Objective Recent data have suggested that non-selective β-blockers (NSBB) are associated with increased mortality in patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites. However, other evidence implies that NSBB may be beneficial in this setting by reducing bacterial translocation. Our aim was to determine whether NSBB use was a risk factor for mortality in patients with end-stage chronic liver disease and ascites awaiting liver transplantation. Design This was a single-centre retrospective study of 322 patients with ascites listed January 2007 to July 2011. Results NSBB patients (n=159) and non-NSBB patients (n=163) were comparable with regards to listing model for end-stage liver disease score (p=0.168), frequency of hepatocellular carcinoma (p=0.193) and refractory ascites (35.2% vs. 37.4%, p=0.681). 82 patients died, 221 patients were transplanted and 19 patients were removed from the list during a median follow-up duration of 72 days; the median time to death was 150 and 54 days in the NSBB and non-NSBB groups, respectively. In a multivariate competing risk Cox model, patients on NSBB had reduced mortality compared with propensity risk score-matched non-NSBB patients (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.95, p=0.032). Similarly, in the subgroup of patients with refractory ascites (n=117), NSBB remained independently associated with less waitlist death (adjusted HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.86, p=0.022). Conclusions NSBB in patients with ascites and refractory ascites listed for liver transplantation are not detrimental, and instead are associated with reduced waitlist death. Our findings argue that NSBB are safe and may confer benefit in patients with ascites complicating end-stage liver disease.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) carries a post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) rate of 2–10%, which could be as high as 30–50% in high-risk cases. PEP is severe in up to 5% of cases, with potential for life-threatening complications, including multi-organ failure, peripancreatic fluid collections, and death in up to 1% of cases. The risk of PEP is potentially predictable and may be modified with pharmacological measures and endoscopist technique. This review covers the definition, epidemiology and risk factors for PEP, with a focus on the latest evidence-based medical and endoscopic strategies to prevent and manage PEP.

Introduction: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in incidence in the UK and globally. Liver cirrhosis is the common cause for developing HCC. The common reasons for liver cirrhosis are viral hepatitis C (HCV), viral hepatitis B and alcohol. However, HCC caused by non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-cirrhosis is now increasingly as a result of rising worldwide obesity. Aim: To compare the clinical presentation, treatment options and outcomes of HCC due to HCV and NAFLD patients. Methods: Data were collected from two liver transplant centres in the UK (Birmingham and Newcastle upon Tyne) between 2000 and 2014. We compared 275 patients with HCV-related HCC against 212 patients with NAFLD- related HCC. Results: Patients in the NAFLD group were found to be significantly older (P < 0.001) and more likely to be Caucasian (P < 0.001). They had lower rates of cirrhosis (P < 0.001) than those in HCV-HCC group. The NAFLD group presented with significantly larger tumours (P = 0.009), whilst HCV patients had a higher alpha fetoprotein (P = 0.018). NAFLD patients were more commonly treated with TACE (P = 0.005) than the HCV patients, whilst the HCV group were significantly more likely to be transplanted (P < 0.001). In patients selected for liver transplantation, 5-year survival rates in NAFLD were not significantly different from HCV-HCC (44 and 56% respectively, P = 0.102). Conclusion: In this study, NAFLD patients presented with larger tumours that were less likely to be amenable to curative therapy, as compared with HCV patients. Despite this disadvantage, patients with NAFLD had similar overall survival compared to patients with HCV.

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) with lumen apposing metal stents has recently emerged as a viable option, as an alternative to surgical gastrojejunostomy and endoscopic enteral stenting, for managing gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). We aim to perform a retrospective analysis of the efficacy, safety and outcomes of EUS-GJ performed at three tertiary institutions in the United Kingdom. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GJ between August 2018 and March 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data were obtained from interrogation of electronic health records. Results: Twenty five patients (15 males) with a median age of 63 years old (range 29–80) were included for analysis. 88% (22/25) of patients had GOO due to underlying malignant disease. All patients were deemed surgically inoperable or at high surgical risk. Both technical and clinical success were achieved in 92% (23/25) of patients. There was an improvement in the mean Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System scores following a technically successful EUS-GJ (2.52 vs 0.68, p < 0.01). Adverse events occurred in 2/25 patients (8%), both due to stent maldeployment necessitating endoscopic closure of the gastric defect with clips. Long-term follow-up data were available for 21 of 23 patients and the re-intervention rate was 4.8% (1/21) over a median follow-up period of 162 (range 5–474) days. Conclusion: EUS-GJ in carefully selected patients is an effective and safe procedure when performed by experienced endoscopists.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the characterization of solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas