Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 70, Issue 4 , Pages 710-723, October 2009

EUS-guided ethanol versus saline solution lavage for pancreatic cysts: a randomized, double-blind study

Current affiliations: Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.D., K.M.), Department of Surgery (C.M.S.), Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, GI Unit (W.R.B.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Received 20 December 2008; accepted 27 March 2009. published online 06 July 2009.

Indianapolis, Indiana, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Background

Surgery for pancreatic cysts is associated with significant morbidity. A pilot study previously demonstrated the safety of EUS-guided ethanol lavage of pancreatic cysts.

Objective

To determine whether EUS-guided ethanol lavage would decrease pancreatic cyst size more than saline solution lavage.

Design

Prospective, multicenter, randomized trial.

Setting

Two tertiary referral hospitals in the United States.

Patients

Patients referred for EUS with a 1- to 5-cm unilocular pancreatic cyst were randomized to blinded ethanol or saline solution lavage. Three months later, the cyst diameter was remeasured by EUS, and a second unblinded ethanol lavage was performed.

Interventions

EUS-guided pancreatic cyst lavage.

Main Outcome Measurements

Cyst ablation based on size changes from follow-up EUS, CT, and histology of resected specimens.

Results

Of 58 patients randomized, 16 were excluded and 42 underwent initial ethanol (n = 25) or saline solution (n = 17) lavage. Ethanol lavage resulted in a greater mean percentage of decrease in cyst surface area (−42.9; 95% CI, −58.4 to −27.4) compared with saline solution alone (–11.4; 95% CI, −25.0 to 2.2; P = .009). Nineteen (76.0%) of 25 and 14 (82.3%) of 17 patients randomized to ethanol and saline solution, respectively, underwent a second ethanol lavage. A follow-up CT scan demonstrated resolution in 12 (33.3%) of 36 cysts. Histology of 4 resected cysts demonstrated epithelial ablation ranging from 0% (saline solution alone) to 50% to 100% (1 or 2 ethanol lavages). Complication rates were similar in all groups.

Limitation

Short-term follow-up.

Conclusions

EUS-guided ethanol lavage results in a greater decrease in pancreatic cyst size compared with saline solution lavage with a similar safety profile. Overall CT-defined complete pancreatic cyst ablation was 33.3%. (This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT00233038.)

Abbreviations: CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen, IPMN, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, MCN, mucinous cystadenoma

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 DISCLOSURE: The following author received research support for this study from an American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Research and Outcomes and Effectiveness grant: W. R. Brugge. The funding source had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.

 See CME section; p. 748.

 If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact him at jodewitt@iupui.edu.

PII: S0016-5107(09)01716-7

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2009.03.1173

Refers to article:

  • CME Activity: Continuing Medical Education Exam: October 2009

    Raquel E. Davila, Jeffrey H. Lee, William Ross, Shou-Jiang Tang, G.S. Raju, George Triadafilopoulos
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy October 2009 (Vol. 70, Issue 4, Pages 748-748.e6)

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 70, Issue 4 , Pages 710-723, October 2009