Pancreatic pseudocyst is a common complication of pancreatitis. Pseudocysts may require decompression when they become painful, infected, or start compressing surrounding organs. Decompression is achieved by endoscopic cystogastrostomy. Recently, the use of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) for cystogastrostomy has gained popularity due to ease of use and high technical success. LAMS has a wider lumen, which allows for direct endoscopic necrosectomy in the cases of walled-off necrosis. Our patient is a 30-year-old male who presented with massive hematemesis and dizziness. He had a history of chronic alcohol-induced pancreatitis. Three weeks before the presentation, he underwent a cystogastrostomy with LAMS placement to treat a 10-cm walled-off necrosis. Urgent computed tomography (CT) scan did not reveal any acute finding suggestive of bleeding. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed blood protruding from the LAMS with a large clot formation. Attempts to stop bleeding were unsuccessful. He underwent CT angiography of the abdomen. CT angiography showed a bleeding pseudoaneurysm (PA) believed to be a complication of the LAMS. Subsequently, multiple coils were placed in the splenic artery near the PA. The patient continued to improve without a further drop in hemoglobin and was eventually discharged. PA formation and subsequent rupture is a rare delayed complication of LAMS. It may lead to massive gastrointestinal bleeding with a high mortality rate. Diagnostic delays have resulted in increased mortality by 60%. In this article, we present a case of massive gastrointestinal bleeding due to a ruptured splenic artery PA presenting as a delayed complication of LAMS.

Background/Aims: Peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) result from acute or chronic pancreatic inflammation that suffers a rupture of its ducts. Currently, there exists three options for drainage or debridement of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis (WON). The traditional procedure is drainage by placing double pigtail plastic stents (DPPS); lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has a biflanged design with a wide lumen that avoids occlusion with necrotic tissue, which is more common with DPPS and reduces the possibility of migration. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses head-to-head, including only studies that compare the two main techniques to drainage of PFCs: LAMS vs DPPS. Methods: We conducted a systematic review in different databases, such as PubMed, OVID, Medline, and Cochrane Databases. This meta-analysis considers studies published from 2014 to 2020, including only studies that compare the two main techniques to drainage of PFCs: LAMS vs DPPS. Results: Thirteen studies were included in the meta-analyses. Only one of all studies was a randomized controlled trial. These studies comprise 1584 patients; 68.2% were male, and 31.8% were female. Six hundred sixty-three patients (41.9%) were treated with LAMS, and 921 (58.1%) were treated with DPPS. Six studies included only WON in their analysis, two included only pancreatic pseudocysts, and five studies included both pancreatic pseudocysts and WON. The technical success was similar in patients treated with LAMS and DPPS (97.6% vs 97.5%, respectively, P =.986, RR = 1.00 [95% CI 0.93-1.08]). The clinical success was similar in both groups (LAMS: 90.1% vs DPPS: 84.2%, P =.139, RR = 1.063 [95% CI 0.98-1.15]). Patients treated with LAMS had a lower complication rate than the DPPS groups, with a significant statistical difference (LAMS: 16.0% vs DPPS: 20.2%, P =.009, RR = 0.746 [95% CI 0.60-0.93]). Bleeding was the most common complication in the LAMS group (33 patients, [5.0%]), whereas infection was the most common complication in the DPPS group (56 patients, [6.1%]). The LAMS migration rate was lower than in the DPPS (0.9% vs 2.2%, respectively, P =.05). The mortality rate was similar in both groups, 0.6% in the LAMS group (four patients) and 0.4% in the DPPS group (four patients; P =.640). Conclusion: The PFCs drainage is an indication when persistent symptoms or PFCs-related complications exist. EUS guided drainage with LAMS has similar technical and clinical success to DPPS drainage for the management of PFCs. The technical and clinical success rates are high in both groups. However, LAMS drainage has a lower adverse events rate than DPPS drainage. More randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the real advantage of LAMS drainage over DPPS drainage. / Revisión por pares