Download PDF
Endoscopy 2019; 51(11): 1035-1043
DOI: 10.1055/a-0759-1353
Original article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Lumen-apposing stents versus plastic stents in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts: a large, comparative, international, multicenter study

Juliana Yang
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Yen-I Chen
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
 2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
,
Shai Friedland
 3   Division of Gastroenterology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
,
Ian Holmes
 3   Division of Gastroenterology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
,
Christopher Paiji
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Ryan Law
 4   Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
,
Amy Hosmer
 4   Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
,
Tyler Stevens
 5   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
,
Franco Matheus
 5   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
,
Rishi Pawa
 6   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Wake Forrest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
,
Nihar Mathur
 6   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Wake Forrest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
,
Divyesh Sejpal
 7   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, New York, New York, USA
,
Sumant Inamdar
 7   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, New York, New York, USA
,
Tyler M. Berzin
 8   Center for Advanced Endoscopy, Division of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
,
Christopher J. DiMaio
 9   Division of Gastroenterology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, USA
,
Sanchit Gupta
 9   Division of Gastroenterology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, USA
,
Patrick S. Yachimski
10   Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
,
Andrea Anderloni
11   Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
,
Alessandro Repici
11   Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
,
Theodore James
12   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
,
Laith H. Jamil
13   Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
,
Mel Ona
13   Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
,
Simon K. Lo
13   Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
,
Srinivas Gaddam
13   Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
,
Markus Dollhopf
14   Department of Gastroenterology, Klinikum Neuperlach, Munich, Germany
,
Nuha Alammar
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Eugenie Shieh
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Majidah Bukhari
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Vivek Kumbhari
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Vikesh Singh
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Olaya Brewer
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Omid Sanaei
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Lea Fayad
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Saowanee Ngamruengphong
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Eun Ji Shin
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Todd H. Baron
12   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
,
Mouen A. Khashab
 1   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 16 February 2018

accepted after revision 05 September 2018

Publication Date:
07 December 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Correction: Lumen-apposing stents versus plastic stents in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts: a large, comparative, international, multicenter studyEndoscopy 2019; 51(11): C5-C5
DOI: 10.1055/a-0852-9243

Abstract

Background Larger caliber lumen-apposing stents (LAMSs) have been increasingly used in the management of pancreatic fluid collections, specifically when solid debris is present; however, their advantages over smaller caliber plastic stents in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts are unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of LAMS specifically in the management of pancreatic pseudocysts compared with double-pigtail plastic stents (DPPSs).

Methods We performed a multicenter, international, retrospective study between January 2012 and August 2016. A total of 205 patients with a diagnosis of pancreatic pseudocysts were included, 80 patients received LAMSs and 125 received DPPSs. Measured outcomes included clinical success, technical success, adverse events, stent dysfunction, pancreatic pseudocyst recurrence, and need for surgery.

Results Technical success was similar between the LAMS and the DPPS groups (97.5 % vs. 99.2 %; P = 0.32). Clinical success was higher for LAMSs than for DPPSs (96.3 % vs. 87.2 %; P = 0.03). While the need for surgery was similar between the two groups (1.3 % vs. 4.9 %, respectively; P = 0.17), the use of percutaneous drainage was significantly lower in the LAMS group (1.3 % vs. 8.8 %; P = 0.03). At 6-month follow-up, the recurrence rate was similar between the groups (6.7 % vs 18.8 %, respectively; P = 0.12). The rate of adverse events was significantly higher in the DPPS group (7.5 % vs. 17.6 %; P = 0.04). There was no difference in post-procedure mean length of hospital stay (6.3 days [standard deviation 27.9] vs. 3.7 days [5.7]; P = 0.31).

Conclusion When compared to DPPSs, LAMSs are a safe, feasible, and effective modality for the treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts and are associated with a higher rate of clinical success, shorter procedure time, less need for percutaneous interventions, and a lower overall rate of adverse events.

Table e1

Letter to this article:

Which stent to use for the management of pancreatic pseudocysts? Time for randomized controlled studiesEndoscopy 2020; 52(04): 321-321
DOI: 10.1055/a-1103-1938

 

  • References

  • 1 Poornachandra KS, Bhasin DK, Nagi B. et al. Clinical, biochemical, and radiologic parameters at admission predicting formation of a pseudocyst in acute pancreatitis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2011; 45: 159-163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Tyberg A, Karia K, Gabr M. et al. Management of pancreatic fluid collections: A comprehensive review of the literature. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 2256-2270
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Maringhini A, Uomo G, Patti R. et al. Pseudocysts in acute nonalcoholic pancreatitis: incidence and natural history. Dig Dis Sci 1999; 44: 1669-1673
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Nealon WH, Bhutani M, Riall TS. et al. A unifying concept: pancreatic ductal anatomy both predicts and determines the major complications resulting from pancreatitis. J Am Coll Surg 2009; 208: 790-799 ; discussion 799–801
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Singhal S, Rotman SR, Gaidhane M. et al. Pancreatic fluid collection drainage by endoscopic ultrasound: an update. Clin Endosc 2013; 46: 506-514
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kahaleh M, Shami VM, Conaway MR. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst: a prospective comparison with conventional endoscopic drainage. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 355-259
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Shah RJ, Shah JN, Waxman I. et al. Safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with lumen-apposing covered self-expanding metal stents. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 747-752
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Baron TH, Harewood GC, Morgan DE. et al. Outcome differences after endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis, acute pancreatic pseudocysts, and chronic pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 7-17
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Sharaiha RZ, Tyberg A, Khashab MA. et al. Endoscopic therapy with lumen-apposing metal stents is safe and effective for patients with pancreatic walled-off necrosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 1797-1803
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Sutton BS. et al. Equal efficacy of endoscopic and surgical cystogastrostomy for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage in a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2013; 145: 583-590.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Varadarajulu S, Lopes TL, Wilcox CM. et al. EUS versus surgical cyst-gastrostomy for management of pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 649-655
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Teoh AY, Dhir V, Jin ZD. et al. Systematic review comparing endoscopic, percutaneous and surgical pancreatic pseudocyst drainage. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8: 310-318
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Giovannini M. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2005; 15: 179-188, xi
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Parks RW, Tzovaras G, Diamond T. et al. Management of pancreatic pseudocysts. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2000; 82: 383-387
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Pfaffenbach B, Langer M, Stabenow-Lohbauer U. et al. [Endosonography controlled transgastric drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1998; 123: 1439-1442
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Knecht GL, Kozarek RA. Double-channel fistulotome for endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37: 356-357
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Sharaiha RZ, DeFilippis EM, Kedia P. et al. Metal versus plastic for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage: clinical outcomes and success. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 822-827
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C. et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut 2013; 62: 102-111
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Ge N, Hu J, Sun S. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents or plastic double-pigtail stents: a multifactorial analysis. J Transl Int Med 2017; 5: 213-219
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Bang JY, Hawes R, Bartolucci A. et al. Efficacy of metal and plastic stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 486-498
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Seifert H, Biermer M, Schmitt W. et al. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy after acute pancreatitis: a multicentre study with long-term follow-up (the GEPARD Study). Gut 2009; 58: 1260-1266
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bang JY, Wilcox CM, Trevino JM. et al. Relationship between stent characteristics and treatment outcomes in endoscopic transmural drainage of uncomplicated pancreatic pseudocysts. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 2877-2883
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Talreja JP, Shami VM, Ku J. et al. Transenteric drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections with fully covered self-expanding metallic stents (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 1199-1203
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Cennamo V. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage of infected pancreatic fluid collections with placement of covered self-expanding metal stents: a case series. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 429-433
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, Loren DE. et al. Fully covered self-expanding metal stents versus lumen-apposing fully covered self-expanding metal stent versus plastic stents for endoscopic drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis: clinical outcomes and success. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 758-765
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Phadnis MA. et al. Endoscopic transmural drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections: outcomes and predictors of treatment success in 211 consecutive patients. J Gastrointest Surg 2011; 15: 2080-2088
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Penn DE, Draganov PV, Wagh MS. et al. Prospective evaluation of the use of fully covered self-expanding metal stents for EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 679-684
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Ang TL, Kongkam P, Kwek AB. et al. A two-center comparative study of plastic and lumen-apposing large diameter self-expandable metallic stents in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. Endosc Ultrasound 2016; 5: 320-327
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Ang TL, Seewald S. Fully covered self-expandable metal stents: The “be all and end all” for pancreatic fluid collections?. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 1047-1050
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Itoi T, Binmoeller KF, Shah J. et al. Clinical evaluation of a novel lumen-apposing metal stent for endosonography-guided pancreatic pseudocyst and gallbladder drainage (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 870-876
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Moon JH, Choi HJ, Kim DC. et al. A newly designed fully covered metal stent for lumen apposition in EUS-guided drainage and access: a feasibility study (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 990-995
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Varadarajulu S, Wilcox CM. Endoscopic placement of permanent indwelling transmural stents in disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome: does benefit outweigh the risks?. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 1408-1412
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Antillon MR, Shah RJ, Stiegmann G. et al. Single-step EUS-guided transmural drainage of simple and complicated pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 797-803
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Lee BU, Song TJ, Lee SS. et al. Newly designed, fully covered metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections: a prospective randomized study. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 1078-1084
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Bang JY, Hasan MK, Navaneethan U. et al. Lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: When and for whom?. Dig Endosc 2017; 29: 83-90
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Lang GD, Fritz C, Bhat T. et al. EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections with lumen-apposing metal stents and plastic double-pigtail stents: comparison of efficacy and adverse event rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 150-157
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Brimhall B, Han S, Tatman PD. et al. Increased incidence of pseudoaneurysm bleeding with lumen-apposing metal stents compared to double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with peripancreatic fluid collections. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1521-1528
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Patil R, Ona MA, Papafragkakis C. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided placement of AXIOS stent for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. Ann Gastroenterol 2016; 29: 168-173
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Vazquez-Sequeiros E, Baron TH, Pérez-Miranda M. et al. Evaluation of the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of fully covered self-expandable metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: results of a Spanish nationwide registry. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2016; 84: 450-457.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Bang JY, Hasan M, Navaneethan U. et al. Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) drainage: may not be business as usual. Gut 2017; 66: 2054-2056
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Rinninella E, Kunda R, Dollhopf M. et al. EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections using a novel lumen-apposing metal stent on an electrocautery-enhanced delivery system: a large retrospective study (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 1039-1046
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Ryan BM, Venkatachalapathy SV, Huggett MT. Safety of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for pancreatic fluid collection drainage. Gut 2017; 66: 1530-1531
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Leeds JS, Nayar MK, Charnley RM. et al. Lumen-apposing metal stents for pancreatic fluid collection drainage: may not be business as usual?. Gut 2017; 66: 1530
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Siddiqui AA, Adler DG, Nieto J. et al. EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections and necrosis by using a novel lumen-apposing stent: a large retrospective, multicenter U. S. experience (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 699-707
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Cotton PB, Eisen G, Romagnuolo J. et al. Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: results of an ASGE working party. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 868-874
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Ng SC, Tsoi KK, Hirai HW. et al. The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in polyp detection and cecal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1165-1173
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Maimone A. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 4: 479-488
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar