Managing adverse events after endoscopic ultrasound‐guided drainage of the biliary tract and pancreatic fluid collections: Narrative review (with video)

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided therapeutic procedures have become increasingly common in clinical practice. The development of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology led to the concept of interventional EUS. However, it carries a considerable risk of adverse events (AEs), which occur in approximately 23% of the procedures performed for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and 2.5-37.0% of those performed for drainage of the biliary tract. Although the vast majority of AEs occurring after EUSguided drainage are mild, a deep understanding of such events is necessary for their appropriate management. Because EUS-guided drainage is a novel procedure, there have been few studies of the topic. To our knowledge, this is the first narrative review that focuses on the management and resolution of AEs occurring after EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections or the biliary tract. We also include an explanatory video.

Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) Versus Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Randomized Clinical Trial

“…Despite some cases of stent deployment with the LAMS, all were resolved and drainage of the PFC effectively achieved - either grasping the LAMS with cold forceps or deploying another stent through the LAMS - a DPS or a SEMS, as demonstrated in a previous publication [ 30 , 31 ]. Additionally, the type of LAMS is also important to acknowledge, as this stent type is not coupled with an electrocautery system, likely resulting in a longer average release time with LAMS compared to SEMS.…”