Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 43, Issue 11, pp 3043–3053 | Cite as

Imaging of endoscopic cystogastrostomy in pancreatic walled-off necrosis: what the radiologist needs to know

  • Anthony Abou KaramEmail author
  • Arya Bagherpour
  • Jesus Calleros
  • Shaked Laks
Pictorial essay


Acute pancreatitis is a frequent entity encountered by radiologists. In 2012, the Atlanta criteria were revised to help radiologists use a common nomenclature when describing acute pancreatitis and its complications. One delayed complication of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in walled-off necrosis, a collection seen at least 4 weeks after an episode of acute pancreatic necrosis and/or acute peripancreatic necrosis. Multiple treatments have been adapted in the setting of walled-off necrosis, including endoscopic cystogastrostomy. The focus of this article is to familiarize the radiologist with the imaging appearance of this procedure as well as, review the outcomes and potential complications of endoscopic cystogastrostomy.


Walled-off necrosis Cystogastrostomy Pancreas 


Compliance with ethical standards



Conflict of interest

Anthony Abou Karam, Arya Bagherpour, Jesus Calleros and Shaked Laks declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required (study is retrospective and no PHI were included).


  1. 1.
    Yadav D, Lowenfels AB (2013) The epidemiology of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. Gastroenterology 144(6):1252–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lankisch PG, Apte M, Banks PA (2015) Acute pancreatitis. Lancet 2015(386):85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bollen TL, Dervenis C, Gooszen HG, et al. (2013) Classification of acute pancreatitis—2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut 62:102–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thoeni RF (2012) The revised Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis: its importance for the radiologist and its effect on treatment. Radiology 262(3):751–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stamatakos M, Stefanaki C, Kontzoglou K, et al. (2010) Walled-off pancreatic necrosis. World J Gastroenterol 16(14):1707–1712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin H, Zhan X-B, Sun S-Y, et al. (2014) Stent selection for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a multicenter study in China. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2014:193562PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ruiz-Clavijo D, de la Higuera BG, Vila JJ (2015) Advances in the endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. World J Gastrointest Endosc 7(4):381–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Puli SR, Graumlich JF, Pamulaparthy SR, Kalva N (2014) Endoscopic transmural necrosectomy for walled-off pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28(1):50–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kawakami H, Itoi T, Sakamoto N (2014) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage for peripancreatic fluid collections: where are we now? Gut Liver 8(4):341–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, Loren DE, et al. (2017) Fully covered self-expanding metal stents versus lumen-apposing fully covered self-expanding metal stent versus plastic stents for endoscopic drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis: clinical outcomes and success. Gastrointest Endosc 85(4):758–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Siddiqui AA, Adler DG, Nieto J, et al. (2016) EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections and necrosis by using a novel lumen-apposing stent: a large retrospective, multicenter U.S. experience. Gastrointest Endosc 83(4):699–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tzovaras G, Parks RW, Diamond T, Rowlands BJ (2004) Early and long-term results of surgery for severe necrotising pancreatitis. Dig Surg 21(1):41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tyberg A, Karia K, Gabr M, et al. (2016) Management of pancreatic fluid collections: a comprehensive review of the literature. World J Gastroenterol 22(7):2256–2270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nabi Z, Basha J, Reddy DN (2017) Endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collections revisited. World J Gastroenterol 23(15):2660–2672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hookey LC, Debroux S, Delhaye M, et al. (2006) Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections in 116 patients: a comparison of etiologies, drainage techniques, and outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 63(4):635–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahmed A, Bailey A, Agrawal D (2014) Unusual complication of endoscopic cystogastrostomy. Gastroenterology 146(5):e12–e13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hao S-J, Wei-Jia X, Di Y, et al. (2017) Novel and supplementary management of pancreatic fluid collections: endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage. World J Gastrointest Endosc 9(9):486–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muniraj T, Jamidar P, Nealon W, Alanian H (2016) Endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collections. J Clin Gastoenterol 51(1):19–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Texas Tech University Medical Center El PasoEl PasoUSA
  2. 2.University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, UTMBGalvestonUSA

Personalised recommendations