Background/Aims: The factors affecting the detection rate of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP) using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) in patients with type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) have not been thoroughly studied. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to identify the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Methods: Fifty patients with AIP were included in this study, and the primary outcome measures were the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Results: Multivariate analysis identified the use of fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles as a significant predictive factor for LPSP detection (odds ratio, 15.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.62–141; ¬¬p=0.017). The rate of good-quality specimens (specimen adequacy score ≥4) was significantly higher for the FNB needle group than for the fine needle aspiration (FNA) needle group (97% vs. 56%; p<0.01), and the FNB needle group required significantly fewer needle passes than the FNA needle group (median, 2 vs. 3; p<0.01). Conclusions The use of FNB needles was the most important factor for the histological confirmation of LPSP using EUS-TA in patients with type 1 AIP.

Background/Aims: The factors affecting the detection rate of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP) using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) in patients with type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) have not been thoroughly studied. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to identify the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Methods: Fifty patients with AIP were included in this study, and the primary outcome measures were the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Results: Multivariate analysis identified the use of fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles as a significant predictive factor for LPSP detection (odds ratio, 15.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.62–141; ¬¬p=0.017). The rate of good-quality specimens (specimen adequacy score ≥4) was significantly higher for the FNB needle group than for the fine needle aspiration (FNA) needle group (97% vs. 56%; p<0.01), and the FNB needle group required significantly fewer needle passes than the FNA needle group (median, 2 vs. 3; p<0.01). Conclusions The use of FNB needles was the most important factor for the histological confirmation of LPSP using EUS-TA in patients with type 1 AIP.

Background/Aims: The factors affecting the detection rate of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP) using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) in patients with type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) have not been thoroughly studied. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to identify the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Methods: Fifty patients with AIP were included in this study, and the primary outcome measures were the predictive factors for histologically detecting level 1 or 2 LPSP using EUS-TA. Results: Multivariate analysis identified the use of fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles as a significant predictive factor for LPSP detection (odds ratio, 15.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.62–141; ¬¬p=0.017). The rate of good-quality specimens (specimen adequacy score ≥4) was significantly higher for the FNB needle group than for the fine needle aspiration (FNA) needle group (97% vs. 56%; p<0.01), and the FNB needle group required significantly fewer needle passes than the FNA needle group (median, 2 vs. 3; p<0.01). Conclusions The use of FNB needles was the most important factor for the histological confirmation of LPSP using EUS-TA in patients with type 1 AIP.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is currently the standard technique for treating unresectable malignant distal biliary obstructions (MDBO). Therefore, covered SEMS with longer stent patency and fewer migrations are required. This study aimed to assess the clinical performance of a novel, fully covered SEMS for unresectable MDBO. Methods: This was a multicenter single-arm prospective study. The primary outcome was a non-obstruction rate at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), technical and clinical success, and adverse events. Results: A total of 73 patients were enrolled in this study. The non-obstruction rate at 6 months was 61%. The median OS and TRBO were 233 and 216 days, respectively. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 97%, respectively. Furthermore, the rate of occurrence of RBO and adverse events was 49% and 21%, respectively. The length of bile duct stenosis (<2.2 cm) was the only significant risk factor for stent migration. Conclusions The non-obstruction rate of a novel fully covered SEMS for MDBO is comparable to that reported earlier but shorter than expected. Short bile duct stenosis is a significant risk factor for stent migration.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic biliary drainage using self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) for malignant biliary strictures occasionally induces acute cholecystitis (AC). This study evaluated the efficacy of prophylactic gallbladder stents (GBS) during SEMS placement. Methods: Among 158 patients who underwent SEMS placement for malignant biliary strictures between January 2018 and March 2023, 30 patients who attempted to undergo prophylactic GBS placement before SEMS placement were included. Results: Technical success was achieved in 21 cases (70.0%). The mean diameter of the cystic duct was more significant in the successful cases (6.5 mm vs. 3.7 mm, p<0.05). Adverse events occurred for 7 patients (23.3%: acute pancreatitis in 7; non-obstructive cholangitis in 1; perforation of the cystic duct in 1 with an overlap), all of which improved with conservative treatment. No patients developed AC when the GBS placement was successful, whereas 25 of the 128 patients (19.5%) without a prophylactic GBS developed AC during the median follow-up period of 357 days (p=0.043). In the multivariable analysis, GBS placement was a significant factor in preventing AC (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.99; p=0.045). Conclusions GBS may contribute to the prevention of AC after SEMS placement for malignant biliary strictures.

Objectives: Diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis are instrumental in obtaining good outcomes of hip surgery.Measuring bone mineral density (BMD) using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis. However, due to limited access to DXA, there is a need for a screening tool to identify patients at a higher risk of osteoporosis. We analyzed the potential utility of the Osteoporosis Self-assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA) as a screening tool for osteoporosis. Methods: A total of 1378 female patients who underwent hip surgery at 8 institutions were analyzed. For each patient, the BMD of the proximal femoral region was measured by DXA (DXA-BMD), and the correlation with OSTA score (as a continuous variable) was assessed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the ability of OSTA score to predict osteoporosis. Lastly, the OSTA score was truncated to yield an integer (OSTA index) to clarify the percentage of patients with osteoporosis for each index. Results: DXA-BMD showed a strong correlation with OSTA (r = 0.683; P < 0.001). On ROC curve analysis, the optimal OSTA score cut-off value of − 5.4 was associated with 73.8% sensitivity and 80.9% specificity for diagnosis of osteoporosis (area under the curve: 0.842). A decrease in the OSTA index by 1 unit was associated with a 7.3% increase in the probability of osteoporosis. Conclusions OSTA is a potentially useful tool for screening osteoporosis in patients undergoing hip surgery. Our findings may help identify high-risk patients who require further investigation using DXA.

Background/Aims: We aimed to investigate (1) promising clinical findings for the recognition of focal type autoimmune pancreatitis (FAIP) and (2) the impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) on the diagnosis of FAIP. Methods: Twenty-three patients with FAIP were involved in this study, and 44 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) were included in the control group. Results: (1) Multivariate analysis revealed that homogeneous delayed enhancement on contrast-enhanced computed tomography was a significant factor indicative of FAIP compared to PDAC (90% vs. 7%, p=0.015). (2) For 13 of 17 FAIP patients (76.5%) who underwent EUS-TA, EUS-TA aided the diagnostic confirmation of AIPs, and only one patient (5.9%) was found to have AIP after surgery. On the other hand, of the six patients who did not undergo EUS-TA, three (50.0%) underwent surgery for pancreatic lesions. Conclusions Homogeneous delayed enhancement on contrast-enhanced computed tomography was the most useful clinical factor for discriminating FAIPs from PDACs. EUS-TA is mandatory for diagnostic confirmation of FAIP lesions and can contribute to a reduction in the rate of unnecessary surgery for patients with FAIP.

Background/Aims: This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of pancreatic duct lavage cytology combined with a cell-block method (PLC-CB) for possible pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). Methods: This study included 41 patients with suspected PDACs who underwent PLC-CB mainly because they were unfit for undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration. A 6-Fr double lumen catheter was mainly used to perform PLC-CB. Final diagnoses were obtained from the findings of resected specimens or clinical outcomes during surveillance after PLC-CB. Results: Histocytological evaluations using PLC-CB were performed in 87.8% (36/41) of the patients. For 31 of the 36 patients, final diagnoses (invasive PDAC, 12; pancreatic carcinoma in situ, 5; benignancy, 14) were made, and the remaining five patients were excluded due to lack of surveillance periods after PLC-CB. For 31 patients, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PLC-CB for detecting malignancy were 94.1%, 100%, and 96.8%, respectively. In addition, they were 87.5%, 100%, and 94.1%, respectively, in 17 patients without pancreatic masses detectable using endoscopic ultrasonography. Four patients developed postprocedural pancreatitis, which improved with conservative therapy. Conclusions PLC-CB has an excellent ability to detect malignancies in patients with possible PDACs, including pancreatic carcinoma in situ.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.