Background and Aim: Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided biliary drainage (EUS‐BD) can be carried out by two different approaches: choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). We compared the efficacy and safety of these approaches in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) patients using a prospective, randomized clinical trial.Methods: Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were randomly selected for either CDS or HGS. The procedures were carried out at nine tertiary centers from September 2013 to March 2016. Primary endpoint was technical success rate, and the noninferiority of HGS to CDS was examined with a one‐sided significance level of 5%, where the noninferiority margin was set at 15%. Secondary endpoints were clinical success, adverse events (AE), stent patency, survival time, and overall technical success including alternative EUS‐BD procedures.Results: Forty‐seven patients (HGS, 24; CDS, 23) were enrolled. Technical success rates were 87.5% and 82.6% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively, where the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval of the risk difference was −12.2% (P = 0.0278). Clinical success rates were 100% and 94.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.475). Overall AE rate, stent patency, and survival time did not differ between the groups. Overall technical success rates were 100% and 95.7% in the HGS and CDS groups, respectively (P = 0.983).Conclusions: This study suggests that HGS is not inferior to CDS in terms of technical success. When one procedure is particularly challenging, readily switching to the other could increase technical success.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, whether endoscopy generates aerosols needs to be determined. METHODS: In patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with an enclosure covering their heads, 0.3–10-μm aerosols were measured for 60 seconds before, during, and after endoscopy by an optical counter. Whether aerosols increased in the situation with and without endoscopy was examined. RESULTS: The analysis included 103 consecutive patients undergoing endoscopy and 90 control patients. Aerosols increased significantly during endoscopy compared with the control group. Body mass index and burping were significant factors related to increased aerosols during endoscopy. DISCUSSION: Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was an aerosol-generating procedure.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) arises from precursor lesions, such as pancreatic intra-epithelial neoplasia (PanIN) and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN). The prognosis of high-grade precancerous lesions, including high-grade PanIN and high-grade IPMN, without invasive carcinoma is good, despite the overall poor prognosis of PDAC. High-grade PanIN, as a lesion preceding invasive PDAC, is therefore a primary target for intervention. However, detection of localized high-grade PanIN is difficult when using standard radiological approaches. Therefore, most studies of high-grade PanIN have been conducted using specimens that harbor invasive PDAC. Recently, imaging characteristics of high-grade PanIN have been revealed. Obstruction of the pancreatic duct due to high-grade PanIN may induce a loss of acinar cells replaced by fibrosis and lobular parenchymal atrophy. These changes and additional inflammation around the branch pancreatic ducts (BPDs) result in main pancreatic duct (MPD) stenosis, dilation, retention cysts (BPD dilation), focal pancreatic parenchymal atrophy, and/or hypoechoic changes around the MPD. These indirect imaging findings have become important clues for localized, high-grade PanIN detection. To obtain pre-operative histopathological confirmation of suspected cases, serial pancreatic-juice aspiration cytologic examination is effective. In this review, we outline current knowledge on imaging characteristics of high-grade PanIN.