Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has dramatically spread and improved in the last two decades and is changing the paradigm of drainage in case of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). EUS-BD can be achieved from different routes, including the common bile duct (choledochoduodenostomy), intrahepatic bile ducts (hepaticogastrostomy), and gallbladder as a rescue (cholecystogastrostomy/cholecystoduodenostomy). EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valuable option for biliary drainage in MBO when ERCP fails or is not feasible. EUS-HGS has demonstrated high efficacy with a good rate of technical and clinical success. The safety profile is also overall favorable, although severe adverse events may occur in a significant proportion of patients. From a technical perspective, EUS-HGS is considered one of the most demanding procedures in biliopancreatic endoscopy, requiring multiple steps and high technical skills and experience. In this comprehensive review, technical tips and clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are reviewed according to the latest evidence in the literature.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs) represent approximately 2% of all solid pancreatic tumors. The incidence of pNENs has been increasing in the last decade. The clinical manifestations of pNENs range from hormone secretion syndromes in functioning neoplasms (F-pNENs) to local infiltration or distant metastases in late-stage diagnoses or incidental findings in small non-functioning neoplasms (NF-pNENs). While surgery is the gold-standard treatment for larger and more aggressive tumors, small and low-grade tumors (G1) may be followed-up due to the indolent course of disease. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ablative techniques, such as ethanol injection (EUS-EI) and radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA), have emerged as promising options for loco-regional ablations in selected cases. Despite promising safety profile and efficacy, high-quality evidence is needed to support their widespread adoption. This article reviews the current state of EUS-guided locoregional therapies, patient selection criteria, procedural details, and associated risks.

Objectives: Most studies assess risk factors for common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients with gallbladder in situ. We aimed to assess risk factors for CBD stones in patients with previous cholecystectomy in a proof-of-concept study. Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients undergoing EUS for suspected symptomatic CBD stones and recorded demographic variables, clinical presentation, liver function tests (LFTs), and transabdominal ultrasound (US) findings. EUS was used as gold standard for CBD stones. Multivariate analysis was used to identify risk factors in the training set; a model was created and tested on the validation set. Results: A total of 211 patients (25.6% male; median age, 66 [49–75] years old) were enrolled; 77.7% presented with abdominal pain, 30.3% with hyperbilirubinemia, 26.5% with pancreatitis, and 61.1% with LFT alterations. Ultrasound showed CBD dilation in 37.4% patients. Overall, 96 (45.5%) patients had CBD stones. According to multivariate analysis, male gender (OR 2.54 [1.26–5.09]; p = 0.009), age > 63 years (OR 3.06 [1.63–5.72]; p < 0.001), LFT alteration (OR 2.62 [1.40–4.91]; p = 0.003), and CBD dilation (OR 2.46 [1.31–4.65]; p = 0.005) were independently related to CBD stones. A model was created based on the number of risk factors on admission; patients with no risk factor had a 9.5% prevalence of CBD stones; those with one risk factor, 26.7%; two risk factors, 53.2%; three risk factors, 66.7%; and four risk factors, 100%. Conclusions: The results of this proof-of-concept study identify male gender, age, LFT alteration, and CBD dilation as risk factors for CBD stones in patients with previous cholecystectomy. An adequate assessment of the pre-test probability will guide patients’ subsequent management.

Background and Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) is an emerging minimally invasive therapeutic option for pancreatic and selected extra-pancreatic lesions. However, its clinical adoption is limited by heterogeneous indications, non-standardized techniques, and variable quality of evidence. This systematic review assessed the published literature on EUS-RFA and classified available evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was performed to identify peer-reviewed studies reporting clinical or translational data on EUS-RFA. Studies were grouped by indication, including pancreatic insulinoma, non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and other pancreatic cystic neoplasms, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, pancreatic metastases, adrenal adenoma, and miscellaneous indications. Each study was categorized according to Oxford level of evidence based on study design. Results: Thirty-seven records were included in the final evidence map, comprising 36 clinical studies classifiable according to Oxford levels of evidence and one translational record not classifiable as clinical therapeutic evidence. Among the 36 clinically classifiable studies, one provided Level 1b evidence, consisting of a randomized trial evaluating EUS-guided celiac ganglion RFA for pancreatic cancer-related pain palliation, and three provided Level 2b evidence, including non-randomized comparative cohorts in pancreatic insulinoma and unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Most clinically classifiable studies were Level 4 evidence (32/36), mainly uncontrolled prospective or retrospective cohorts and case series. One preclinical/translational study was not classifiable within clinical therapeutic evidence levels. Pancreatic insulinoma was the most evidence-supported tumor-ablation indication, with comparative data suggesting efficacy comparable to surgery and a more favorable safety profile. For non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, branch-duct IPMN, renal cell carcinoma pancreatic metastases, and adrenal adenomas, available data suggest feasibility and encouraging short-term outcomes but remain predominantly non-comparative. In pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, EUS-RFA remains investigational as an adjunct to systemic therapy. Conclusions: EUS-RFA is a promising therapeutic platform, but evidence remains highly indication-dependent and dominated by low-level observational studies. Standardized protocols, indication-specific outcomes, prospective registries, and comparative trials are needed.

Elastography is an ultrasound-based technique that enables the non-invasive assessment of tissue stiffness. In endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), elastography was initially introduced as a strain-based method, providing qualitative or semi-quantitative information on tissue deformation. More recent technological developments have enabled the integration of shear-wave-based elastography into EUS platforms, including shear-wave measurement (SWM), point shear-wave elastography (pSWE), and two-dimensional shear-wave elastography (2D-SWE). Unlike strain elastography, shear-wave techniques provide quantitative estimates of tissue stiffness by measuring shear-wave velocity or a derived elastic modulus. This invited narrative review summarizes the technical principles, terminology, quality-control requirements, and current clinical evidence for EUS-guided shear-wave-based elastography in pancreatic and hepatobiliary diseases. Because much of the available EUS literature derives from EUS-SWM or point SWE rather than true 2D-SWE, acquisition mode is a central determinant when interpreting clinical evidence and clinical readiness. Current data suggest that EUS-guided shear-wave-based elastography is technically feasible and biologically plausible, but its clinical maturity remains indication-specific. Evidence is most encouraging in chronic pancreatitis, early chronic pancreatitis, autoimmune pancreatitis activity monitoring, and selected endo-hepatology settings, particularly liver fibrosis assessment in patients in whom transabdominal techniques may be suboptimal. In contrast, available evidence does not support EUS-guided shear-wave-based elastography as a standalone diagnostic test for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions, including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, because absolute stiffness values often overlap among malignant lesions, inflammatory masses, and background parenchyma. Before routine clinical implementation, standardized acquisition protocols, disease-specific cut-offs, multicenter reproducibility data, and evidence of incremental clinical value beyond established diagnostic pathways are required.