No abstract

MELD/PELD criteria do not adequately measure the clinical characteristics and staging of ESBD. The allocation system based on MELD/PELD criteria should be re-evaluated for patients with ESBD.

With the advance of invasive interventions, the treatment model for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) has shifted from open surgery to the step-up minimally invasive treatment. Late intervention, originating from the open surgery era, has been questioned in the minimally invasive period. With the emergence of new high-quality evidence about the timing for intervention, it seems to be increasingly apparent that, even in the age of minimal invasiveness, “late intervention” waiting for the necrotic collections to be encapsulated is still necessary. This opinion review mainly discusses the intervention timing for INP.

Pancreatic and peripancreatic collections are the main local complications of acute pancreatitis with a high incidence. In the early phase, most acute pancreatic and peripancreatic collections can resolve spontaneously with supportive treatment. However, in some cases, they will develop into pancreatic pseudocyst (PPC) or walled-off necrosis (WON). When causing symptoms or coinfection, both PPC and WON may require invasive intervention. Compared to PPC, which can be effectively treated by endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage with plastic stents, the treatment of WON is more complicated and challenging, particularly in the presence of infected necrosis. In the past few decades, with the development of minimally invasive interventional technology especially the progression of endoscopic techniques, the standard treatments of those severe complications have undergone tremendous changes. Currently, based on the robust evidence from randomized controlled trials, the step-up minimally invasive approaches have become the standard treatments for WON. However, the pancreatic fistulae during the surgical step-up treatment and the stent-related complications during the endoscopic step-up treatment should not be neglected. In this review article, we will mainly discuss the indications of PPC and WON, the timing for intervention, and minimally invasive treatment, especially endoscopic treatment. We also introduced our preliminary experience in endoscopic gastric fenestration, which may be a promising innovative method for the treatment of WON.

Background/Aims: Enteroenteric intussusception in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (EI-PJS) is traditionally treated by surgery. However, enteroscopic treatment is a minimally invasive approach worth attempting. We aimed to develop a risk scoring system to facilitate decision-making in the treatment of EI-PJS. Methods:This was a single-center case-control study, including 80 patients diagnosed with PJS and coexisting intussusception between January 2015 and January 2021 in Air Force Medical Center. We performed logistic regression analysis to identify independent risk factors and allocated different points to each subcategory of risk factors; the total score of individuals ranged from 0 to 9 points. Then, we constructed a risk stratification system based on the possibility of requiring surgery: 0-3 points for "low-risk," 4-6 points for "moderate-risk," and 7-9 points for "high-risk."Results: Sixty-one patients (76.25%) were successfully treated with enteroscopy. Sixteen patients (20.0%) failed enteroscopic treatment and subsequently underwent surgery, and three patients (3.75%) received surgery directly. Abdominal pain, the diameter of the responsible polyp, and the length of intussusception were independent risk factors for predicting the possibility of requiring surgery. According to the risk scoring system, the incidence rates of surgery were 4.44% in the low-risk tier, 30.43% in the moderate-risk tier, and 83.33% in the high-risk tier. From low-to high-risk tiers, the trend of increasing risk was significant (p<0.001). Conclusions:We developed a risk scoring system based on abdominal pain, diameter of the responsible polyps, and length of intussusception. It can preoperatively stratify patients according to the risk of requiring surgery for EI-PJS to facilitate treatment decision-making. (Gut Liver,

Purpose Biliary stents combined with percutaneous or endoscopic ultrasound-guided iodine-125 seed implantation into primary tumor have been confirmed to relieve malignant obstructive jaundice (MOJ), and prolong patient’s stent patency. The aim of the study was to evaluate meaningful clinical application indications and better guide the application of this technology. Material and methods Patients with MOJ, who have received bile duct stenting combined with iodine-125 ( 125 I) seed implantation from October, 2010 to April, 2022, were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were adopted to indicate factors of stent patency in MOJ and influencing factors of jaundice reduction at one week after surgery. Results A total of 90 patients were enrolled into the study, including 52 males (57.8%) and 38 females (42.2%), with a mean age of 68.66 ±12.53 years. The median stent patency was 8 months. No serious adverse events occurred during follow-up. Multivariate analysis showed that Child-Pugh score (HR = 2.221, 95% CI: 1.081-4.562), biliary infection (HR = 1.901, 95% CI: 1.084-3.335), and pre-operative jaundice duration (HR = 1.977, 95% CI: 1.106-3.533) were the independent risk factors for stent patency. Child-Pugh B/C (OR = 4.647, 95% CI: 1.080-19.982) and bile duct infection (OR = 3.583, 95% CI: 1.095-11.725) were the independent risk factors for jaundice reduction at one week after surgery. Conclusions MOJ patients treated with biliary stents combined with 125 I seed implantation, and patients with better pre-operative liver function and no biliary tract infection, present not only longer biliary stent patency, but also better early jaundice reduction.

No abstract

Purpose The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided iodine-125 ( 125 I) seed implantation in ampullary carcinoma (AC). Material and methods From January 2011 to June 2020, 13 patients were selected for this retrospective study. Thirteen tumors (27.46 ±12.07 mm) were treated with EUS-guided 125 I seed implantation in 29 sessions. We evaluated the therapeutic efficacy, adverse effects, and overall survival (OS) time. Results Complete response (CR) was observed in one tumor in 6 months. Partial response (PR) was detected in two target tumors in 3 months, seven in 6 months, seven in 9 months, and six in 12 months. Good periods of survival were observed. The median OS was 35 months, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was 8.97 to 61.03 months. The 1-, 2-, and 5-year OS rates were 100%, 67.5%, and 11.3%, respectively. There were no procedure-related deaths or serious adverse events. Transient abdominal pain (5 cases, 17.2%), abdominal distension and loss of appetite (3 cases, 10.3%), and seed migration (1 case, 3.4%) were observed, respectively. Conclusions In selected patients with inoperable AC, EUS-guided 125 I seed implantation is feasible and safe with favorable local control efficacy and OS.