Background Disconnected pancreatic duct (DPD) after development of walled-off necrosis (WON) predisposes to recurrent (peri)pancreatic fluid collection (PFC). In this randomized controlled trial, we compared plastic stents with no plastic stent after removal of a large-caliber metal stent (LCMS) on incidence of recurrent PFCs in DPD. Methods Consecutive patients with WON who underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage with LCMS between September 2017 and March 2020 were screened for eligibility. At LCMS removal (4 weeks after drainage), patients with DPD were randomized to plastic stent or no stent groups. The primary outcome was incidence of recurrent PFC at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were technical success of plastic stent deployment, adverse events, stent migration, and recurrence of PFC at 6 and 12 months. Results 236 patients with WON underwent EUS-guided drainage using LCMS, and 104 (males 94, median age 34 years (interquartile range [IQR] 26–44.7) with DPD were randomized into stenting (n = 52) and no-stenting (n = 52) groups. Plastic stent deployment was successful in 88.5 %. Migration occurred in 19.2 % at median follow-up of 8 months (IQR 2.5–12). Recurrent PFCs occurred in six patients at 3 months (stent n = 3, no stent n = 3). There was no significant difference in PFC recurrence between the two groups at 3, 6, and 12 months. Reintervention was required in seven patients with recurrent PFCs, with no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion In patients with WON and DPD, deployment of plastic stents after LCMS removal did not reduce recurrence of PFC.

Objective In patients with an intermediate likelihood of choledocholithiasis, European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines recommend endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) to diagnose choledocholithiasis to make the indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) treatment; there is no randomised control trial to compare both in this setting. Design Patients with suspected choledocholithiasis satisfying ESGE guideline’s intermediate likelihood were screened for this single-centre randomised controlled trial between November 2019 and May 2020. The enrolled patients were randomised to either EUS or MRCP. ERCP was performed in stone positive cases or if clinical suspicion persisted during follow-up. Negative cases underwent a further 6-month clinical follow-up. Main outcome was accuracy (sensitivity/specificity) of both tests to diagnose choledocholithiasis, with ERCP or follow-up as a gold standard. Results Of 266 patients, 224 patients (mean age: 46.77±14.57 years; 50.9 % female) were enrolled; overall prevalence of choledocholithiasis was 49.6%, with a higher frequency in the MRCP group (63/112 vs 46/112 for EUS). Both sensitivity of EUS and MRCP were similarly high (92%–98%), without significant differences between the two groups. The negative predictive value and likelihood ratio + were significantly higher in EUS arm (p<0.05). The percentage of ERCPs either incorrectly halted back (false negatives: EUS: 2 vs MRCP: 5) or performed unnecessarily (false positives: EUS: 1 vs MRCP: 2) was low in both groups. Conclusion The performance parameters of both EUS and MRCP are comparable for detecting choledocholithiasis in the intermediate-risk group of choledocholithiasis and the choice of a test should be based on local expertise, availability of resources and patient preference. Trial registration number NCT04173624.

EUS-guided vascular intervention has expanded the horizons of diagnostic as well as therapeutic interventions for vascular pathology. EUS-guided embolization is a commonly performed technique for the treatment of gastric varices. However, there is a lack of data on the standardization of the technique. Here, we review the techniques and difficulties encountered during EUS-guided embolization of varices and pseudoaneurysms. This article and accompanying video describe the EUS-guided embolization techniques for various vascular lesions. EUS-guided embolization was achieved by combination therapy using coils and cyanoacrylate. Complete obliteration of the lesions was documented on follow-up. The existing literature of EUS-guided embolization therapy is also reviewed. Patients with various vascular lesions, including gastric varices, ectopic duodenal varices, and splenic artery pseudoaneurysms, were successfully treated with EUS-guided coil plus cyanoacrylate injection. Patients with gastric varices underwent treatment with 2 EUS-guided techniques: (1) direct puncture of the varix and embolization and (2) feeder vessel embolization. Following embolization, the absence of Doppler flow within the varix and pseudoaneurysm was documented. Techniques of EUS-guided embolization of varices and pseudoaneurysms are demonstrated. Understanding the techniques and the challenges encountered during therapy is crucial to optimize outcomes and reduce adverse events.