction of the necrosis. Both the step-up approach using percutaneous drainage followed by minimally invasive video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement and per-oral endoscopic necrosectomy have been shown to have superior outcomes to traditional open necrosectomy with respect to short-term and long-term morbidity and are emerging as treatments of choice. Applicability of these techniques depends on the availability of specialized expertise and a multidisciplinary team dedicated to the management of severe acute pancreatitis and its complications.

Hilar cholangiocarcinoma has a poor prognosis and surgery remains the only curative option. However, few patients are diagnosed at a curable stage and palliative therapies are, therefore, mandatory. Endoscopy could have a useful role in the work-up of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma who are unsuitable for surgery. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography provides an opportunity to collect specimens for cytological or histological diagnosis, yet is often nondiagnostic. Other techniques, including fluorescence in situ hybridization, confocal laser endomicroscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography, are now improving the accuracy of tissue diagnosis. This Review presents an overview of the diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic procedures in the management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. The use of such procedures in guiding the therapeutic management of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma is discussed, and the relative success of endoscopic stenting as the main palliative therapy for obstructive jaundice (a common complication of hilar cholangiocarcinoma) is described. The potential role of photodynamic therapy as a palliative treatment for patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma is also outlined.

Endoscopic treatment is the mainstay of therapy for benign billiary strictures, and surgery is reserved for selected patients in whom endoscopic treatment fails or is not feasible. The endoscopic approach depends mainly on stricture etiology and location, and generally involves the placement of one or multiple plastic stents, dilation of the stricture(s), or a combination of these approaches. Knowledge of biliary anatomy, endoscopy experience and a well-equipped endoscopy unit are necessary for the success of endoscopic treatment. This Review discusses the etiologies of benign biliary strictures and different endoscopic therapies and their respective outcomes. Data on newer therapies, such as the placement of self-expandable metal stents, and the treatment of biliary–enteric anastomotic strictures is also reviewed.

Benign biliary diseases are often managed endoscopically using plastic stents. Benign biliary strictures (BBS) respond to placement of multiple large-bore plastic stents, though requiring multiple procedures to place stents, and to exchange stents to prevent and/or treat stent occlusion. Bile leaks close using plastic stents, which divert bile away from the leak into the duodenum. Covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMS), intended for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction, have been used to treat benign biliary diseases. Advantages include small predeployment and large postexpansion diameters. Lack of imbedding of the metal into the bile duct wall enables removability.

Surgery is the treatment of choice for traumatic pseudocyst. Minimally invasive management of these collections has been used. The aim was to analyze the outcome after endoscopic treatment and the integrity of the main pancreatic duct caused by abdominal trauma.

Traditional open surgical necrosectomy for treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with high morbidity and mortality, leading to a shift toward minimally invasive endoscopic, radiologic, and laparoscopic approaches. Percutaneous drainage is useful as a temporizing method to control sepsis and as an adjunctive treatment to surgical intervention. It is limited because of the requirement for frequent catheter care and the need for repeated procedures. Endoscopic transgastric or transduodenal therapies with endoscopic debridement/necrosectomy have recently been described and are highly successful in carefully selected patients. It avoids the need for open necrosectomy and can be used in poor operative candidates. Laparoscopic necrosectomy is also promising for treatment of pancreatic necrosis. However, the need for inducing a pneumoperitoneum and the potential risk of infection limit its usefulness in patients with critical illness. Retroperitoneal access with a nephroscope is used to directly approach the necrosis with complete removal of a sequestrum. Retroperitoneal drainage using the delay-until-liquefaction strategy also appears to be successful to treat pancreatic necrosis. The anatomic location of the necrosis, clinical comorbidities, and operator experience determine the best approach for a particular patient. Tertiary care centers with sufficient expertise are increasingly using minimally invasive procedures to manage pancreatic necrosis.

Commentary: There now are a wide variety of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) available to the endoscopist for treatment of biliary obstruction. Furthermore, there is increasing availability of stents with different designs and configurations; stents that are fully covered, uncovered, or partially covered; and several methods of stent deployment. Also, the clinical indications for use of SEMS are expanding to potentially include benign biliary tract disease as well as preoperative usage in potentially resectable malignant disease. In this Clinical Update, Dr Todd H. Baron reviews this topic, focusing on comparative clinical outcome studies of metal vs plastic stents for treatment of biliary obstruction. In addition, Dr Baron discusses possible complications of SEMS and how to manage them.

Pancreatitis is a known complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Our aim was to assess the prevalence and severity of ERCP-associated pancreatitis using established criteria. Retrospective review of patients younger than 18 years undergoing ERCP complicated by post-ERCP pancreatitis defined by the 1991 consensus statement. Patients with chronic pancreatitis were studied separately using modified criteria. Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis were analyzed. Three hundred forty-three ERCPs were performed in 224 patients. Two hundred seventy-six ERCPs were performed in patients without chronic pancreatitis, 7 of which were complicated by post-ERCP pancreatitis (prevalence 2.5%). Patients undergoing diagnostic-only ERCP were less likely to develop post-ERCP pancreatitis (P< 0.01). Sixty-seven procedures were performed on patients with chronic pancreatitis; 10 developed postprocedure pain requiring or prolonging hospitalization (prevalence 14.9%). Pancreatic duct stenting was a risk factor for post-ERCP pain in this subset of patients (P= 0.02). The prevalence of post-ERCP pancreatitis is low—2.5% excluding patients with chronic pancreatitis and 4.96% overall. Therapeutic procedures and the presence of chronic pancreatitis are risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Background A 72-year-old male presented to the emergency department with epigastric pain, anorexia and progressive jaundice of 1 week's duration. He had no prior history of gastrointestinal illness, diabetes or cancer. He did not smoke or consume alcohol. He did have a family history of colon and bone cancer.Investigations Biochemical and serologic studies, CT scan, abdominal ultrasound, endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, biliary cytology, pancreas needle biopsies and immunohistochemical stainings.Diagnosis Autoimmune pancreatitis with IgG4-associated sclerosing cholangitis affecting the extrahepatic biliary ducts and mimicking primary sclerosing cholangitis and cholangiocarcinoma.Management Corticosteroids and immunomodulatory therapy.

Endoscopic clipping is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of various bleeding gastrointestinal lesions. Randomized controlled trials and a meta-analysis have shown comparable efficacy between clipping and conventional contact thermal therapy for definitive hemostasis of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Clipping also seems to be efficacious for selected lower gastrointestinal bleeding lesions, such as diverticular bleeding and postpolypectomy bleeding. Proficiency in clip application and endoscopic identification of lesions that are amenable to clipping are key determinants of a successful outcome.

Biliary cast syndrome is an uncommon condition, almost always associated with liver transplantation. We describe 2 patients with biliary cast syndrome in a nonliver transplant setting. The casts were managed endoscopically.

Expandable stents have now become accepted for the relief of malignant obstruction throughout the GI tract and biliary system. Almost all expandable stents are composed of metal. More recently, an expandable plastic stent has been developed for the treatment of benign esophageal conditions. The clinical response to these devices is dependent on proper stent placement and anatomical location. Proper stent placement, in turn, is dependent on being familiar with the characteristics of the devices, having knowledge of the length of the stricture and anatomy, and the location of the obstruction within the GI tract. This review summarizes the available devices and techniques for optimal placement of expandable stents.

Background:Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography was developed over 30 years ago for the diagnosis of biliary disorders. It has become an accepted interventional technique for management of biliary tract diseases, especially in patients who have failed attempted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography or have altered anatomy that makes the biliary tree endoscopically inaccessible. The correlative procedure, which we term ‘percutaneous pancreatography’ (PP), has only been described once in the literature. Case Presentations:We report the outcome of 4 patients undergoing PP for management of difficult pancreatic duct strictures. In all patients, PP was used to provide access and therapy of otherwise endoscopically impassable pancreatic duct strictures. PP-guided pancreatic stent duct placement was performed and allowed for subsequent successful endoscopie management of complex, benign pancreatic duct obstructions. Conclusions:PP is a useful modality for management of otherwise endoscopically impassable pancreatic duct Strictures.

Biliary endoscopy offers both diagnostic and therapeutic value in complex clinical situations. This review addresses the latest advances over the past year in endoscopic approaches of biliary tract diseases.