Background Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is considered to be an effective salvage procedure for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of EUS-BD. at seven tertiary-care referral centers in Japan were included. The primary outcome was the technical success rate, and the secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications, stent dysfunction rate, time to stent dysfunction, and overall survival. Results The technical success rate for both EUS-CDS and EUS-HGS was 95%. The reasons for technical failure were two failed dilations of the anastomosis in EUS-CDS and one puncture failure in EUS-HGS. The stent dysfunction rate and 3-month dysfunction-free patency rate were 21% and 80% for EUS-CDS and 32% and 51% for EUS-HGS. There were 12 (six in EUS-CDS and six in EUS-HGS) procedurerelated complications (19%): five cases of bile leakage (3/2), three stent misplacements (1/2), one pneumoperitoneum (1/0), two cases of bleeding (1/1), one perforation (1/0), and one biloma (0/1). Bile leakage was more frequently observed in patients who underwent plastic stent placement (11%) than in those with covered metal stents (4%). Conclusions This Japanese multicenter study revealed a high success rate in EUS-BD. However, the complication rate was as high as that in previous series. Covered metal stents may be useful to reduce bile leakage in EUS-BD.

Background and study aims: Localized type bile duct carcinoma (LBDC) is often

Background and aims Needle tract seeding after preoperative endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration (EUS‐FNA) for pancreatic body and tail cancer has been reported. This study aimed to investigate the long‐term outcomes, including the needle tract seeding ratio, of patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic body and tail cancer diagnosed preoperatively by EUS‐FNA. Methods This retrospective, observational cohort study assessed patients from three university hospitals and 11 tertiary referral centers. All patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for invasive cancer of the pancreatic body and tail between January 2006 and December 2015 were identified and reviewed. Needle tract seeding rate, recurrence‐free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results Of the 301 total patients analyzed, 176 underwent preoperative EUS‐FNA (EUS‐FNA group) and 125 did not (non‐EUS‐FNA group). The median follow‐up periods of the EUS‐FNA group and non‐EUS‐FNA group were 32.8 and 30.1 months. Six patients (3.4%) in the EUS‐FNA group were diagnosed as having needle tract seeding. The 5‐year cumulative needle tract seeding rate estimated using Fine and Gray's method was 3.8% (95% CI 1.6–7.8%). The median RFS or OS was not significantly different between the EUS‐FNA group and the non‐EUS‐FNA group (23.7 vs 16.9 months: P = 0.205; 48.0 vs 43.9 months: P = 0.392). Conclusion Although preoperative EUS‐FNA for pancreatic body and tail cancer has no negative effect on RFS or OS, needle tract seeding after EUS‐FNA was observed to have a non‐negligible rate. (UMIN000030719)

Background: Irinotecan, oxaliplatin and leucovorin-modulated fluorouracil (FOLFIRINOX) and the combination regimen of gemcitabine and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (GnP) (nab-PTX) improve the prognosis of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, no study has compared the efficacy of the two regimens. We compared retrospectively the efficacy and safety of the two regimens in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Methods: Thirty-eight patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer received FOLFIRINOX or GnP as first-line chemotherapy between December 2013 and September 2015.In the FOLFIRINOX group, patients received 85 mg/m 2 oxaliplatin followed by 180 mg/m 2 irinotecan and 200 mg/m 2 L-leucovorin, and by 400 mg/m 2 fluorouracil as a bolus and 2,400 mg/m 2 fluorouracil as a 46-h continuous infusion every 14 days. In the GnP group, patients received 125 mg/m 2 nab-PTX followed by 1 g/m 2 , and gemcitabine on days 1, 8 and 15, repeated every 28 days. Results: Response rate was 6.3% in the FOLFIRINOX group and 40.9% in the GnP group (P=0.025).Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.0-4.5] in the FOLFIRINOX group and 6.5 months (95% CI, 6.2-6.9 months) in the GnP group (P=0.031). Drug toxicity in the GnP group was less than in the FOLFIRINOX group. Conclusions: Efficacy and safety of GnP compare favorably to those of FOLFIRINOX in patients with pancreatic cancer. Additional prospective trials are warranted.

Impact of stress on diseases including gastrointestinal failure is well-known, but molecular mechanism is not understood. Here we show underlying molecular mechanism using EAE mice. Under stress conditions, EAE caused severe gastrointestinal failure with high-mortality. Mechanistically, autoreactive-pathogenic CD4+ T cells accumulated at specific vessels of boundary area of third-ventricle, thalamus, and dentate-gyrus to establish brain micro-inflammation via stress-gateway reflex. Importantly, induction of brain micro-inflammation at specific vessels by cytokine injection was sufficient to establish fatal gastrointestinal failure. Resulting micro-inflammation activated new neural pathway including neurons in paraventricular-nucleus, dorsomedial-nucleus-of-hypothalamus, and also vagal neurons to cause fatal gastrointestinal failure. Suppression of the brain micro-inflammation or blockage of these neural pathways inhibited the gastrointestinal failure. These results demonstrate direct link between brain micro-inflammation and fatal gastrointestinal disease via establishment of a new neural pathway under stress. They further suggest that brain micro-inflammation around specific vessels could be switch to activate new neural pathway(s) to regulate organ homeostasis.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25517.001

Walled‐off necrosis (WON) is a new term for encapsulated necrotic tissue after severe acute pancreatitis. Various terminologies such as pseudocyst, necroma, pancreatic abscess, and infected necrosis were previously used in the literature, resulting in confusion. The current and past terminologies must be reconciled to meaningfully interpret past data. Recently, endoscopic necrosectomy was introduced as a treatment option and is now preferred over surgical necrosectomy when the expertise is available. However, high‐quality evidence is still lacking, and there is no standard management strategy for WON. The consensus meeting aimed to clarify the diagnostic criteria for WON and the role of endoscopic interventions in its management. In the Consensus Conference, 27 experts from eight Asian countries took an active role and examined key clinical aspects of WON diagnosis and endoscopic management. Statements were crafted based on literature review and expert opinion, employing the modified Delphi method. All statements were substantiated by the level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation. We created 27 consensus statements for WON diagnosis and management, including details of endoscopic procedures. When there was not enough solid evidence to support the statements, this was clearly acknowledged to facilitate future research. Proposed management strategies were formulated and are illustrated using flow charts. These recommendations, which are based on the best current scientific evidence and expert opinion, will be useful for guiding endoscopic management of WON. Part 2 of this statement focused on the endoscopic management of WON.

Walled-off necrosis (WON) is a relatively new term for encapsulated necrotic tissue after severe acute pancreatitis. Various terminologies such as pseudocyst, necroma, pancreatic abscess, and infected necrosis were previously used in the literature, resulting in confusion. The current and past terminologies must be reconciled to meaningfully interpret past data. Recently, endoscopic necrosectomy was introduced as a treatment option and is now preferred over surgical necrosectomy when the expertise is available. However, high-quality evidence is still lacking, and there is no standard management strategy for WON. The consensus meeting aimed to clarify the diagnostic criteria for WON and the role of endoscopic interventions in its management. In the Consensus Conference, 27 experts from eight Asian countries took an active role and examined key clinical aspects of WON diagnosis and endoscopic management. Statements were crafted based on literature review and expert opinion, employing the modified Delphi method. All statements were substantiated by the level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation. We created 27 consensus statements for WON diagnosis and management, including details of endoscopic procedures. When there was not enough solid evidence to support the statements, this was clearly acknowledged to facilitate future research. Proposed management strategies were formulated and are illustrated using flow charts. These recommendations, which are based on the best current scientific evidence and expert opinion, will be useful for guiding endoscopic management of WON. Part 1 of this statement focused on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and timing of intervention.Author contributions: HI was involved with study conception, study design, creation of the preliminary statements list and the allocated statement, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision of the manuscript, obtaining funding, face-to-face meetings, and voting. YN, NY, RR, and CK were involved with creation of the preliminary statements list and the allocated statement, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision of the manuscript, face-to-face meetings, and voting. All authors were involved with creation of the allocated statement, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision of the manuscript, obtaining funding, face-to-face meetings, and voting.

EUS-FNA is a sensitive and safe diagnostic modality for patients with suspected MBS and can be an additional option in cases where endoscopic brush cytology and biopsy have produced negative results.