Clinical outcomes of EUS-guided drainage of debris-containing pancreatic pseudocysts: a large multicenter study

Abstract

Background and study aims Data on clinical outcomes of endoscopic drainage of debris-free pseudocysts (PDF) versus pseudocysts containing solid debris (PSD) are very limited. The aims of this study were to compare treatment outcomes between patients with PDF vs. PSD undergoing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage via transmural stents.

Patients and methods Retrospective review of 142 consecutive patients with pseudocysts who underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage (TM) from 2008 to 2014 at 15 academic centers in the United States. Main outcome measures included TM technical success, treatment outcomes (symptomatic and radiologic resolution), need for endoscopic re-intervention at follow-up, and adverse events (AEs).

Results TM was performed in 90 patients with PDF and 52 with PSD. Technical success: PDF 87 (96.7 %) vs. PSD 51 (98.1 %). There was no difference in the rates for endoscopic re-intervention (5.5 % in PDF vs. 11.5 % in PSD; P = 0.33) or AEs (12.2 % in PDF vs. 19.2 % in PSD; P = 0.33). Median long-term follow-up after stent removal was 297 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 59 – 424 days) for PDF and 326 days (IQR: 180 – 448 days) for PSD (P = 0.88). There was a higher rate of short-term radiologic resolution of PDF (45; 66.2 %) vs. PSD (21; 51.2 %) (OR = 0.30; 95 % CI: 0.13 – 0.72; P = 0.009). There was no difference in long-term symptomatic resolution (PDF: 70.4 % vs. PSD: 66.7 %; P = 0.72) or radiologic resolution (PDF: 68.9 % vs. PSD: 78.6 %; P = 0.72)

Conclusions There was no difference in need for endoscopic re-intervention, AEs or long-term treatment outcomes in patients with PDF vs. PSD undergoing EUS-guided drainage with transmural stents. Based on these results, the presence of solid debris in pancreatic fluid collections does not appear to be associated with a poorer outcome.

• References

• 1 Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C. et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis – 2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut 2013; 62: 102-111
• 2 Baillie J. Pancreatic pseudocysts (part I). Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 873-879
• 3 Kozerak RA. Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 1997; 4: 36-43
• 4 Cui ML, Kim KH, Kim HG. et al. Incidence, risk factors and clinical course of pancreatic fluid collections in acute pancreatitis. Dig Dis Sci 2014; 59: 1055-1062
• 5 Holt BA, Varadarajulu S. The endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 804-812
• 6 Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Sutton BS. et al. Equal efficacy of endoscopic and surgical cystogastrostomy for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage in a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2013; 145: 583-590
• 7 Varadarajulu S, Rana SS, Bhasin DK. Endoscopic Therapy for Pancreatic Duct Leaks and Disruptions. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2013; 23: 863-892
• 8 Bang JY, Varadarajulu S. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided management of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis. Clin Endosc 2014; 47: 429-431
• 9 Khashab MA, Chithadi KV. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 81-89
• 10 Anderson MA, Ben-Menachem T. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Management of antithrombotic agents for endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 1060-1070
• 11 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 450-454
• 12 Sharaiha RZ, DeFilippis EM, Kedia P. et al. Metal versus plastic for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage: clinical outcomes and success. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 822-27
• 13 Siddiqui AA, Adler DG, Nieto J. et al. EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections and necrosis using a novel lumen-apposing stent: a large retrospective multicenter U.S. experience (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; [Epub ahead of print]; DOI:
• 14 Puri R, Mishra SR, Thandassery RB. et al. Outcome and complications of endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage using combined endoprosthesis and naso-cystic drain. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 27: 722-727
• 15 Siddiqui AA, DeWitt JM, Strongin A. et al. Outcomes of EUS-guided drainage of debris-containing pancreatic pseudocysts by using combined endoprosthesis and a nasocystic drain. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 589-595
• 16 Holt BA, Varadarajulu S. The endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 4: 804-812