By preventing tumor ingrowth and migration, covered SEMSs with an anti-migration system had a longer duration of patency than uncovered SEMSs, which recommends their use in the palliative treatment of patients with biliary obstruction due to pancreatic carcinomas.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveStenting is an established endoscopic therapy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). The choice of stent (covered vs uncovered) has been examined in prior randomised studies without clear results.DesignIn a multicentre randomised prospective study, we compared covered (CSEMS) with uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMS) in patients with mGOO; main outcomes were stent dysfunction and patient survival, with subgroup analyses of patients with extrinsic and intrinsic tumours.ResultsOverall survival was poor with no difference between groups (probability at 3 months 49.7% for covered vs 48.4% for uncovered stents; log-rank for overall survival p=0.26). Within that setting of short survival, the proportion of stent dysfunction was significantly higher for uncovered stents (35.2% vs 23.4%, p=0.01) with significantly shorter time to stent dysfunction. This was mainly relevant for patients with extrinsic tumours (stent dysfunction rates for uncovered stents 35.6% vs 17.5%, p<0.01). Subgrouping was also relevant with respect to tumour ingrowth (lower with covered stents for intrinsic tumours; 1.6% vs 27.7%, p<0.01) and stent migration (higher with covered stents for extrinsic tumours: 15.3% vs 2.5%, p<0.01).ConclusionsDue to poor patient survival, minor differences between covered and uncovered stents may be less relevant even if statistically significant; however, subgroup analysis would suggest to use covered stents for intrinsic and uncovered stents for extrinsic malignancies.

Objective Post–endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis involves persistent serum amylase levels of 3 times or more the standard upper limit. However, these criteria were mostly based on retrospective studies and not necessarily supported by diagnostic imaging. Our prospective study aimed to investigate cutoff serum amylase levels suggesting post-ERCP pancreatitis using computed tomography as the criterion standard. Methods We prospectively followed 2078 cases. Computed tomography was performed in patients whose serum amylase levels exceeded the institutional upper limit 12 to 24 hours after ERCP. Two expert radiologists blindly assessed the images and judged the presence or absence of pancreatitis. Correlations between serum amylase levels with pancreatitis were investigated using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Results Amylase levels increased in 416 (23.2%) of 1789 cases included, and 350 cases were analyzed using computed tomography. Post–endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis was diagnosed in 12.0% (214/1789). The cutoff amylase levels for judging pancreatitis after 12 to 24 hours was 2.75 times higher than the institutional upper limit, with an area under the curve of 0.77. Conclusions The appropriate cutoff serum amylase level for judging post-ERCP pancreatitis at 12 to 24 hours after ERCP was 2.75 times higher than the institutional upper limit. These results may clarify the definition of post-ERCP pancreatitis.