Raza Hasan

Clinical Outcomes, Efficacy, and Adverse Events in Patients Undergoing Esophageal Stent Placement for Benign Indications: A Large Multicenter Study.

Introduction:Esophageal stents are commonly used to treat benign esophageal conditions including refractory benign esophageal strictures, anastomotic strictures, fistulae, perforations and anastomotic leaks. Data on outcomes in these settings remain limited. Methods:We performed a retrospective multicenter study of patients who underwent fully or partially covered self-expandable stent placement for benign esophageal diseases. Esophageal stent placements were performed for the following indications: (1) benign refractory esophageal strictures, (2) surgical anastomotic strictures, (3) esophageal perforations, (4) esophageal fistulae, and (5) surgical anastomotic leaks. Results:A total of 70 patients underwent esophageal stent placement for benign esophageal conditions. A total of 114 separate procedures were performed. The most common indication for esophageal stent placement was refractory benign esophageal stricture (48.2%). Global treatment success rate was 55.7%. Treatment success rate was 33.3% in refractory benign strictures, 23.1% in anastomotic strictures, 100% in perforations, 71.4% in fistulae, and 80% in anastomotic leaks. Stent migration was noted in 28 of 70 patients (40%), most commonly seen in refractory benign strictures. Conclusions:This is one of the largest studies to date of esophageal stents to treat benign esophageal diseases. Success rates are lowest in benign esophageal strictures. These patients have few other options beyond chronic dilations, feeding tubes, and surgery, and fully covered self-expandable metallic stent give patients a chance to have their problem fixed endoscopically and still eat by mouth. Perforations, fistulas, and leaks respond very well to esophageal stenting, and stenting should be considered as a first-line therapy in these settings.

Endoscopic suturing for the prevention of stent migration in benign upper gastrointestinal conditions: a comparative multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) have increasingly been used in benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions; however, stent migration remains a major limitation. Endoscopic suture fixation (ESF) may prevent stent migration. The aims of this study were to compare the frequency of stent migration in patients who received endoscopic suturing for stent fixation (ESF group) compared with those who did not (NSF group) and to assess the impact of ESF on clinical outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent FCSEMS placement for benign UGI diseases. Patients were divided into either the NSF or ESF group. Outcome variables, including stent migration, clinical success (resolution of underlying pathology), and adverse events, were compared. RESULTS A total of 125 patients (44 in ESF group, 81 in NSF group; 56 benign strictures, 69 leaks/fistulas/perforations) underwent 224 stenting procedures. Stent migration was significantly more common in the NSF group (33 % vs. 16 %; P = 0.03). Time to stent migration was longer in the ESF group (P = 0.02). ESF appeared to protect against stent migration in patients with a history of stent migration (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.09; P = 0.002). ESF was also significantly associated with a higher rate of clinical success (60 % vs. 38 %; P = 0.03). Rates of adverse events were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Endoscopic suturing for stent fixation is safe and associated with a decreased migration rate, particularly in patients with a prior history of stent migration. It may also improve clinical response, likely because of the reduction in stent migration.

Feasibility, safety, and outcomes of a single-step endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections without fluoroscopy using a novel electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent.

Background and Objectives: There are currently limited data available regarding the safety of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) using the lumen-apposing metal stent without fluoroscopic guidance. This study aims to evaluate clinical outcomes and safety of EUS-guided drainage of PFC using the electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (EC-LAMSs) without fluoroscopic guidance. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on patients with symptomatic PFC who underwent EUS-guided drainage using EC-LAMS without fluoroscopy. All patients were followed clinically until resolution of their PFC. Technical success (successful placement of EC-LAMS), number of patients who achieved complete resolution of PFC without additional intervention and adverse events were noted. Results: We evaluated 25 patients, including three with pancreatic pseudocysts and 22 with walled-off necrosis (WON). The etiology of the patients pancreatitis was gallstones (42%), alcohol (27%), and other causes (31%). The mean cyst size was 82 mm (range, 60–170 mm). The indications for endoscopic drainage were abdominal pain, infected WON, or gastric outlet obstruction. Technical success with placement of the EC-LAMS was achieved in all 25 patients. There were no procedure-related complications. The mean patient follow-up was 7.8 months. PFCs resolved in 24 (96%) patients; the one failure was in a patient with WON. Stent occlusion was seen in one patient. There was a spontaneous migration of one stent into the enteral lumen after resolution of WONs. The EC-LAMS were successfully removed using a snare in all the remaining patients. The median number of endoscopy sessions to achieve PFCs resolution was 2 (range, 2–6). Conclusions: Single-step EUS-guided drainage of PFCs without fluoroscopic guidance using the novel EC-LAMS is a safe and effective endoscopic technique for drainage of PFCs with excellent technical and clinical success rates and no complications. Due to its ease of use, EC-LAMS may simplify and streamline EUS-guided management of PFC and help in its widespread adoption as an alternative to surgery.

A retrospective study evaluating endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections using a novel lumen-apposing metal stent on an electrocautery enhanced delivery system.

Objectives: To report the safety and clinical efficacy with the novel lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) with an electrocautery enhanced delivery system for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients with PFCs who underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage using the LAMS with an electrocautery enhanced delivery system in 2 US centers. Results: Thirteen patients with PFCs (69% with walled-off necrosis [WON]) underwent drainage using the study device. Successful stent placement was accomplished in all patients. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy was carried out in all nine patients with WON complete resolution of the PFC was obtained in all 13 cases, with no recurrence during follow-up. There was one procedure-related adverse event. In one patient, the LAMS was dislodged immediately after deployment, falling into the stomach where it was removed. A second electrocautery enhanced LAMS was placed in this patient immediately afterward. Conclusions: EUS-guided drainage using the LAMS with the electrocautery-enhanced delivery system is a safe, easily performed, and a highly effective for the drainage of PFCs.

Fully-covered metal stents with endoscopic suturing vs. partially-covered metal stents for benign upper gastrointestinal diseases: a comparative study

Background and study aims  Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used in benign conditions (e. g. strictures, fistulas, leaks, and perforations). Fully covered SEMS (FSEMS) were introduced to avoid undesirable consequences of partially covered SEMS (PSEMS), but come with higher risk of stent migration. Endoscopic suturing (ES) for stent fixation has been shown to reduce migration of FSEMS. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of FSEMS with ES (FS/ES) versus PSEMS in patients with benign upper gastrointestinal conditions. Patients and methods  We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent stent placement for benign gastrointestinal conditions at seven US tertiary-care centers. Patients were divided into two groups: FSEMS with ES (FS/ES group) and PSEMS (PSEMS group). Clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results  A total of 74 (FS/ES 46, PSEMS 28) patients were included. On multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference in rate of stent migration between FS/ES (43 %) and PSEMS (15 %) (adjusted odds ratio 0.56; 95 % CI 0.15 – 2.00). Clinical success was similar [68 % vs. 64 %; P  = 0.81]. Rate of adverse events (AEs) was higher in PSEMS group [13 (46 %) vs. 10 (21 %); P  = 0.03). Difficult stent removal was higher in the PSEMS group (n = 5;17 %) vs. 0 % in the FS/ES group; P  = 0.005. Conclusions  The proportion of stent migration of FS/ES and PSEMS are similar. Rates of other stent-related AEs were higher in the PSEMS group. PSEMS was associated with tissue ingrowth or overgrowth leading to difficult stent removal, and secondary stricture formation. Thus, FSEMS with ES for stent fixation may be the preferred modality over PSEMS for the treatment of benign upper gastrointestinal conditions.

A Multicenter comparative trial of a novel EUS-guided core biopsy needle (SharkCore™) with the 22-gauge needle in patients with solid pancreatic mass lesions

Background and Objectives: The ability to obtain adequate tissue of solid pancreatic lesions by EUS-guided remains a challenge. The aim of this study was to compare the performance characteristics and safety of EUS-FNA for evaluating solid pancreatic lesions using the standard 22-gauge needle versus a novel EUS biopsy needle. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective study of EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions between 2009 and 2015. Patients underwent EUS-guided sampling with a 22-gauge SharkCore (SC) needle or a standard 22-gauge FNA needle. Technical success, performance characteristics of EUS-FNA, the number of needle passes required to obtain a diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, and complications were compared. Results: A total of 1088 patients (mean age = 66 years; 49% female) with pancreatic masses underwent EUS-guided sampling with a 22-gauge SC needle (n = 115) or a standard 22-gauge FNA needle (n = 973). Technical success was 100%. The frequency of obtaining an adequate cytology by EUS-FNA was similar when using the SC and the standard needle (94.1% vs. 92.7%, respectively). The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for tissue diagnosis were not significantly different between two needles. Adequate sample collection leading to a definite diagnosis was achieved by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pass in 73%, 92%, and 98% of procedures using the SC needle and 20%, 37%, and 94% procedures using the standard needle (P < 0.001), respectively. The median number of passes to obtain a tissue diagnosis using the SC needle was significantly less as compared to the standard needle (1 and 3, respectively; P< 0.001). Conclusions: The EUS SC biopsy needle is safe and technically feasible for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Preliminary results suggest that the SC needle has a diagnostic yield similar to the standard EUS needle and significantly reduces the number of needle passes required to obtain a tissue diagnosis.