Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has progressed beyond diagnostic imaging to include EUS-guided tissue acquisition and EUS-directed therapies. This review provides an update on EUS-guided drainage and anastomotic procedures, and other therapeutic procedures. Today, EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is the norm, with endoscopic necrosectomy as an adjunct. For high-risk surgical patients unsuitable for cholecystectomy, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage of acute cholecystitis is an option. Additionally, EUS-guided drainage of obstructed biliary and pancreatic ductal system can be performed as salvage procedures after unsuccessful endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Bariatric procedures such as Roux-en-Y gastric bypass alter the gastric anatomy, hindering access to the major papilla. This can be overcome by creating a conduit through the excluded stomach using EUS-directed transgastric ERCP. Gastric outlet obstruction and afferent loop syndrome can be treated using EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy. These therapeutic interventions are a major advancement in the field of interventional EUS, achieving significant clinical impact.
Humans ; Endosonography/methods* ; Drainage/methods* ; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/methods* ; Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/methods*

OBJECTIVES: In recent years, the incidence and detection rate of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) have increased significantly. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays an indispensable role in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of PCLs. However, evidence comparing the diagnostic performance of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) remains limited. This study aims to compare the diagnostic yield, adequacy of tissue acquisition, and safety between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in evaluating PCLs to inform clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients with PCLs who underwent either EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB between January 2014 and August 2021. The diagnostic yield, tissue acquisition adequacy, and incidence of adverse events were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients with PCLs were included (52 in the FNA group and 38 in the FNB group). The diagnostic yield was similar between the FNA and FNB groups (94.2% vs 94.7%, P>0.05). The adequacy of tissue acquisition was 71.2% in the FNA group and 81.6% in the FNB group (P>0.05). No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of adverse events between the 2 groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS Both EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB demonstrate equally high diagnostic yields and tissue adequacy in PCLs, with excellent safety profiles. Both methods are safe and effective diagnostic tools for evaluating PCLs.
Humans ; Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/adverse effects* ; Retrospective Studies ; Female ; Male ; Pancreatic Cyst/diagnostic imaging* ; Middle Aged ; Biopsy, Fine-Needle/adverse effects* ; Aged ; Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis* ; Adult ; Endosonography/methods* ; Pancreas/pathology* ; Diagnosis, Differential

Objective: To analyze the risk factors for complications of endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) of upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors (SMTs). Methods: This was a retrospective observational study. The indications for EFTR included: (1) SMTs originating from the muscularis propria layer and growing out of the cavity or infiltrating the deep part of the muscularis propria layer; (2) SMTs diameter <5 cm; and (3) tumor identified as closely adherent to the serous layer during endoscopic submucosal dissection or endoscopic mucosal resection. This study included patients with SMTs originating from the muscularis propria layer in upper digestive tract, diagnosed preoperatively by endoscopic ultrasonography or computed tomography, who were successfully treated with EFTR. Those with incomplete clinical data were excluded. The clinical data of 154 patients with upper gastrointestinal SMTs who underwent EFTR at the Department of Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2016 to January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Post-EFTR complications (such as delayed perforation, delayed bleeding, and postoperative infection, including electrocoagulation syndrome) were monitored and the risk factors for them were analyzed. Results: Among the 154 study patients, 33 (21.4%) developed complications, including delayed bleeding in three (1.9%), delayed perforation in two (1.3%), and postoperative infection in 28 (18.2%). One patient with bleeding was classified as having a major complication (hospitalized for more than 10 days because of complication). According to univariate analysis, complication was associated with tumor diameter >15 mm, operation time >90 minutes, defect closure method(purse string suture), and diameter of resected specimen ≥20 mm (all P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that operation time >90 minutes (OR=6.252, 95%CI: 2.530-15.446, P<0.001) and tumor diameter >15 mm (OR=4.843, 95%CI: 1.985-11.817, P=0.001) were independent risk factors for complications after EFTR in patients with upper gastrointestinal SMTs. The independent risk factors for postoperative infection in these patients were operation time>90 minutes (OR=4.993, 95%CI:1.964-12.694, P=0.001) and purse string suture (OR=7.142, 95%CI: 1.953-26.123, P=0.003). Conclusion: Patients with upper gastrointestinal SMTs undergoing EFTR with tumor diameter >15 mm or operation time >90 minutes have a significantly increased risk of postoperative complications. Postoperative monitoring is important for these patients with SMTs.
Humans ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery* ; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods* ; Gastroscopy/methods* ; Retrospective Studies ; Endosonography/adverse effects* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Treatment Outcome ; Gastric Mucosa/surgery*

Among metastatic pancreatic tumors, malignant melanomas are rare. Here, we report a very rare case of a malignant melanoma that involved only the pancreas and liver, and was difficult to differentiate from a neuroendocrine tumor of the pancreas with a liver metastasis. A 65-year-old- male with no history of a malignant melanoma exhibited hypervascular hepatic and pancreatic tumors on computed tomography and contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography. He lacked lesions of the skin, eye, and gastrointestinal tract on physical examination, upper endoscopy, and a whole-body positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan; these sites are common primary sites of malignant melanoma. Finally, endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic core biopsy and percutaneous ultrasonography-guided liver biopsy confirmed malignant melanoma of the pancreas and liver.
Biopsy ; Electrons ; Endoscopy ; Endosonography ; Gastrointestinal Tract ; Humans ; Liver ; Male ; Melanoma ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Neuroendocrine Tumors ; Pancreas ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; Physical Examination ; Skin

Recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) is defined as two or more true episodes of acute pancreatitis and about 20% of patients with acute pancreatitis experience at least one episode of recurrence. In about 10% of RAP, no definite etiology is found despite extensive evaluation. This entity is called idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Toxic-metabolic, idiopathic, genetic, autoimmune, recurrent and severe acute pancreatitis, obstructive (TIGAR-O) classification is commonly used to identify risk factors for RAP. Modalities employed to find causes of RAP and IAP include meticulous history taking, blood tests, diagnostic imaging, genetic testing, bile crystal analysis, endoscopic ultrasonography, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with/without sphincter of Oddi manometry. Each modality is briefly reviewed in this review.
Bile ; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde ; Classification ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic Imaging ; Endosonography ; Genetic Testing ; Hematologic Tests ; Humans ; Manometry ; Pancreatitis ; Recurrence ; Risk Factors ; Sphincter of Oddi

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Determining the cause of suspected biliary stricture is often challenging in clinical practice. We aimed to compare the diagnostic yields of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling (EUS-TS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided tissue sampling (ERCP-TS) in patients with suspected biliary stricture at different primary lesions. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent same-session EUS- and ERCP-TS for the evaluation of suspected biliary stricture. Forceps biopsy and/or brush cytology of intraductal lesions and fine-needle aspiration for solid mass lesions were performed during ERCP and EUS, respectively. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-five patients treated at our institution between January 2011 and September 2016, were initially considered for the study. However, 32 patients were excluded due to loss of follow-up (n=8) and ERCP-TS on the pancreatic duct (n=20) or periampullary lesions (n=4). Of the 93 patients included, 86 had a malignant tumor including cholangiocarcinoma (n=39), pancreatic cancer (n=37), and other malignancies (n=10). Seven patients had benign lesions. EUS-TS had higher rate of overall diagnostic accuracy than ERCP-TS (82.8% vs. 60.2%, p=0.001), and this was especially true for patients with a pancreatic lesion (84.4% vs. 51.1%, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-TS was found to be superior to ERCP-TS for evaluating suspected biliary strictures, especially those caused by pancreatic lesions.
Biopsy ; Biopsy, Fine-Needle ; Cholangiocarcinoma ; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Diagnosis ; Endosonography ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Pancreatic Ducts ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; Surgical Instruments

No abstract available.
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Endosonography

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most efficient imaging modality for gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs). However, abdominopelvic computed tomography (APCT) has other advantages in evaluating the characteristics, local extension, or invasion of SETs to adjacent organs. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic ability of EUS and APCT based on surgical histopathology results.METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from 53 patients who underwent both EUS and APCT before laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric SETs from January 2010 to December 2017 at a single institution. On the basis of histopathology results, we assessed the diagnostic ability of the 2 tests.RESULTS: The overall accuracy of EUS and APCT was 64.2% and 50.9%, respectively. In particular, the accuracy of EUS vs. APCT for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), leiomyomas, and ectopic pancreas was 83.9% vs. 74.2%, 37.5% vs. 0.0%, and 57.1% vs. 14.3%, respectively. Most of the incorrect diagnoses with EUS involved hypoechoic lesions originating in the fourth echolayer, with the most common misdiagnosed lesions being GISTs mistaken for leiomyomas and vice versa.CONCLUSIONS: APCT showed a lower overall accuracy than EUS; however, APCT remains a useful modality for malignant/potentially malignant gastric SETs.
Diagnosis ; Endosonography ; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors ; Humans ; Leiomyoma ; Pancreas ; Retrospective Studies

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) now plays an important role in the management of pancreatic neoplasms. There are various types of pancreatic neoplasms, from benign to malignant lesions, and the role of EUS ranges from the imaging diagnosis to treatment. EUS is useful for the detection, characterization, and tissue acquisition of pancreatic lesions. Recent advancement of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS and elastography enables better characterization of pancreatic lesions. In addition to these enhanced EUS imaging techniques, EUS-guided tissue acquisition is now the standard procedure to establish the pathological diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasms. While these diagnostic roles of EUS have been established, EUS-guided interventions such as ablation and drainage are also increasingly utilized in the management of pancreatic neoplasms. However, most of these EUS-guided interventions are not yet standardized in terms of techniques and devices and thus need further investigations.
Biopsy, Fine-Needle ; Diagnosis ; Drainage ; Elasticity Imaging Techniques ; Endosonography ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; Ultrasonography

No abstract available.
Diagnosis ; Endosonography