Transpapillary drainage has no added benefit on treatment outcomes in patients undergoing EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts: a large multicenter study

Published:November 05, 2015DOI:

      Background and Aims

      The need for transpapillary drainage (TPD) in patients undergoing transmural drainage (TMD) of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) remains unclear. The aims of this study were to compare treatment outcomes between patients with pancreatic pseudocysts undergoing TMD versus combined (TMD and TPD) drainage (CD) and to identify predictors of symptomatic and radiologic resolution.


      This is a retrospective review of 375 consecutive patients with PFCs who underwent EUS-guided TMD from 2008 to 2014 at 15 academic centers in the United States. Main outcome measures included TMD and CD technical success, treatment outcomes (symptomatic and radiologic resolution) at follow-up, and predictors of treatment outcomes on logistic regression.


      A total of 375 patients underwent EUS-guided TMD of PFCs, of which 174 were pseudocysts. TMD alone was performed in 95 (55%) and CD in 79 (45%) pseudocysts. Technical success was as follows: TMD, 92 (97%) versus CD, 35 (44%) (P = .0001). There was no difference in adverse events between the TMD (15%) and CD (14%) cohorts (P = .23). Median long-term (LT) follow-up after transmural stent removal was 324 days (interquartile range, 72-493 days) for TMD and 201 days (interquartile range, 150-493 days) (P = .37). There was no difference in LT symptomatic resolution (TMD, 69% vs CD, 62%; P = .61) or LT radiologic resolution (TMD, 71% vs CD, 67%; P = .79). TPD attempt was negatively associated with LT radiologic resolution of pseudocyst (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.8; P = .03).


      TPD has no benefit on treatment outcomes in patients undergoing EUS-guided TMD of pancreatic pseudocysts and negatively affects LT resolution of PFCs.


      ASGE (American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy), CD (combined drainage), CI (confidence interval), ERP (endoscopic retrograde pancreatography), IQR (interquartile range), LT (long-term), OR (odds ratio), PD (pancreatic duct), PFC (pancreatic fluid collection), ST (short-term), TMD (transmural drainage), TPD (transpapillary drainage)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Banks P.A.
        • Bollen T.L.
        • Dervenis C.
        • et al.
        Classification of acute pancreatitis – 2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus.
        Gut. 2012; 62: 102-111
        • Baillie J.
        Pancreatic pseudocysts (part I).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59: 873-879
        • Kozerak R.A.
        Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts.
        J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 1997; 4: 36-43
        • Cui M.L.
        • Kim K.H.
        • Kim H.G.
        • et al.
        Incidence, risk factors and clinical course of pancreatic fluid collections in acute pancreatitis.
        Dig Dis Sci. 2014; 59: 1055-1062
        • Holt B.A.
        • Varadarajulu S.
        The endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts (with videos).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 81: 804-812
        • Varadarajulu S.
        • Bang J.Y.
        • Sutton B.S.
        • et al.
        Equal efficacy of endoscopic and surgical cystogastrostomy for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage in a randomized trial.
        Gastroenterology. 2013; 145: 583-590
        • Varadarajulu S.
        • Rana S.S.
        • Bhasin D.K.
        Endoscopic therapy for pancreatic duct leaks and disruptions.
        Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2013; 23: 863-892
        • Varadarajulu S.
        • Christein J.D.
        • Tamhane A.
        • et al.
        Prospective randomized trial comparing EUS and EGD for transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts (with videos).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2008; 68: 1102-1111
        • Park D.H.
        • Lee S.S.
        • Moon S.H.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic ultrasound-guided versus conventional transmural drainage for pancreatic pseudocysts: a prospective randomized trial.
        Endoscopy. 2009; 41: 842-848
        • Hookey L.C.
        • Debroux S.
        • Delhaye M.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections in 116 patients: a comparison of etiologies, drainage techniques, and outcomes.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 63: 635-643
        • Trevino J.M.
        • Tamhane A.
        • Varadarajulu S.
        Successful stenting in ductal disruption favorably impacts treatment outcomes in patients undergoing transmural drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections.
        J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010; 25: 526-531
        • Khashab M.A.
        • Chithadi K.V.
        • Acosta R.D.
        • et al.
        • ASGE Standards of Practice Committee
        Antibiotic prophylaxis for GI endoscopy.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 81: 81-89
        • Anderson M.A.
        • Ben-Menachem T.
        • Gan S.I.
        • et al.
        • ASGE Standards of Practice Committee
        Management of antithrombotic agents for endoscopic procedures.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70: 1060-1070
        • Cotton P.B.
        • Eisen G.M.
        • Aabakken L.
        • et al.
        A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71: 450-454
        • Varadarajulu S.
        • Bang J.Y.
        • Phadnis M.A.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic transmural drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections: outcomes and predictors of treatment success in 211 consecutive patients.
        J Gastrointest Surg. 2011; 15: 2080-2088
        • Sanchez Cortes E.
        • Maalak A.
        • Le Moine O.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic cystenterostomy of nonbulging pancreatic fluid collections.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 56: 380-386
        • Krüger M.
        • Schneider A.S.
        • Manns M.P.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts or abscesses after an EUS-guided 1-step procedure for initial access.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 63: 409-416
        • Lopes C.V.
        • Pesenti C.
        • Bories E.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic ultrasound-guided endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts.
        Arq Gastroenterol. 2008; 45: 17-21
        • Antillon M.R.
        • Shah R.J.
        • Steigmann G.
        • et al.
        Single-step EUS-guided transmural drainage of simple and complicated pancreatic pseudocysts.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 63: 797-803
        • Penn D.E.
        • Draganov P.V.
        • Wagh M.S.
        • et al.
        Prospective evaluation of the use of fully covered self-expanding metal stents for EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 76: 679-684
        • Shah R.J.
        • Shah J.N.
        • Waxman I.
        • et al.
        Safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with lumen-apposing covered self-expanding metal stents.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015; 13: 747-752
        • Itoi T.
        • Binmoeller K.F.
        • Shah J.
        • et al.
        Clinical evaluation of a novel lumen-apposing metal stent for endosonography-guided pancreatic pseudocysts and gallbladder drainage (with videos).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 75: 870-876
        • Varadarajulu S.
        • Noone T.C.
        • Tutuian R.
        • et al.
        Predictors of outcome in pancreatic duct disruption managed by endoscopic transpapillary stent placement.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61: 568-575
        • Telford J.J.
        • Farrell J.J.
        • Saltzman J.R.
        • et al.
        Pancreatic stent placement for duct disruption.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 56: 18-24
        • Shrode C.W.
        • Macdonough P.
        • Gaidhane M.
        • et al.
        Multimodality endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct disruption with stenting and pseudocyst drainage: how efficacious is it?.
        Dig Liv Dis. 2013; 45: 129-133
        • Arvanitakis M.
        • Delhaye M.
        • Bali M.A.
        • et al.
        Pancreatic fluid collections: a randomized controlled trial regarding stent removal after endoscopic transmural drainage.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 65: 609-619
        • Cahen D.
        • Rauws E.
        • Fockens P.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts: long-term outcome and procedural factors associated with safe and successful treatment.
        Endoscopy. 2005; 37: 977-983

      Linked Article