EUS-guided anastomoses with LAMS have emerged as a therapeutic option for patients with obstruction of the digestive tract. However, the long-term permeability of these anastomoses remains unknown. Most of the published cases involve the gastric wall and experience in distal obstruction is limited to few case reports. We review our series of patients treated with LAMS for gastrointestinal obstruction and describe the technical success according to the anastomotic site and the long-term follow-up in those cases in which the stent migrated spontaneously or was removed. Out of 30 cases treated with LAMS, EUS-guided anastomosis did not involve the gastric wall in 6 patients. These procedures were technically more challenging as two failures were recorded (2/6, 33%) while technical success was achieved in 100% of the cases in which the stent was placed through the gastric wall. In two of the patients, one with entero-enteric and another with recto-colic anastomosis, stent removal after spontaneous displacement was followed by long term permeability of the EUS-guided anastomosis (172 and 234 days respectively). In a EUS-guided gastroenterostomy the stent was removed at 118 days, but closure of the fistula was confirmed 26 days later. Our experience suggests that LAMS placement between bowel loops is feasible and might allow the creation of an anastomosis with long-term patency. As compared to LAMS placement between bowel loops, when LAMS are placed through the gastric wall, removal of the LAMS seems to lead to closure of the fistula.

Background Liver transplant recipients have an increased incidence of malignancies, but it is unclear whether they have a higher risk of colorectal cancer. Aim To investigate whether liver transplant recipients have an increased risk of developing colorectal adenomas (a surrogate marker of colorectal cancer risk). Patients and methods One hundred thirty-nine liver transplant recipients (excluding primary sclerosing cholangitis) who underwent a colonoscopy and polypectomy before and after transplantation, and 367 nontransplanted patients who underwent a colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening and a second colonoscopy later were retrospectively studied. The risks of incident colorectal adenomas and high-risk adenomas (advanced or multiple adenomas or carcinomas) were compared between both cohorts. Results Incident colorectal adenomas were found in 40.3% of the transplanted patients and 30.0% of the nontransplanted patients (15.1% and 5.5%, respectively, had high-risk adenomas). After adjusting for age, sex, presence of adenomas in the baseline endoscopy, and interval between colonoscopies, transplant recipients showed a higher risk of developing colorectal adenomas (OR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.05-2.47; p = .03) and high-risk adenomas (OR: 2.87; 95% CI: 1.46-5.65; p = .002). Conclusions Our results suggest that liver transplant recipients have an increased risk of developing colorectal adenomas and lesions with high risk of colorectal cancer.

Background and study aims Traditionally in the case of a vascular interposition, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been contraindicated. A transvascular route (TV) is feasible and probably a safe alternative approach in selected patients, but data are scarce. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the diagnostic yield and safety of EUS-TV-FNA in thoracic and abdominal lesions. Secondary aims included evaluation of the clinical impact and technical aspects. Patients and methods A retrospective multicenter study was conducted with inclusion of all consecutive patients that underwent EUS-TV-FNA from July 2007 to January 2020. Feasibility, cytopathology, procedure details, and safety were evaluated. Univariate analysis was performed to identify variables associated with incidents, cytopathological diagnosis, and clinical impact. Results Data were collected from a total of 49 cases and 50 EUS-TV-FNAs. The aorta (n = 19) and portal system (n = 17) were the most frequently punctured. The most frequent lesions were mediastinal lymph nodes (n = 13) and pancreatic tumors (n = 11). The diagnostic yield was 86 %, and there were nondiagnostic samples in seven cases. Overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88 % (95 %CI,0.74-0.96), 100 % (95 %CI,0.59-1), and 90 % (95 %CI,0.78-0.96), respectively. Only three incidents were detected: two mural hematomas and a self-limited bleeding of gastroduodenal artery. In most patients, there was a significant impact on clinical management (88 %). Arterial vessel and ASA-III had a trend with incidents (both, P < 0.08). Rapid on-site evlauation was found to be an independent predictor for obtaining a conclusive sample (OR 6.2; 95 %CI, 1.06-36.73, P < 0.04). Conclusions EUS-TV-FNA is feasible, seems to be safe, and can be recommended when no other targets are available, and the information obtained would impact on the clinical plan.

Background and objectives: there are few published data on the use of EUS guided fine-needle aspiration in secondary pancreatic lesions. We describe the largest series published so far in a European country. Patients and methods: a retrospective review of the cases identified in our institution from 2004 to 2016 has been recorded. The clinical data are described, comparing the latency period from the primary tumor diagnosis to the detection of the pancreatic metastasis and the survival of patients according to the cytological diagnosis. Results: forty-four patients were diagnosed with pancreatic metastasis using EUS guided fine needle aspiration. Ancillary cytological studies were performed in 28 (63.6%). The most common primary tumor sites were kidney and lung. Thirty-four patients (77.3%) had a previous history of malignancy, with a latency period ranging from 6 months to 18.8 years. Patients diagnosed with primary renal carcinoma had a significantly longer latency period and longer survival compared to those with primary lung cancer. In 13 patients, EUS was either the only technique that detected the PM or showed a greater number of intrapancreatic lesions. These metastases were significantly smaller than those diagnosed by other imaging studies (11.9 +/- 4.1 mm vs 30.7 +/- 19.8 mm, p < 0.001). Conclusions: EUS guided fine-needle aspiration plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of pancreatic metastases and may have a major clinical impact. Patients with renal cell carcinoma could benefit from long-term follow-up with EUS.