Search

Background and Aim: Secondary prophylaxis (SP) of variceal rebleeding was reported to improve outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, but the optimal endoscopic approach is not well defined. We compared outcomes in HCC patients who underwent SP by endoscopic ultrasound-guided cyanoacrylate obturation (EUS-CYA) versus no SP., Methods: Between 2014 and 2018, 30 consecutive patients with inoperable HCC and recent endoscopically controlled variceal bleeding were prospectively recruited. Twenty-seven patients with persistent varices ≥ 3 mm on endoscopic ultrasound underwent EUS-CYA for SP. Thirty-three HCC patients treated by esophagogastroduodenoscopy-guided CYA obturation (EGD-CYA) alone for acute variceal bleeding between 2009 and 2013 were identified from a prospective gastrointestinal bleed registry as standard of care controls for comparison. Outcome measures were death-adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding, bleeding-free survival, technical success, and procedure-related adverse events of EUS-CYA., Results: The majority of patients in both groups had advanced HCC, portal vein thrombosis, and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. EUS-CYA was successful in all 27 patients with no radiographic evidence of cyanoacrylate-lipiodol embolization. Significantly lower 30- and 90-day death-adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding (14.8% vs 42.4%, P = 0.023 and 18.5% vs 60.6%, P = 0.002, respectively) and significantly higher variceal bleeding-free survival at 3 and 6 months (51.9% vs 21.2%, P = 0.009, 40.7% vs 15.2%, P = 0.010, respectively) were observed in the EUS-CYA group when compared with standard of care group., Conclusions: Secondary prophylaxis by EUS-CYA reduced rebleeding rate and improved variceal bleeding-free survival in patients with inoperable HCC and variceal bleeding when compared with no SP. Randomized studies are needed to confirm the benefits of EUS-CYA for this difficult-to-treat population., (© 2020 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objectives: Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures., Methods: Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question., Results: A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required., Conclusions: The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Drainage of obstructed bile duct and pancreatic duct under endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance has evolved into viable techniques suitable for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or altered surgical anatomy. One of the major advantages of EUS guidance is the possibility of multiple access points depending upon patient and ductal anatomy. Unlike ERCP, an approachable papilla is not a requisite for successful EUS-guided biliary or pancreatic ductal drainage. Moreover, as the access is away from the papilla, there is the possibility of reduced pancreatitis. A variety of procedures have become available for EUS-guided drainage, and it is important to develop standard terminology and procedural details. EUS-specific stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents have recently become available, and are likely to impact the outcomes of these procedures. Available data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. Success rate appears to be low for pancreatic duct drainage because of a variety of reasons. Outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage appear equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage appears promising for patients requiring gallbladder drainage but unfit for surgery. Further large controlled studies are needed to evaluate the exact role of these procedures., (© 2017 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is now firmly established as the best option for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections (PFC). It has high clinical efficacy, similar to surgical and percutaneous approaches, but with lower morbidity and costs. It is superior to non-EUS-guided approaches because even collections without endoluminal bulging can be successfully drained. Transmural drainage alone is sufficient for pseudocysts, but in the context of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), adjunctive direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) may be required. Traditionally, double pigtail plastic stents (PS) were used for transmural drainage, but, recently, fully covered self-expandable metallic stents (FCSEMS) customized for PFC drainage have become available and are increasingly used, especially in the management of WON, because the larger-diameter stent facilitates drainage and insertion of an endoscope into the WON cavity for DEN. The present review will discuss the evidence for EUS-guided drainage and DEN, the technical problems involved, and the roles of PS and FCSEMS in PFC drainage., (© 2016 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)