BACKGROUND  Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) has emerged as a viable completely endoscopic method for performing pancreaticobiliary interventions in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy. The aims of this systematic review were (1) to describe the indications, outcomes, and complications of EDGE; and (2) to identify deficiencies in our knowledge of important technical approaches and clinical outcomes. METHODS  A systematic review was conducted via comprehensive searches of Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane to identify studies focusing on EDGE outcomes. Simple descriptive statistics were derived from case series only. Case reports were only included to qualitatively describe additional indications, techniques, and adverse events. RESULTS  The initial search identified 2143 abstracts. Nine case series and eight case reports were included. In the nine case series, 169 patients underwent EDGE. The technical success rate was 99 % (168 /169) for gastrogastrostomy/jejunogastrostomy creation and 98 % (166 /169) for subsequent ERCP. Minor adverse events specifically related to EDGE occurred in 18 % (31/169) and included intraprocedural stent migration/malposition (n = 27) and abdominal pain (n = 4). Moderate adverse events specific to EDGE occurred in 5 % (9/169) including bleeding (2 %), persistent fistula (1 %), and perforation (1 %). Severe adverse events occurred in one patient with a perforation requiring surgery. Deficiency in reporting on the clinical significance of adverse events was identified. CONCLUSION  Based on limited observational data, in expert hands, EDGE has a high rate of technical success and an acceptable rate of adverse events. As a novel procedure, many knowledge gaps need to be addressed to inform the design of meaningful comparative studies and guide informed consent.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the standard in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions, in particular when combined with rapid onsite evaluation of cytopathology (ROSE). More recently, a fork-tip needle for core biopsy (FNB) has been shown to be associated with excellent diagnostic yield. EUS-FNB alone has however not been compared with EUS-FNA + ROSE in a large clinical trial. Our aim was to compare EUS-FNB alone to EUS-FNA + ROSE in solid pancreatic lesions.  A multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial involving seven centers was performed. Solid pancreatic lesions referred for EUS were considered for inclusion. The primary end point was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary end points included sensitivity/specificity, mean number of needle passes, and cost.  235 patients were randomized 115 EUS-FNB alone and 120 EUS-FNA + ROSE. Overall, 217 patients had malignant histology. The diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of EUS-FNB alone was non-inferior to EUS-FNA + ROSE at 92.2 % (95 %CI 86.6 %-96.9 %) and 93.3 % (95 %CI 88.8 %-97.9 %), respectively (  = 0.72). Diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy was 92.5 % (95 %CI 85.7 %-96.7 %) for EUS-FNB alone vs. 96.5 % (93.0 %-98.6 %) for EUS-FNA + ROSE (  = 0.46), while specificity was 100 % in both. Adequate histological yield was obtained in 87.5 % of the EUS-FNB samples. RBN013209 order The mean (SD) number of needle passes and procedure time favored EUS-FNB alone (2.3 [0.6] passes vs. 3.0 [1.1] passes [  < 0.001]; and 19.3 [8.0] vs. 22.7 [10.8] minutes [  = 0.008]). EUS-FNB alone cost on average 45 US dollars more than EUS-FNA + ROSE.  EUS-FNB alone is non-inferior to EUS-FNA + ROSE and is associated with fewer needle passes, shorter procedure time, and excellent histological yield at comparable cost. EUS-FNB alone is non-inferior to EUS-FNA + ROSE and is associated with fewer needle passes, shorter procedure time, and excellent histological yield at comparable cost.  Endoscopic internal drainage (EID) with double-pigtail stents or low negative-pressure endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) are treatment options for leakage after upper gastrointestinal oncologic surgery. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of these techniques.  Between 2016 and 2019, patients treated with EID in five centers in France and with EVT in Göttingen, Germany were included and retrospectively analyzed using univariate analysis. Pigtail stents were changed every 4 weeks; EVT was repeated every 3-4 days until leak closure.  35 EID and 27 EVT patients were included, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) leak size of 0.75 cm (0.5-1.5). Overall treatment success was 100 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 90 %-100 %) for EID vs. 85.2 % (95 %CI 66.3 %-95.8 %) for EVT (  = 0.03). The median (IQR) number of endoscopic procedures was 2 (2-3) vs. 3 (2-6.5;  = 0.003) and the median (IQR) treatment duration was 42 days (28-60) vs. 17 days (7.5-28;  < 0.001), for EID vs. EVT, respectively.  EID and EVT provide high closure rates for upper gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks. EVT provides a shorter treatment duration, at the cost of a higher number of procedures. EID and EVT provide high closure rates for upper gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks. EVT provides a shorter treatment duration, at the cost of a higher number of procedures.FACE-Q was developed by Klassen et al in 2010 as a validated psychometric evaluation instrument for patients undergoing aesthetic surgery. The aim of this study was to translate, adapt, and validate the FACE-Q rhinoplasty module into a Dutch version of the FACE-Q questionnaire conceptually equivalent to the original English version. "Satisfaction with nose" and "satisfaction with nostrils" questionnaires were used and translated from English into Dutch. The translation process and cross-cultural adaptation were conducted in accordance to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and World Health Organization guidelines. Psychometric validation was performed prospectively on a patient cohort of 30 patients. Each step in the translation process allowed us to make changes to achieve a conceptual translation equivalent to the original version. Psychometric validation revealed highly significant values for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness. The use of international translation guidelines, with a strict translation-back-translation process, led to a Dutch version of the FACE-Q rhinoplasty module.