Search

Objectives: Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) by cytopathologists during endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) improves adequacy and diagnostic accuracy while reducing the number of needle passes. We evaluated the usefulness of ROSE performed by the endosonographer., Methods: Patients with an SPL were randomly assigned to EUS-FNA with ROSE or non-ROSE. Procedure duration, number of needle passes, specimen adequacy, and adverse event rates were compared., Results: Sixty-five patients were enrolled (33 in the ROSE vs 32 in the non-ROSE group). Both groups were similar in terms of age, sex, size, and location of the lesion. Specimen adequacy rates were high and similar between groups. Mean (standard deviation) procedure duration was shorter in the ROSE versus non-ROSE group (30.0 [11.3] vs 37.0 [7.2] minutes, P < 0.005), as well as the mean (standard deviation) number of needle passes (2.6 [0.8] vs 3.5 [0.8], P < 0.005). Accuracy parameters as sensitivity and accuracy of ROSE by the endosonographer for malignancy were 93% and 88%, respectively., Conclusions: After specific training, the endosonographer can accurately evaluate samples during EUS-FNA of SPL, allowing for a shorter procedure duration and a lower number of needle passes., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

This guideline refers to infants, children, and adolescents ages 0 to 18 years. The areas covered include indications for diagnostic and therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy and ileocolonoscopy; endoscopy for foreign body ingestion; corrosive ingestion and stricture/stenosis endoscopic management; upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; and endoscopic ultrasonography. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and endoscopy specific to inflammatory bowel disease has been dealt with in other guidelines and are therefore not mentioned in this guideline. Training and ongoing skill maintenance are to be dealt with in an imminent sister publication to this.

Background: Although data about the incidence and management of biliary complications after deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) are well defined, those pertaining to adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are conflicting., Methods: We retrospectively compared endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) findings in 30 LDLT vs. 357 DDLT consecutive adult recipients with duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction. LDLT and DDLT recipients were followed up for median durations of 30.5 and 36.0 months after the last ERCP, respectively., Results: Postoperative biliary complications were more frequently identified at ERCP after LDLT versus DDLT (10/30 [33.3%] vs. 34/357 [9.5%]; P<0.001). Complications mainly consisted of anastomotic biliary strictures (10/30 [33.3%] vs. 27/357 [7.6%]; LDLT vs. DDLT recipients, respectively; P<0.001) and biliary leaks (4/30 [13.3%] vs. 6/357 [1.7%]; LDLT vs. DDLT recipients, respectively; P=0.005; some patients had both complications). Stricture dilation was successful in 4/10 (40%) LDLT vs. 27/27 (100%) DDLT recipients (P<0.001), and bile ducts remained patent up to the end of follow-up without further intervention in 2/10 (20.0%) vs. 21/27 (77.8%) patients, respectively (P=0.002). Endoscopic treatment of bile leaks was successful in 3/4 (75.0%) vs. 5/6 (83.3%) LDLT versus DDLT recipients, respectively (NS)., Conclusions: Biliary complications were more frequent after LDLT compared with DDLT. Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures was successful in a minority of patients after LDLT, in contrast with DDLT. Most biliary leaks were successfully treated at endoscopy after LDLT or DDLT.