BACKGROUND/AIMS: The risk of developing pancreatitis induced by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS FNA) is relatively small. However, patients undergoing sampling through the normal pancreatic parenchyma or the pancreatic duct may have a higher rate of pancreatitis. Here, we determine the factors associated with increased risk of acute pancreatitis in patients undergoing FNA through normal pancreatic parenchyma/pancreatic duct. METHODS: In this prospective study at a tertiary cancer center, patients undergoing sampling through the pancreatic duct or ≥5 mm of the normal parenchyma between December 2013 and September 2017 were included. Post-EUS induced pancreatitis was diagnosed by the presence of abdominal pain with an amylase or lipase level higher than three times normal value. RESULTS: A total of 712 patients underwent pancreatic EUS FNA. A total of 163 patients were included in the high-risk group. Mean age was 63 years, 82 females, mean number of needle-passes was 3.3 (range, 1–7). Fifteen patients (15/163, 9.2%) developed pancreatitis after EUS FNA through the pancreatic parenchyma compared with only one case among the control group (<5 mm of normal parenchyma) (0.18%, 1/549, p<0.0001). Several factors appeared to be associated with pancreatitis, including young age, solid lesion, and a recent history of acute pancreatitis. By logistic regression, a prior history of recent pancreatitis was the only statistically significant factor associated with post-EUS-guided biopsy pancreatitis (p=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a recent history of acute pancreatitis undergoing EUS FNA through 5 mm or more of the normal pancreatic parenchyma are at a much greater risk of acute pancreatitis.
Abdominal Pain ; Amylases ; Biopsy* ; Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration ; Endoscopy ; Female ; Humans ; Lipase ; Logistic Models ; Pancreatic Ducts ; Pancreatitis* ; Prospective Studies ; Reference Values ; Risk Factors* ; Ultrasonography*

Background/Aims: The endoscopic management of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC)-associated dominant strictures remains challenging. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare balloon dilation and stent placement in the treatment of dominant strictures among PSC patients. Methods: Literature searches on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and Lilacs/Bireme were performed for studies published until December 2020. Measured outcomes included clinical efficacy, stricture recurrence, cumulative recurrencefree rate, transplant rate, 5-year survival rate, and adverse events (i.e., pancreatitis, cholangitis, bleeding, perforation and death). Results: A total of 5 studies (n=467) were included. Based on pooled analyses, there were no differences in clinical efficacy (risk difference [RD], -0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.58 to 0.33; I2=93%) or transplant rates (RD, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.01; I2=0%); however, the risk of occurrence of adverse events was lower with balloon dilatation than with stent placement (RD,-0.34; 95% CI, -0.45 to -0.23; I2=61%). Among the types of adverse events reported, only the rates of cholangitis/bacteremia were significantly lower in balloon dilation patients (RD, -0.19; 95% CI, -0.25 to -0.13; I2=51%). Conclusions Compared to balloon dilation, stent placement for dominant strictures in PSC appeared to have higher complication rates without significant differences in efficacy.