Pancreatic fluid collections(PFCs) are a frequent complication of pancreatitis. It is important to classify PFCs to guide management. The revised Atlanta criteria classifies PFCs as acute or chronic, with chronic flui...Pancreatic fluid collections(PFCs) are a frequent complication of pancreatitis. It is important to classify PFCs to guide management. The revised Atlanta criteria classifies PFCs as acute or chronic, with chronic fluid collections subdivided into pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis(WOPN). Establishing adequate nutritional support is an essential step in the management of PFCs. Early attempts at oral feeding can be trialed in patients with mild pancreatitis. Enteral feeding should be implemented in patients with moderate to severe pancreatitis. Jejunal feeding remains the preferred route of enteral nutrition. Symptomatic PFCs require drainage; options include surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic approaches. With the advent of newer and more advanced endoscopic tools and expertise, and an associated reduction in health care costs, minimally invasive endoscopic drainage has become the preferable approach. An endoscopic ultrasonography-guided approach using a seldinger technique is the preferred endoscopic approach. Both plastic stents and metal stents are efficacious and safe; however, metal stents may offer an advantage, especially in infected pseudocysts and in WOPN. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy is often required in WOPN. Lumen apposing metal stents that allow for direct endoscopic necrosectomy and debridement through the stent lumen are preferred in these patients. Endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography with pancreatic duct(PD) exploration should be performed concurrent to PFC drainage. PD disruption is associated with an increased severity of pancreatitis, an increased risk of recurrent attacks of pancreatitis and long-term complications, and a decreased rate of PFC resolution after drainage. Any pancreatic ductal disruption should be bridged with endoscopic stenting.展开更多
Background: Duodenoscope-related multidrug-resistant organism(MDRO) infections raise concerns. Disposable duodenoscopes have been recently introduced in the market and approved by regulatory agencies with the aim to r...Background: Duodenoscope-related multidrug-resistant organism(MDRO) infections raise concerns. Disposable duodenoscopes have been recently introduced in the market and approved by regulatory agencies with the aim to reduce the risk of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) associated infections. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of procedures performed with single-use duodenoscopes in patients with clinical indications to single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy. Methods: This is a multicenter international, retrospective study combining all patients who underwent complex biliopancreatic interventions using the combination of a single-use duodenoscope and a single-use cholangioscope. The primary outcome was technical success defined as ERCP completion for the intended clinical indication. Secondary outcomes were procedural duration, rate of cross-over to reusable duodenoscope, operator-reported satisfaction score(1 to 10) on performance rating of the single-use duodenoscope, and adverse event(AE) rate. Results: A total of 66 patients(26, 39.4% female) were included in the study. ERCP was categorized according to ASGE ERCP grading system as 47(71.2%) grade 3 and 19(28.8%) grade 4. The technical success rate was 98.5%(65/66). Procedural duration was 64(interquartile range 15-189) min, cross-over rate to reusable duodenoscope was 1/66(1.5%). The satisfaction score of the single-use duodenoscope classified by the operators was 8.6 ± 1.3 points. Four patients(6.1%) experienced AEs not directly related to the single-use duodenoscope, namely 2 post-ERCP pancreatitis(PEP), 1 cholangitis and 1 bleeding.Conclusions: Single-use duodenoscope is effective, reliable and safe even in technically challenging procedures with a non-inferiority to reusable duodenoscope, making these devices a viable alternative to standard reusable equipment.展开更多
文摘Pancreatic fluid collections(PFCs) are a frequent complication of pancreatitis. It is important to classify PFCs to guide management. The revised Atlanta criteria classifies PFCs as acute or chronic, with chronic fluid collections subdivided into pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis(WOPN). Establishing adequate nutritional support is an essential step in the management of PFCs. Early attempts at oral feeding can be trialed in patients with mild pancreatitis. Enteral feeding should be implemented in patients with moderate to severe pancreatitis. Jejunal feeding remains the preferred route of enteral nutrition. Symptomatic PFCs require drainage; options include surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic approaches. With the advent of newer and more advanced endoscopic tools and expertise, and an associated reduction in health care costs, minimally invasive endoscopic drainage has become the preferable approach. An endoscopic ultrasonography-guided approach using a seldinger technique is the preferred endoscopic approach. Both plastic stents and metal stents are efficacious and safe; however, metal stents may offer an advantage, especially in infected pseudocysts and in WOPN. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy is often required in WOPN. Lumen apposing metal stents that allow for direct endoscopic necrosectomy and debridement through the stent lumen are preferred in these patients. Endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography with pancreatic duct(PD) exploration should be performed concurrent to PFC drainage. PD disruption is associated with an increased severity of pancreatitis, an increased risk of recurrent attacks of pancreatitis and long-term complications, and a decreased rate of PFC resolution after drainage. Any pancreatic ductal disruption should be bridged with endoscopic stenting.
文摘Background: Duodenoscope-related multidrug-resistant organism(MDRO) infections raise concerns. Disposable duodenoscopes have been recently introduced in the market and approved by regulatory agencies with the aim to reduce the risk of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) associated infections. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of procedures performed with single-use duodenoscopes in patients with clinical indications to single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy. Methods: This is a multicenter international, retrospective study combining all patients who underwent complex biliopancreatic interventions using the combination of a single-use duodenoscope and a single-use cholangioscope. The primary outcome was technical success defined as ERCP completion for the intended clinical indication. Secondary outcomes were procedural duration, rate of cross-over to reusable duodenoscope, operator-reported satisfaction score(1 to 10) on performance rating of the single-use duodenoscope, and adverse event(AE) rate. Results: A total of 66 patients(26, 39.4% female) were included in the study. ERCP was categorized according to ASGE ERCP grading system as 47(71.2%) grade 3 and 19(28.8%) grade 4. The technical success rate was 98.5%(65/66). Procedural duration was 64(interquartile range 15-189) min, cross-over rate to reusable duodenoscope was 1/66(1.5%). The satisfaction score of the single-use duodenoscope classified by the operators was 8.6 ± 1.3 points. Four patients(6.1%) experienced AEs not directly related to the single-use duodenoscope, namely 2 post-ERCP pancreatitis(PEP), 1 cholangitis and 1 bleeding.Conclusions: Single-use duodenoscope is effective, reliable and safe even in technically challenging procedures with a non-inferiority to reusable duodenoscope, making these devices a viable alternative to standard reusable equipment.
