Background Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) with worrisome features are surgically managed. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has recently been developed. The safety of EUS-RFA was the primary end point of this study, its efficacy the secondary end point. Methods This was a prospective multicenter study that was planned to include 30 patients with a 1-year follow-up with either a NET < 2 cm or a pancreatic cystic neoplasm (PCN), either a branch duct IPMN with worrisome features or a mucinous cystadenoma (MCA). EUS-RFA was performed with an 18G RFA cooling needle. Results 12 patients had 14 NETs (mean size 13.1 mm, range 10 – 20 mm); 17 patients had cystic tumors (16 IPMNs, 1 MCA; mean size 28 mm, range 9 – 60 mm). Overall three adverse events occurred (10 %), two of these in the first two patients (one pancreatitis, one small-bowel perforation). After these initial patients, modifications in the protocol resulted in a decrease in complications (3.5 %), with one patient having a pancreatic ductal stenosis. Among the 14 NETs, at 1-year follow-up 12 had completely disappeared (86 % tumor resolution), with three patients having a delayed response. Among the 17 PCNs, at 12 months, there were 11 complete disappearances and one diameter that decreased by > 50 % (significant response rate 71 %). All 12 mural nodules showed complete resolution. Conclusions EUS-RFA of pancreatic NETs or PCNs is safe with a 10 % complication rate, which can be decreased by improved prophylaxis for the procedure.

Summary of Recommendations 1 ESGE recommends that each center implements a written policy regarding the management of iatrogenic perforations, including the definition of procedures that carry a higher risk of this complication. This policy should be shared with the radiologists and surgeons at each center. 2 ESGE recommends that in the case of an endoscopically identified perforation, the endoscopist reports its size and location, with an image, and statement of the endoscopic treatment that has been applied. 3 ESGE recommends that symptoms or signs suggestive of iatrogenic perforation after an endoscopic procedure should be rapidly and carefully evaluated and documented with a computed tomography (CT) scan. 4 ESGE recommends that endoscopic closure should be considered depending on the type of the iatrogenic perforation, its size, and the endoscopist expertise available at the center. Switch to carbon dioxide (CO2) endoscopic insufflation, diversion of digestive luminal content, and decompression of tension pneumoperitoneum or pneumothorax should also be performed. 5 ESGE recommends that after endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, further management should be based on the estimated success of the endoscopic closure and on the general clinical condition of the patient. In the case of no or failed endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, and in patients whose clinical condition is deteriorating, hospitalization and surgical consultation are recommended.

The mid-term efficacy of G-POEM reaches 70% at 6 months. The procedure remains reproducible and safe. Diabetes and female gender were predictive of failure.