ABSTRACT
Advanced malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO) with inaccessible papilla poses a significant challenge to endoscopists, as drainage of multiple liver segments may be warranted. Transpapillary drainage may not be feasible in patients with surgically altered anatomy, duodenal stenosis, prior duodenal self-expanding metal stent, and after initial transpapillary drainage, but require re-intervention for draining separated liver segments. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage are the feasible options in this scenario. The major advantages of EUS-BD over percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage include a reduction in patient discomfort and internal drainage away from the tumor, thus reducing the possibility of tissue or tumor ingrowth. With innovations, EUS-BD is helpful not only for bilateral communicating MHBO but also for non-communicating systems with bridging hilar stents or isolated right intra-hepatic duct drainage by hepatico-duodenostomy. EUS-guided multi-stent drainage with specially designed cannulas and guidewires has become a reality. A combined approach with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for re-intervention, interventional radiology, and intraductal tumor ablative therapies has been reported. Stent migration and bile leakage can be minimized with proper stent selection and technique, and stent blocks can be managed with EUS-guided interventions in a majority of cases. Future comparative studies are required to establish the role of EUS-guided interventions in MHBO as rescue or primary therapy.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#Endoscopic drainage is an established treatment modality for adult patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). Available data regarding the efficacy and safety of endoscopic drainage in pediatric patients are limited. In this systematic review and metaanalysis, we aimed to analyze the outcomes of endoscopic drainage in children with PFCs. @*Methods@#A literature search was performed in Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar for studies on the outcomes of endoscopic drainage with or without endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance in pediatric patients with PFCs from inception to May 2021. The study’s primary objective was clinical success, defined as resolution of PFCs. The secondary outcomes included technical success, adverse events, and recurrence rates. @*Results@#Fourteen studies (187 children, 70.3% male) were included in this review. The subtypes of fluid collection included pseudocysts (60.3%) and walled-off necrosis (39.7%).The pooled technical success rates in studies where drainage of PFCs were performed with and without EUS guidance were 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.6–98%; I2 =0) and 93.9% (95% CI, 82.6–98%; I2 =0), respectively. The pooled clinical success after one and two endoscopic interventions were 88.7% (95% CI, 82.7–92.9%; I2 =0) and 92.3% (95% CI, 87.4–95.4%; I2 =0), respectively. The pooled rate of major adverse events was 6.3% (95% CI, 3.3–11.4%; I2 =0). The pooled rate of recurrent PFCs after endoscopic drainage was 10.4% (95% CI, 6.1–17.1%; I2 =0). @*Conclusion@#Endoscopic drainage is safe and effective in children with PFCs. However, future studies are required to compare endoscopic and EUS-guided drainage of PFCs in children.
ABSTRACT
Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are increasingly being detected, though usually as incidental findings. Majority of the PNETs are non-functional and surgical resection is the standard of care for most of them. However, in patients with small PNETs localized within the pancreas, who are unfit or unwilling for surgery, alternate methods of treatment are needed. Direct methods of ablation of PNETs, using either ethanol injection or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), are emerging as effective methods. The limited literature available as case reports or case series on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided local ablation using either ethanol or RFA has demonstrated safety and efficacy along with short- to medium-term sustained relief. Long-term benefits with these local ablative therapies are awaited. Comparative studies are needed to show which of these two competing technologies is superior. Finally, comparative trials of EUS-guided ablation with surgical resection in terms of efficacy and safety will ensure their place in the management algorithm.