ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic postoperative fluid collections: a retrospective cohort study evaluating timing of intervention and clinical outcomes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSymptomatic postoperative fluid collections (POFCs) can result in significant morbidity and mortality after abdominal surgery requiring timely intervention. EUS-guided drainage is traditionally delayed up to four weeks to allow wall maturation and reduce perforation or peritonitis risk. However, some POFCs may be suitable for earlier intervention. This study compared the efficacy and safety of acute (≤ 15 days), early (16-30 days), and delayed (> 30 days) EUS-guided drainage.
methodsA retrospective cohort of patients undergoing EUS-guided drainage for symptomatic POFCs between 2013 and 2023 at a single tertiary center was evaluated. Technical success was defined as accessing and draining a POFC by transmural stent placement on initial endoscopy. Clinical success was defined as radiographically or endosonographically confirmed symptomatic POFC improvement without further percutaneous or surgical intervention.
resultsAmong 85 patients with POFCs, most (61%) had undergone distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy. 59% required drainage ≤ 30 days after surgery, with 28% managed acutely. Most (83%) received lumen-apposing metal stents. Overall technical and clinical success rates were 94% and 79%, respectively, after a median 2 endoscopies (IQR 2-3). Success did not differ by timing (technical: 92% vs. 96% vs. 94%; clinical: 83% vs. 85% vs. 71%; P = 0.86 and P = 0.37). Adverse event rates were similar across groups (P = 0.85). Transgastric access was associated with clinical success (P < 0.001) and fewer adverse events (P = 0.03). Transduodenal access predicted technical (P = .05) and clinical failure (P = 0.02).
conclusionsIn this large single-center experience of symptomatic POFCS, acute and early EUS-guided drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents in carefully selected patients was found to be technically safe and clinically effective, potentially avoiding more morbid interventions such as ERCP, percutaneous drainage, or surgery. Further randomized, prospective studies are needed to define predictors of technical and clinical success as well as adverse events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42230364What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.