BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (!20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse

In this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, we found that alcohol is not required for effective EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation, and when alcohol is removed from the ablation process, there is a significant reduction in associated adverse events. A multi-agent chemotherapeutic ablation admixture did not appear to significantly improve rates of complete ablation compared with the current standard of alcohol lavage followed by paclitaxel alone. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01475331.

Background and aim Recently, several guidelines with divergent recommendations on management of pancreatic cystic neoplasm have been published but the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic cyst ablation has not been thoroughly addressed. The aim of the current paper is to explore the issues surrounding EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation by generating a list of clinical questions and providing answers based on best scientific evidence available. Methods An expert panel in EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation was recruited from members of the Asian EUS group and an international expert panel. A list of clinical questions was created and each question allocated to one member to generate a statement in response. The statements were then discussed in three Internet conference meetings between October 2016 and October 2017. The statements were changed until consensus was obtained. Afterwards, the complete set of statements was sent to all the panelist to vote on strength of the statements, classification of the statement sand grading of the evidence. Results Twenty-three statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic cyst ablation were formulated. The statements addressed indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre-procedure and post-procedure management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. Conclusion The current set of statements on EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation are the first to be published by any endoscopic society. Clinicians interested in developing the technique should reference these statements and future studies should address the key issues raised in the document.

Background and study aims: In this study, we aim to determine the safety and feasibility of an alcohol-free approach to pancreatic cyst ablation using a chemotherapeutic ablation cocktail. Patients and methods: In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded pilot study, 10 patients with known mucinous type pancreatic cysts underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration and then lavage with either 80 % ethanol or normal saline. Both groups were then treated with a cocktail of paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Primary outcomes were reduction in cyst volume and rates of complications. Results: At 6 months, patients randomized to the alcohol arm had an 89 % average volume reduction, with a 91 % reduction noted in the alcohol-free arm. Complete ablation was achieved in 67 % of patients in the alcohol-free arm at both 6 and 12 months, whereas the alcohol group recorded complete ablation rates of 50 % and 75 % at 6 and 12 months, respectively. One patient in the alcohol arm developed acute pancreatitis (20 %) with no adverse events in the alcohol-free arm. Conclusions: This study revealed similar ablation rates between the alcohol ablation group and the alcohol-free arm and demonstrates the safety and feasibility of an alcohol-free ablation protocol. This pilot study suggests that alcohol may not be required for effective cyst ablation.

No abstract