An international experience with single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy in patients with altered anatomy

Background and study aims: The utility of digital single- operator cholangiopancreatoscopy (D-SOCP) in surgically altered anatomy (SAA) is limited. We aimed to evaluate the technical success and safety of D-SOCP in patients SAA. Patients and methods: Patients with SAA who underwent D-SOCP between February 2015 and June 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Technical success was defined as completing the intended procedure with the use of D-SOCP. Results: Thirty-five patients underwent D-SOCP (34 D-SOC, 1 D-SOP). Bilroth II was the most common type of SAA (45.7 %), followed by Whipple reconstruction (31.4 %). Twenty-three patients (65.7 %) patients had prior failed ERCP due to the presence of complex biliary stone (52.2 %). A therapeutic duodenoscope was utilized in the majority of the cases (68.6 %), while a therapeutic gastroscope (22.7 %) or adult colonoscope (8.5 %) were used in the remaining procedures. Choledocholithiasis (61.2 %) and pancreatic duct calculi (3.2 %) were the most common indications for D-SOCP. Technical success was achieved in all 35 patients (100 %) and majority (91.4 %) requiring a single session. Complex interventions included electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy, biliary or pancreatic stent placement, stricture dilation, and target tissue biopsies. Two mild adverse events occurred (pancreatitis and transient bacteremia). Conclusions: In SAA, D-SOCP is a safe and effective modality to diagnose and treat complex pancreatobiliary disorders, especially in cases where standard ERCP attempts may fail

Placing a lumen-apposing metal stent despite ascites: feasibility and safety

Background and Aims: Placing a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) through ascites carries serious risks, including death from leakage around the LAMS and failure to create a mature fistula between the 2 lumens. However, sometimes no options exist or are equally dangerous. We present 5 patients who underwent LAMS placement despite ascites in 2 different locations. Methods: This is a retrospective review of 5 patients who underwent LAMS placement despite ascites in 2 different locations from 2016 to 2018. Results: Three patients with cholecystitis and 2 patients with afferent limb syndrome and severe ascites were treated with a combination of preprocedural and intraprocedural paracentesis. Serum ascites albumin gradient was measured. Weight was recorded daily. Patients were encouraged to sleep at an incline, and periodic paracentesis (every 3-7 days) was performed when ascites reaccumulated over 4 weeks. Median volume of ascites aspirated was 2 L preprocedurally and 300 mL intraprocedurally. Only 1 patient had ascites with a high serum ascites albumin gradient and was treated with diuretics. Technical and clinical success was achieved in all 5 patients without any adverse events over a median follow-up of 28 weeks. Conclusions: In situations in which no better options remain, LAMS placement appears to be safe after adequate and aggressive treatment of the underlying ascites pre-, intra-, and postprocedurally. Larger studies are needed to establish the safety of this approach