» Articles » PMID: 38420155

Safety and Efficacy of Early Versus Late Removal of LAMS for Pancreatic Fluid Collections

Overview
Journal Endosc Int Open
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2024 Feb 29
PMID 38420155
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Optimal timing for removal of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for effective drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) while minimizing adverse events (AE) is unknown. Outcomes of early (≤ 4 weeks) or delayed (> 4 weeks) LAMS removal on both clinical efficacy and the incidence of AE were assessed. This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained registry of PFC drainage between November 2016 and September 2021. Clinical success was defined as a 75% decrease in fluid collection volume with no need for reintervention at 6 months. AE were defined using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine variables associated with clinical success and AE. A total of 108 consecutive PFCs were included. LAMS deployment was technically successful in 103 of 108 cases (95.4%). Failure was associated with collection diameter ≤ 4 cm (odds ratio [OR] 24.0, = 0.005) and presence of more than 50% necrotic material (OR 20.1, = 0.01). Stents were left in place for a median of 48 days. Patients with early stent removal (< 4 weeks) had clinical success in 70.0% of cases, which was significantly less than in the group with delayed stent removal (96.4%, = 0.03). On multiple regression analysis, clinical failure was associated with early stent removal (OR 25.5, = 0.003). AEs occurred in 8.7% of cases (9/103). There were no predictors of AE. Notably, delayed stent removal did not predict the occurrence of AE. Early LAMS removal (< 4 weeks) did not prevent AEs but did lead to increased clinical failure.

Citing Articles

Chronic and Idiopathic Pancreatitis-A Personalized Treatment Approach.

von Widdern J, Rosendahl J, Ammer-Herrmenau C United European Gastroenterol J. 2024; 13(1):116-124.

PMID: 39704081 PMC: 11866313. DOI: 10.1002/ueg2.12741.


When to remove a lumen-apposing metal stent for pancreatic fluid collections?.

Saito T, Iwashita T, Omoto S, Nakai Y, Isayama H Endosc Int Open. 2024; 12(8):E996-E997.

PMID: 39188853 PMC: 11347035. DOI: 10.1055/a-2308-3777.

References
1.
Guzman-Calderon E, Chacaltana A, Diaz R, Li B, Martinez-Moreno B, Aparicio J . Head-to-head comparison between endoscopic ultrasound guided lumen apposing metal stent and plastic stents for the treatment of pancreatic fluid collections: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2021; 29(2):198-211. DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1008. View

2.
Alali A, Mosko J, May G, Teshima C . Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Update and Review of the Literature. Clin Endosc. 2017; 50(2):117-125. PMC: 5398360. DOI: 10.5946/ce.2017.045. View

3.
Manrai M, Kochhar R, Gupta V, Yadav T, Dhaka N, Kalra N . Outcome of Acute Pancreatic and Peripancreatic Collections Occurring in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2016; 267(2):357-363. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002065. View

4.
Onnekink A, Boxhoorn L, Timmerhuis H, Bac S, Besselink M, Boermeester M . Endoscopic Versus Surgical Step-Up Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (ExTENSION): Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Trial. Gastroenterology. 2022; 163(3):712-722.e14. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.05.015. View

5.
Cai Q, Zhang Y, Liao Y, Gong J, Xiong B . Is endoscopic drainage better than percutaneous drainage for patients with pancreatic fluid collections? A comparative meta-analysis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2020; 113(6):454-462. DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7170/2020. View