Drainage Of Pancreatic Fluid Collections Research Articles

Lumen-apposing metal stents: A primer on indications and technical tips.

Lumen-apposing metal stents have ushered a new frontier for interventional endoscopic ultrasound. Initial use for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has rapidly expanded to the bile duct, gallbladder and small bowel. Intra-luminal applications for short strictures have also emerged. Electrocautery enhancement has made the stent delivery speedy. While the advent of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has brought a paradigm shift in the practice of interventional endoscopic ultrasound, their use is associated with certain technicalities that any advanced endosonologist should know. Understanding indications for LAMS is critical and their use in appropriate settings. Troubleshooting in tricky situations is always a challenge and the background considerations for their use include knowing the target organ, cautery and puncture technique, managing partially opened LAMS and also managing maldeployment. In this review, we discuss the intricacies and technical tips for the use of lumen-apposing metal stents.

Impact of long-term transmural plastic stents on recurrence after endoscopic treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis

Background and study aims: Endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) using double pigtail stents (DPS) is a well-established treatment for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). This study aimed to compare outcomes in patients undergoing ETD with DPS left indwelling versus those where stents were removed or migrated. Patients and methods: This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included patients with WON who underwent ETD using DPS between July 2001 and December 2019. The primary outcome was recurrence of a pancreatic fluid collection (PFC). Secondary outcomes were long term complications and recurrence-associated factors. Competing risk regression analysis considered DPS removal or migration as time-varying covariate. Results: Among 320 patients (median age 58, 36% female), DPS were removed in 153 (47.8%), migrated spontaneously in 27 (8.4%), and remained indwelling in 140 (43.8%). PFC recurrence was observed in 57 patients (17.8%): after removal in 39 (25.5%), after migration in 4 (14.8%) and in patients with indwelling DPS in 14 patients (10%). In 25 patients (7.8%) drainage of recurrent PFC was indicated. Risk factors for recurrence were DPS removal or migration (HR: 3.45, 95%CI: 1.37–8.70) and presence of a disconnected pancreatic duct (HR: 3.45, 95%CI: 1.84–14.0). Conclusions: Among patients who undergo ETD of WON, leaving DPS in situ seems to lower the risk on recurrent fluid collections, without any long term DPS-related complications. These results suggest that DPS should not be routinely removed and can be safely left indwelling indefinitely.

Clinical and Economic Implications of Interventions in Pancreatic Fluid Collections: An Assessment From a National Claims Database.

To compare clinical and economic implications of percutaneous and endoscopic treatment approaches in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). This is a retrospective claims analysis of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent inpatient endoscopic or percutaneous PFC drainage procedures (2016-2020). We performed longitudinal analysis of claims for all-cause mortality and rehospitalization during 180-day follow-up. Main outcome was mortality. Other outcomes were rehospitalization and direct costs. A total of 1311 patients underwent endoscopic (n = 727) or percutaneous (n = 584) drainage. Percutaneous as compared with endoscopic approach was associated with higher mortality (23.08% vs 16.7%, P = 0.004), rehospitalization (58.9% vs 53.3%, P = 0.04), and mean direct hospital costs ($37,107 [SD = $67,833] vs $27,800 [SD = $43,854], P = 0.004). On multivariable analysis, percutaneous drainage (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.86; P = 0.039), older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P < 0.001), intensive care unit stay (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P < 0.001), and multiple comorbidities (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with mortality. Percutaneous drainage (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04-1.63; P = 0.027) and older age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with rehospitalizations. As percutaneous drainage may be associated with higher mortality, rehospitalization, and costs, when requisite expertise is available, endoscopy should be preferred for treatment of PFC amenable to such an approach. Randomized trials are required to validate these findings.

Multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for the internal drainage of pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) including pancreatic pseudocyst (PP) and walled-off necrosis (WON) are complications after acute pancreatitis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) placement to manage PFCs. Between June 2019 and May 2023, patients with symptomatic PFCs who underwent EUS-guided electrocautery-enhanced LAMS drainage were enrolled retrospectively from eight tertiary centers in Taiwan. In total, 33 [14 (42.42%) PP and 19 (57.58%) WON] patients were enrolled. Gallstones (27.27%) and abdominal pain (72.73%) were the most common etiology and indication for drainage. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 96.97%, respectively, and the mean procedure time was 30.55 (± 16.17) min. Complications included one (3.03%) case of self-limited bleeding; there were no cases of mortality. Seven (21.21%) patients had recurrence. Patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) had a higher recurrence rate than those without (71.43% vs. 38.46%, p = 0.05). After replacing LAMSs with transmural double-pigtail plastic stents (DPSs) in the DPDS patients, the DPS migration rate was higher in the patients with recurrence (100% vs. 33.33%, p = 0.04). In conclusion, drainage of symptomatic PFCs with EUS-guided electrocautery-enhanced LAMS appears to be efficient and safe. Replacing LAMSs with DPSs in DPDS patients was associated with a lower recurrence rate.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Not All Queries Are Already Solved.

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are well-known complications of acute pancreatitis. The overinfection of these collections leads to a worsening of the prognosis with an increase in the morbidity and mortality rate. The primary strategy for managing infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or symptomatic PFCs is a minimally invasive step-up approach, with endosonography-guided (EUS-guided) transmural drainage and debridement as the preferred and less invasive method. Different stents are available to drain PFCs: self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), double pigtail stents (DPPSs), or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs). In particular, LAMSs are useful when direct endoscopic necrosectomy is needed, as they allow easy access to the necrotic cavity; however, the rate of adverse events is not negligible, and to date, the superiority over DPPSs is still debated. Moreover, the timing for necrosectomy, the drainage technique, and the concurrent medical management are still debated. In this review, we focus attention on indications, timing, techniques, complications, and particularly on aspects that remain under debate concerning the EUS-guided drainage of PFCs.

Comparative outcome of single versus two double-pigtail stents for endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with minimal necrosis: a retrospective analysis.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided cystogastrostomy is the treatment of choice for managing symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFC). However, studies on the number of stents for optimal drainage of PFCs are limited. Hence, the present study was conducted to compare the outcome of single versus two double-pigtail stents for endoscopic drainage of PFCs. This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of PFCs with minimal necrosis (pseudocyst or walled-off necrosis with <30% solid content) at a tertiary center in South India from October 2020 to October 2022. Post-procedure, patients were followed up for clinical improvement, and stents were removed after documentation of cyst size reduction on imaging. Sixty-three patients (82.5% males, median age: 34 years) fulfilling the selection criteria were included. For single stent placement (n = 47), stents of size 8.5 Fr or 10 Fr were used, while for placement of two stents (n = 16), 7 Fr stents were used. The technical success rate was 100%. Intraprocedural and early postprocedural adverse events (all mild to moderate) were comparable between the groups (17.0% with single stent vs. 25.0% with two stents, p = NS). Clinical success was achieved in 93.6% of patients, with no difference between both groups. Three patients in the single stent group required additional procedures. All patients underwent successful stent removal after a median follow-up of 14 weeks. A single pigtail stent of 8.5 Fr or 10 Fr size for EUSguided cystogastrostomy provides efficacy and safety similar to that of two stents.

Safety and efficacy of early versus late removal of LAMS for pancreatic fluid collections.

Background and study aims Optimal timing for removal of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for effective drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) while minimizing adverse events (AE) is unknown. Outcomes of early (≤ 4 weeks) or delayed (> 4 weeks) LAMS removal on both clinical efficacy and the incidence of AE were assessed. Patients and methods This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained registry of PFC drainage between November 2016 and September 2021. Clinical success was defined as a 75% decrease in fluid collection volume with no need for reintervention at 6 months. AE were defined using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine variables associated with clinical success and AE. Results A total of 108 consecutive PFCs were included. LAMS deployment was technically successful in 103 of 108 cases (95.4%). Failure was associated with collection diameter ≤ 4 cm (odds ratio [OR] 24.0, P = 0.005) and presence of more than 50% necrotic material (OR 20.1, P = 0.01). Stents were left in place for a median of 48 days. Patients with early stent removal (< 4 weeks) had clinical success in 70.0% of cases, which was significantly less than in the group with delayed stent removal (96.4%, P = 0.03). On multiple regression analysis, clinical failure was associated with early stent removal (OR 25.5, P = 0.003). AEs occurred in 8.7% of cases (9/103). There were no predictors of AE. Notably, delayed stent removal did not predict the occurrence of AE. Conclusions Early LAMS removal (< 4 weeks) did not prevent AEs but did lead to increased clinical failure.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections and bleeding risk: a propensity matched study.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) using the Hot-Axios device has recently been associated with a significant risk of bleeding. This adverse event (AE) seems to occur less frequently with the use of a different device, the Spaxus stent. The aim of the current study was to compare the rates of bleeding between the two stents. Patients admitted for treatment of PFCs by EUS plus lumen-apposing metal stent in 18 endoscopy referral centers between 10 July 2019 and 28 February 2022 were identified and their outcomes compared using a propensity-matching analysis. 363 patients were evaluated. After a 1-to-1 propensity score match, 264 patients were selected (132 per group). The technical and clinical success rates were comparable between the two groups. Significantly more bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred in the Hot-Axios group than in the Spaxus group (6.8% vs. 1.5%; P = 0.03); stent type was a significant predictor of bleeding in both univariate and multivariate regression analyses (P = 0.03 and 0.04, respectively). Bleeding necessitating arterial embolization did not however differ significantly between the two groups (3.0% vs. 0%; P = 0.12). In addition, the Hot-Axios was associated with a significantly higher rate of overall AEs compared with the Spaxus stent (9.8% vs. 3.0%; P = 0.04). Our study showed that, in patients with PFCs, bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred significantly more frequently with use of the Hot-Axios stent than with the Spaxus stent, although this was not the case for bleeding requiring embolization.

A novel lumen-apposing metal stent for endoscopic drainage of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections: a retrospective study

ABSTRACT Background and Objectives Previous studies showed that lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) provides a feasible route to perform direct endoscopic necrosectomy. However, the high risk of bleeding and migration induced by the placement of LAMS attracted attention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a novel LAMS. Methods In this retrospective study, we enrolled patients with symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to perform EUS–guided drainage with a LAMS in our hospital. Evaluation variables included technical success rate, clinical success rate, and adverse events. Results Thirty-two patients with a mean age of 41.38 ± 10.72 years (53.1% males) were included in our study, and the mean size of PFC was 10.06 ± 3.03 cm. Technical success rate and clinical success rate reached 96.9% and 93.8%, respectively. Stent migration occurred in 1 patient (3.1%), and no stent-induced bleeding occurred. The outcomes of using LAMS in 10 patients with pancreatic pseudocyst and 22 patients with walled-off necrosis were comparable. Compared with pancreatic pseudocyst, walled-off necrosis needed more direct endoscopic necrosectomy times to achieve resolution (P = 0.024). Conclusions Our study showed that the novel LAMS is effective and safe for endoscopic drainage of PFCs with a relatively low rate of adverse events. Further large-scale multicenter studies are needed to confirm the present findings.

Lumen-apposing metal stents versus traditional self-expanding metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopic drainage has become the preferred treatment for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). There is still a lack of reliable evidence to prove which metal stent is the best choice for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of PFCs. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) compared to traditional self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in meta-analysis. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to July 15, 2023. Relevant publications that compared LAMS with traditional SEMS for drainage of patients' PFCs under EUS-guidance were included. This meta-analysis assessed endpoints using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 14.0 statistical software. Nine citations comprising 707 patients with PFCs were included. The clinical success rate of LAMS tended to be higher than that of SEMS (RR = 1.07, 95%CI [1.00, 1.15], P = 0.05). LAMS had a lower technical success rate (RR = 0.97, 95%CI [0.94, 0.99], P = 0.02) and faster procedure time (minutes) (MD = - 24.29, 95%CI [- 25.59, - 22.99], P < 0.00001) compared to SEMS. In addition, LAMS had fewer overall adverse events (RR = 0.64, 95%CI [0.48, 0.87], P = 0.004). For specific adverse events, LAMS had fewer migration (RR = 0.37, 95%CI [0.19, 0.72], P = 0.003), occlusion (RR = 0.43, 95%CI [0.22, 0.82], P = 0.01) and infection (RR = 0.38, 95%CI [0.20, 0.70], P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in bleeding and perforation between the two stents. For hospital stay (days), LAMS group was similar to SEMS group (MD = - 3.34, 95%CI [- 7.71, - 1.03], P = 0.13). Regarding recurrence, LAMS group was fewer than SEMS group (RR = 0.41, 95%CI [0.21, 0.78], P = 0.007). Compared to traditional SEMS, LAMS has a higher clinical success rate, faster procedure time, fewer adverse events, similar hospital stay and lower recurrence rate in EUS-guided drainage of PFCs. LAMS is a good choice with a high technical success rate over 95%, and using a shorter length or "one-step" operation can further improve it. Richer placement experience is required for LAMS placement under EUS-guidance.

Does endoprosthesis design impact bleeding risk when using lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections?

Does endoprosthesis design impact bleeding risk when using lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections?

Analysis of adverse events with lumen apposing metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections

Abstract Background and study aims Innovations in endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) using lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) have rendered it a preferred approach for drainage of PFCs. These advances have not come without concern for adverse events (AEs). We present our experience with LAMS for drainage of PFCs and analyze factors that contribute to LAMS-related AEs. Patients and methods From November 2015 to October 2021, a retrospective analysis was performed of patients undergoing endoscopic management of PFCs using LAMS. All AEs were classified as either early (&lt;48 hours) or late (&gt;48 hours). Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed using logistic regression to assess the relationship between independent variables and AEs. Results A total of 119 patients with symptomatic PFCs underwent endoscopic drainage with LAMS. There were 16 AEs (12.4%). These included systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) (n=2), stent occlusion (n=5), bleeding (n=7), and stent migration (n=2). Univariate analysis of risk of AEs showed that no variables approached statistical significance. Of the seven patients who developed bleeding, five had pseudoaneurysms following LAMS placement and underwent angioembolization by an interventional radiologist. The average time to bleeding was 9.3 days (standard deviation 7.3) with all bleeding events occurring within 3 weeks. In a multivariate model, pseudocysts and presence of paracolic gutter extension were associated with an increased risk of bleeding. Conclusions Endoscopists should be aware of the risk factors for LAMS-related bleeding and tailor their drainage strategy, including utilization of plastic stents for drainage of pseudocysts and adherence to a strict imaging interval and follow-up protocol.

Early versus delayed EUS-guided drainage for postoperative pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Postoperative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs) are common adverse events (AEs) after pancreatic surgery and may need interventions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage for POPFCs is increasingly reported, but its appropriate timing has not been fully elucidated. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate treatment outcomes of POPFCs according to the timing of EUS-guided drainage. Using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database, we identified clinical studies published until December 2022 with data comparing outcomes of early and delayed EUS-guided drainage for POPFCs. We pooled data on AEs, mortality, and technical and clinical success rates, using the random-effects model. From 1415 papers identified in the initial literature search, we identified 6 retrospective studies, including 128 and 107 patients undergoing early and delayed EUS-guided drainage for POPFCs. The threshold of early and delayed drainage ranged from 14 to 30days. Distal pancreatectomy was the major cause of POPFCs, ranging from 44 to 100%. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for AEs was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.64, P = 0.55) comparing early to delayed drainage. There was no procedure-related mortality. Technical success was achieved in all cases and a pooled OR of clinical success was 0.60 (95% CI 0.20-1.83, P = 0.37). POPFCs can be managed by early EUS-guided drainage without an increase in AEs.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with two different dedicated metal stents: a nationwide, multicentre, propensity score-matched comparison

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with two different dedicated metal stents: a nationwide, multicentre, propensity score-matched comparison

S113 Endoscopic vs Percutaneous Drainage for Post-Operative Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

S113 Endoscopic vs Percutaneous Drainage for Post-Operative Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lumen-apposing metal stents with or without coaxial plastic stent placement for the management of pancreatic fluid collections

Coaxial double pigtail plastic stent (DPPS) placement is often performed within lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to prevent adverse events (AEs) such as stent occlusion and bleeding. This study compares the safety and outcomes of LAMS alone versus LAMS with coaxial DPPS for PFC management. Patients undergoing LAMS drainage of a PFC were retrospectively identified and categorized as LAMS or LAMS/DPPS based on initial drainage strategy. AE rate, AE type, and clinical success were extracted via chart review. 185 individuals (83 LAMS, 102 LAMS/DPPS) were identified. There were no significant differences in rates of clinical success (75.9% LAMS vs. 69.6% LAMS/DDPS, p=0.34) or overall AE (15.7% LAMS vs. 15.7% LAMS/DPPS, p=0.825). In this comparative single-center study, placement of a coaxial DPPS for LAMS drainage of PFCs did not affect rates of AEs or clinical success.

Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management.

The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainages has marked a turning point in the field of interventional ultrasound and it is gathering worldwide diffusion in different clinical settings. Nevertheless, the procedure may conceal unexpected pitfalls. LAMS misdeployment is the most frequent cause of technical failure and it can be considered a procedure-related adverse event when it hampers the conclusion of the planned procedure or results in significant clinical consequences. Stent misdeployment can be managed successfully by endoscopic rescue maneuvers to allow the completion of the procedure. To date, no standardized indication is available to guide an appropriate rescue strategy depending on the type of procedure or of misdeployment. To evaluate the incidence of LAMS misdeployment during EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and pancreatic fluid collections drainage (EUS-PFC) and to describe the endoscopic rescue strategies adopted under the circumstance. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on PubMed by searching for studies published up to October 2022. The search was carried out using the exploded medical subject heading terms "lumen apposing metal stent", "LAMS", "endoscopic ultrasound" and "choledochoduodenostomy" or "gallbladder" or "pancreatic fluid collections". We included in the review on-label EUS-guided procedures namely EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC. Only those publications reporting EUS-guided LAMS positioning were considered. The studies reporting a technical success rate of 100% and other procedure-related adverse events were considered to calculate the overall rate of LAMS misdeployment, while studies not reporting the causes of technical failure were excluded. Case reports were considered only for the extraction of data regarding the issues of misdeployment and rescue techniques. The following data were collected from each study: Author, year of publication, study design, study population, clinical indication, technical success, reported number of misdeployment, stent type and size, flange misdeployed and type of rescue strategy. The overall technical success rate of EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC was 93.7%, 96.1%, and 98.1% respectively. Significant rates of LAMS misdeployment have been reported for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC drainage, respectively 5.8%, 3.4%, and 2.0%. Endoscopic rescue treatment was feasible in 86.8%, 80%, and 96.8% of cases. Non endoscopic rescue strategies were required only in 10.3%, 16% and 3.2% for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. The endoscopic rescue techniques described were over-the-wire deployment of a new stent through the created fistula tract in 44.1%, 8% and 64.5% and stent-in-stent in 23.5%, 60%, and 12.9%, respectively for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. Further therapeutic option were endoscopic rendezvous in 11.8% of EUS-CDS and repeated procedure of EUS-guided drainage in 16.1% of EUS-PFC. LAMS misdeployment is a relatively common adverse event in EUS-guided drainages. There is no consensus on the best rescue approach in these cases and the choice is often made by the endoscopist relying upon the clinical scenario, anatomical characteristics, and local expertise. In this review, we investigated the misdeployment of LAMS for each of the on-label indications focusing on the rescue therapies used, with the aim of providing useful data for endoscopists and to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of endoprosthesis type on inflammatory response in patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections.

To study the impact of endoprosthesis type on inflammatory response in patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC). Patients undergoing EUS-guided PFC drainage and treated using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) or plastic endoprostheses constituted the study cohort. The primary outcome was the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) after index intervention. Secondary outcomes were persistent organ failure, new onset organ failure, duration of hospitalization, and treatment success. In all, 303 patients were treated using LAMS (n = 247) or plastic stents (n = 56). At 48 h postintervention, the presence of SIRS (25.0 vs. 14.2%, P = 0.047), new onset SIRS (10.0 vs. 1.8%, P = 0.017), and new organ failure (5.4 vs. 0.4%, P = 0.003) were significantly higher in the plastic stent cohort compared to LAMS. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the use of plastic stents (odds ratio [OR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-6.0, P = 0.014), patients receiving high-acuity care (OR 5.1, 95% CI 2.5-10.4, P < 0.001) and the presence of ≥33% of necrosis (OR 4.5, 95% CI 2.0-10.0, P < 0.001) were significantly associated with the presence of SIRS or new organ failure. While there was no significant difference in treatment success (96.4 vs. 95.5%, P = 0.77), duration of hospitalization was significantly longer for the plastic stent cohort (mean [standard deviation] 12.5 [17.8] vs. 7.9 [10.1] days, P = 0.009). Use of plastic stents as compared to LAMS was associated with a higher proportion of SIRS and new organ failure that prolonged hospital stay. Therefore, placement of LAMS is recommended in sick patients and those with ≥33% necrosis to minimize inflammatory response.

A Chinese prospective multicenter cohort study evaluating EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections using the Hot AXIOS system.

The Hot AXIOS system, which features a cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent, facilitates EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collection (PFC). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of stents in a multicenter Chinese cohort. Thirty patients from nine centers with a single pancreatic pseudocyst (PP) or walled-off necrosis (WON) who underwent EUS-guided transgastric or transduodenal drainage with the novel stent were prospectively enrolled. We included 15 (50%) patients with PPs and 15 (50%) with WONs. The mean diameter of the PFCs was 11.06 ± 3.56 cm. Stent placement was technically successful in all patients (100%), whereas clinical success was achieved in 93.3% of patients (28/30). Clinical success was defined as the alleviation of clinical symptoms combined with at least a 50% reduction in PFC diameter within 60 days after surgery. 73.3% (22/30) of AXIOS stents were removed after reaching clinical success in the 1st month of follow-up. A total of 14 (46.7%) PFC-associated infections occurred (4 pre- and 10 postoperation), which recovered within 1 week after treatment. Other complications included three (10%) partially or fully blocked stents and two (6.7%) stent migrations. Regarding the fully opened stent without blocking, complete remission of PFCs within 1 month was independently predicted by a previous pancreatitis attack > 6 months prior (adjusted odds ratio: 11.143; 95% confidence interval: 1.108-112.012; P = 0.041). EUS-guided drainage of PFCs using the Hot AXIOS system is safe and efficient. Regarding completely patent stents, a previous pancreatitis attack > 6 months prior predicts a greater chance of achieving 100% remission of PFCs within 1 month of AXIOS treatment.

Endoscopic ultrasound drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: do we know enough about the best approach?

Pancreatic fluid collection often occurs as a local complication of acute pancreatitis, and drainage is indicated in symptomatic patients. The drainage may be surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided. In symptomatic collections older than 4 weeks and localized in the upper abdomen, EUS-guided drainage is the first choice of treatment. Lumen-apposing metal stents are useful in cases of walled-off necrosis, facilitating access to the cavity; however, they do not reduce the number of necrosectomy sessions required. In most pancreatic pseudocysts requiring drainage, plastic stents remain the first choice of treatment. This review aimed to summarize the principles and techniques of step-up therapy of pancreatic fluid collections, including preprocedural and postprocedural assessment and practical approaches of drainage and necrosectomy, making available evidence more accessible to endoscopists aiming to train for this procedure. Successful and safe EUS drainage connotes early recognition and treatment of complications and the presence of a multidisciplinary team for optimal patient management. However, the best time for necrosectomy, modality of drainage method (lumen-apposing metal stents or plastic stents), and duration of antibiotherapy are still under evaluation.