ABSTRACT
Resumen La endosonografía endoscópica es una alternativa que sirve como guía para la realización de derivaciones biliodigestivas en los casos en los que la colangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica (CPRE) ha fallado. Se han descrito técnicas como la coledocoduodenostomía o coledocoantrostomía guiadas por ultrasonografía endoscópica (USE). Se describe el caso de una paciente de 72 años con adenocarcinoma de páncreas, compromiso portal y de paredes duodenales, en quien se usó la CPRE para intentar una derivación paliativa y fue fallida, por lo cual se realizó la colocación de un stent metálico guiado por endosonografía endoscópica, con adecuada respuesta clínica al tratamiento. En conclusión, el procedimiento es seguro y la endosonografía es una vía alterna efectiva en los casos de CPRE fallidas para lograr derivaciones biliares en casos de obstrucción de la vía biliar de origen maligno.
Abstract Endoscopic endosonography is an alternative to guide biliodigestive shunting in cases where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has failed. Techniques such as choledoduodenostomy or choledochoantrostomy guided by endoscopic ultrasonography have been described. This is the case of a 72-year-old patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, portal vein and duodenal wall involvement, in whom ERCP to try a palliative shunt failed. Therefore, a metal stent was placed using endoscopic endosonography, with adequate clinical response to the procedure and treatment. It is concluded that the procedure is safe and that endosonography is an effective alternative in cases of ERCP failure to achieve biliary bypass in cases of malignant biliary obstruction.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Aged , Pancreas , Referral and Consultation , Bile Ducts , Adenocarcinoma , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeABSTRACT
AIM: To understand the current state of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in Spain. METHODS: Descriptive analysis from a national survey with 11 questions: 10 related to technique and 1 to the training and experience of the endoscopists. RESULTS: Sixty endoscopists from 48 of the 97 (49.5%) hospitals that perform EUS in Spain responded to the survey. A total of 28,678 procedures (20,311 diagnostic, 7,446 with puncture and 921 therapeutic) were recorded over the course of one year. Approximately 64% of the hospitals perform between 300 and 999 tests per year. All have radial and sectorial echoendoscopes, with a median of 2 (2-8) scopes. For cytological diagnosis, the 22-gauge needle is the most commonly used (98%) and, for histological diagnosis, the Procore (72%). The study of the pancreas and bile duct is the most common indication for diagnostic EUS (60%), followed by the staging of digestive tract neoplasms (20%). Approximately 72% of the hospitals perform on-site cytopathology evaluations and sedation is administered in equal parts by both endoscopists and anaesthetists. In terms of experience, 45% of echoendoscopists perform fewer than 300 annual exams and the median training duration is 6months (0.5-36). CONCLUSIONS: EUS is adequately implemented in Spain and good equipment is available. However, it is necessary to establish a standardised EUS training program since the one undertaken by many echoendoscopists could prove insufficient according to the standards established by Scientific Societies.
