Pancreatic and Gastric Plasmacytoma Presenting with Obstructive Jaundice, Diagnosed with Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration

Pancreatic plasmacytoma is a rare disorder which may present with obstructive jaundice. Only eighteen cases have been reported in the English language literature. We present the first case of pancreatic plasmacytoma and gastric plasmacytoma diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). A 75-year-old male with a known history of multiple myeloma presented with obstructive jaundice and a pancreatic mass. A concomitant gastric mass due to gastric plasmacytoma was seen. The diagnosis was established via EUS-FNA of the pancreatic mass. Pancreatic plasmacytoma should be suspected in patients with a history of myeloma. EUS-FNA is a safe and effective modality in the diagnosis of pancreatic plasmacytoma. Radiation therapy should be the first-line of therapy in treating pancreatic plasmacytomas

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of three current guidelines for the evaluation of asymptomatic pancreatic cystic neoplasms.

Asymptomatic pancreatic cysts are a common clinical problem but only a minority of these cases progress to cancer. Our aim was to compare the accuracy to detect malignancy of the 2015 American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), the 2012 International Consensus/Fukuoka (Fukuoka guidelines [FG]), and the 2010 American College of Radiology (ACR) guidelines.We conducted a retrospective study at 3 referral centers for all patients who underwent resection for an asymptomatic pancreatic cyst between January 2008 and December 2013. We compared the accuracy of 3 guidelines in predicting high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer in resected cysts. We performed logistic regression analyses to examine the association between cyst features and risk of HGD or cancer.A total of 269 patients met inclusion criteria. A total of 228 (84.8%) had a benign diagnosis or low-grade dysplasia on surgical pathology, and 41 patients (15.2%) had either HGD (n = 14) or invasive cancer (n = 27). Of the 41 patients with HGD or cancer on resection, only 3 patients would have met the AGA guideline\u27s indications for resection based on the preoperative cyst characteristics, whereas 30/41 patients would have met the FG criteria for resection and 22/41 patients met the ACR criteria. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of HGD, and/or cancer of the AGA guidelines were 7.3%, 88.2%, 10%, and 84.1%, compared to 73.2%, 45.6%, 19.5%, and 90.4% for the FG and 53.7%, 61%, 19.8%, and 88% for the ACR guidelines. In multivariable analysis, cyst size \u3e3 cm, compared to ≤3 cm, (odds ratio [OR] = 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11, 4.2) and each year increase in age (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.11) were positively associated with risk of HGD or cancer on resection.In patients with asymptomatic branch duct-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms or mucinous cystic neoplasms who underwent resection, the prevalence rate of HGD or cancer was 15.2%. Using the 2015 AGA criteria for resection would have missed 92.6% of patients with HGD or cancer. The more inclusive FG and ACR had a higher sensitivity for HGD or cancer but lower specificity. Given the current deficiencies of these guidelines, it will be important to determine the acceptable rate of false-positives in order to prevent a single true-positive

Effects of Blended (Yellow) vs Forced Coagulation (Blue) Currents on Adverse Events, Complete Resection, or Polyp Recurrence After Polypectomy in a Large Randomized Trial

Background & aims: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. Results: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). Conclusions: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference

Clip Closure Prevents Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Large Colon Polyps in a Randomized Trial

Background & aims: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. Methods: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. Results: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). Conclusions: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon

Percutaneous transhepatic vs. endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage for suspected malignant hilar obstruction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background The optimal approach to the drainage of malignant obstruction at the liver hilum remains uncertain. We aim to compare percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) to endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) as the first intervention in patients with cholestasis due to suspected malignant hilar obstruction (MHO). Methods The INTERCPT trial is a multi-center, comparative effectiveness, randomized, superiority trial of PTBD vs. ERC for decompression of suspected MHO. One hundred and eighty-four eligible patients across medical centers in the United States, who provide informed consent, will be randomly assigned in 1:1 fashion via a web-based electronic randomization system to either ERC or PTBD as the initial drainage and, if indicated, diagnostic procedure. All subsequent clinical interventions, including crossover to the alternative procedure, will be dictated by treating physicians per usual clinical care. Enrolled subjects will be assessed for successful biliary drainage (primary outcome measure), adequate tissue diagnosis, adverse events, the need for additional procedures, hospitalizations, and oncological outcomes over a 6-month follow-up period. Subjects, treating clinicians and outcome assessors will not be blinded. Discussion The INTERCPT trial is designed to determine whether PTBD or ERC is the better initial approach when managing a patient with suspected MHO, a common clinical dilemma that has never been investigated in a randomized trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03172832 . Registered on 1 June 2017.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142379/1/13063_2018_Article_2473.pd

The use of OverStitchTM for the treatment of intestinal perforation, fistulas and leaks

Gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas may complicate endoscopic and surgical procedures. Surgical repair is associated with significant morbidity. Therapeutic endoscopic tools and techniques have included the application of tissue sealants, clip closure, and stent placement. Endoscopic suturing is a rapidly evolving minimally invasive technique. The OverStitchTM (Apollo Endosurgery, USA) is currently the only available endoscopic suturing system. Although technically more difficult than clip closure, endoscopic suturing allows closure of larger defects. In some settings, outcomes similar to surgical management with less morbidity may be achieved. This review describes the OverStitchTM endoscopic suturing system and the published literature regarding its use for perforations, leaks and fistulas