BACKGROUND AND AIM: Despite aggressive multimodal treatments, survival rates for patients with pancreatic cancer remain disappointing. Local progression is problematic, and minimally invasive procedures allowing locoregional control are needed. In this study, we attempted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided injection of ethanol into the pancreas. METHODS: Under EUS guidance, pure ethanol (2 mL) was injected into normal tissue of the pancreatic body in two anesthetized domestic pigs. Serum concentrations of amylase, aspartame aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and lactate dehydrogenase were measured before treatment and at 2 h, 48 h and 2 weeks after injection. Body weight and clinical signs were also observed. After the animals were euthanized, the pancreases were analyzed histologically. RESULTS: EUS imaging allows real-time surveillance of the injection procedure. Mild diarrhea was noted in one animal, but no other adverse effects were observed. No marked changes in laboratory tests were noted. Histologically, parenchymal necrosis extending over a wide area was seen without severe inflammation. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided ethanol injection in the pancreas seems to be technically simple. More detailed assessments of the safety and dose-effect relationship issues associated with this procedure are required.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Despite aggressive multimodal treatments, survival rates for patients with pancreatic cancer remain disappointing. Local progression is problematic, and minimally invasive procedures allowing locoregional control are needed. In this study, we attempted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided injection of ethanol into the pancreas. METHODS: Under EUS guidance, pure ethanol (2 mL) was injected into normal tissue of the pancreatic body in two anesthetized domestic pigs. Serum concentrations of amylase, aspartame aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and lactate dehydrogenase were measured before treatment and at 2 h, 48 h and 2 weeks after injection. Body weight and clinical signs were also observed. After the animals were euthanized, the pancreases were analyzed histologically. RESULTS: EUS imaging allows real-time surveillance of the injection procedure. Mild diarrhea was noted in one animal, but no other adverse effects were observed. No marked changes in laboratory tests were noted. Histologically, parenchymal necrosis extending over a wide area was seen without severe inflammation. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided ethanol injection in the pancreas seems to be technically simple. More detailed assessments of the safety and dose-effect relationship issues associated with this procedure are required.