Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic ultrasound-guided transcolonic and transrectal drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pelvic abscess drainage has been reported, but data on transcolonic drainage are scant.

AIM: To compare outcomes in patients undergoing transcolonic and transrectal drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses.

METHODS: Retrospective study of all patients who underwent EUS-guided drainage of abdominopelvic abscesses over a 7-year period. Abscesses were drained by a standard single-step EUS-guided technique with deployment of double-pigtail stents ± catheters. Technical success was defined as successful placement of stents or drainage catheters within the abscess cavity. Treatment success was defined as resolution of abscess on follow-up computed tomography at 2 weeks with symptom improvement.

RESULTS: Of 38 patients, 11 underwent transcolonic and 27 transrectal drainages. There was no difference in patient demographics, laboratory values, and median abscess size (65 vs 70 mm, P = 0.85) between the two cohorts. Etiology of abscess was postsurgical in 65.7%, diverticulitis in 13.1%, perforated viscus in 10.5%, and other causes in 10.5%. There was no difference in rates of technical success (100% in each cohort), treatment success (70% vs 96.3%, P = 0.052), or complications (none). Three patients in the transcolonic and one in the transrectal cohort underwent surgery for failed endoscopic drainage (27.3% vs 3.7%, P = 0.06). When evaluated by etiology, treatment success for diverticular abscess was significantly lower compared with others (25% vs 97%, P = 0.002). At a median follow-up of 1228.5 days (interquartile range = 131-1660), all patients with treatment success were doing well with no recurrence.

CONCLUSION: Except for patients with diverticular etiology, treatment of abdominopelvic abscess under EUS guidance is highly effective and safe for both routes.