Among high-ADR endoscopists, AMRs still varied. APP may be a promising secondary indicator for distinguishing between the one-and-done polyp endoscopist and the meticulous endoscopist. The evaluation of influence of new metrics on colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention requires a larger population-based study.

Background and Objectives:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) (pseudocyst [PC]; walled-off necrosis [WON]) utilizes double pigtail plastic stents (PS) and the newer large diameter fully covered self-expandable stents (FCSEMS) customized for PFC drainage. This study examined the impact of type of stent on clinical outcomes and costs.Patients and Methods:Retrospective two-center study. Outcome variables were technical and clinical success, need for repeat procedures, need for direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN), and procedure-related costs.Results:A total of 49 (PC: 31, WON: 18) patients were analyzed. Initially, PS was used in 37 and FCSEMS in 12. Repeat transmural drainage was required in 14 (PS: 13 [9 treated with PS, 4 treated with FCSEMS]; FCSEMS: 1 [treated with PS]) due to stent migration (PS: 3; FCSEMS: 1) or inadequate drainage (PS: 10). Technical success was 100%. Initial clinical success was 64.9% (25/38) for PS versus 91.7% (11/12) for FCSEMS (P = 0.074). With repeat transmural stenting, final clinical success was achieved in 94.6% and 100%, respectively (P = 0.411). Compared to FCSEMS, PS was associated with greater need for repeat drainage (34.2% vs. 6.3%, P = 0.032). The need for and frequency of DEN was similar between both groups, but PS required more frequent balloon dilatation. PS was significantly cheaper for noninfected PC. Costs were similar for infected PC and WON.Conclusion:PS was associated with a higher need for a second drainage procedure to achieve clinical success. The use of FCSEMS did not increase procedural costs for infected PC and WON.

No abstract