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

BACKGROUND: 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. AIM: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of splenic lesions: systematic review with pooled analysis.

Background: Focal splenic lesions are usually incidentally discovered on radiological assessments. Although percutaneous tissue acquisition (TA) under trans-abdominal ultrasound guidance is a well-established technique for obtaining cyto-histological diagnosis of focal splenic lesions, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided TA has been described in several studies, reporting different safety and outcomes. The aim was to assess the pooled safety, adequacy, and accuracy of EUS-TA of splenic lesions. Methods: A comprehensive review of available evidence was conducted at the end of November 2021. All studies including more than five patients and reporting about the safety, adequacy, and accuracy of EUS-TA of the spleen were included. Results: Six studies (62 patients) were identified; all studies have been conducted using fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles. Pooled specimen adequacy and accuracy of EUS-TA for spleen characterization were 92.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 86.3%-99.3%] and 88.2% (95% CI, 79.3%-97.1%), respectively. The pooled incidence of adverse events (six studies, 62 patients) was 4.7% (95% CI, 0.4%-9.7%). Conclusion: EUS-FNA of the spleen is a safe technique with high diagnostic adequacy and accuracy. The EUS-guided approach could be considered a valid alternative to the percutaneous approach for spleen TA.

Combined Endoscopic Stent-In-Stent Placement by Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents Through Self-Expanding Metal Stents for Simultaneous Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction.

The palliation of simultaneous biliary and duodenal obstruction in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer is a clinically and technically challenging scenario. Endoscopic procedures are a valid alternative to surgical or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The availability of self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have expanded therapeutic options. We describe a case in which biliary and duodenal obstructions were treated successfully with the combined use of SEMS and LAMS devices. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage with the use of new LAMS and a duodenal SEMS can be a valid option in expert hands as a palliative and minimally invasive treatment for gastric outlet and biliary obstruction.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence after Hepatitis C Virus Therapy with Direct-Acting Antivirals. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with cirrhosis. The risk of HCC recurrence after a complete response among patients treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has not been fully elucidated yet. AIM: To assess the risk of HCC recurrence after DAA therapy for hepatitis C virus (HCV). METHODS: A systematic review across PubMed, Scopus and Scholar up to November 2020, including full-text studies that assessed the pattern of HCC recurrence after DAA therapy for HCV. Random-effect meta-analysis and univariable metaregression were applied to obtain pooled estimates for proportions and relative risk (RR) and variables influential for the outcome, respectively. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies with 2957 patients were included. Overall, 30% (CI, 26-34%) of the patients with a history of HCC experienced HCC recurrence after DAA therapy, at mean time intervals ranging from 4 to 21 months. This result increased when going from European studies (23%, CI, 17-28%) to US studies (34%, CI, 30-38%), to Egyptian studies (37%, CI, 27-47%), and to Asian studies (33%, CI, 27-40%). Sixty-eight percent (CI, 45-91%) of recurrent HCCs developed within 6 months of follow-up since DAA treatment, among the eight studies providing stratified data. Among the studies providing head-to-head comparisons, the HCC recurrence risk was significantly lower after DAA therapy than IFN (RR, 0.64; CI, 0.51-0.81), and after DAA therapy than no intervention (RR, 0.68; CI, 0.49-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: The recurrence of HCC after DAA is not negligible, being higher soon after the end of treatment and among non-European countries. DAA therapy seems to reduce the risk of HCC recurrence compared to an IFN regimen and no intervention.