Success rates of fixation techniques on prevention of esophageal stent migration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal stenting is an important intervention for managing malignant and benign dysphagia, with stent migration representing a common drawback. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to assess the benefit of stent fixation over nonfixation. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until January 2023 for comparative studies evaluating the migration rates of esophageal stents with versus without (control) fixation. The primary outcome was migration rate. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rate. A subgroup analysis stratified the results based on different fixation techniques: suturing, over-the-scope (OTS) clipping, and through-the-scope (TTS) clipping. Meta-analysis was based on a random effects model and the results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 %CIs. RESULTS: 10 studies (1014 patients) were included. The rate of stent migration was significantly lower after fixation (OR 0.20, 95 %CI 0.11-0.37; I2  = 59 %, P = 0.01). The adverse event rate was similar between fixation and control groups (OR 0.65, 95 %CI 0.28-1.52; I2  = 55 %, P = 0.06). In the subgroup analysis, all fixation techniques remained superior to nonfixation of stents (suturing OR 0.23, 95 %CI 0.10-0.53; OTS clips OR 0.31, 95 %CI 0.17-0.58; TTS clips OR 0.10, 95 %CI 0.03-0.38); however, only the OTS and TTS clip groups achieved nonsignificant heterogeneity (I2  = 0 %, P = 0.67 and P = 0.73, respectively). No difference between techniques was recorded for migration rates. CONCLUSION: Esophageal stent fixation was associated with significantly lower migration rates compared with nonfixation of stents, regardless of fixation technique and stenting indication.

Comparative diagnostic yield of different endoscopic techniques for tissue sampling of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue sampling techniques for subepithelial lesions. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of bite-on-bite biopsy, mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95%CI. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were identified. EUS-FNB was significantly superior to EUS-FNA in terms of sample adequacy (RR 1.20 [95%CI 1.05-1.45]), whereas none of the other techniques significantly outperformed EUS-FNA. Additionally, bite-on-bite biopsy was significantly inferior to EUS-FNB (RR 0.55 [95%CI 0.33-0.98]). Overall, EUS-FNB appeared to be the best technique (surface under cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score 0.90) followed by MIAB (SUCRA 0.83), whereas bite-on-bite biopsy showed the poorest performance. When considering lesions <20 mm, MIAB, but not EUS-FNB, showed significantly higher accuracy rates compared with EUS-FNA (RR 1.68 [95%CI 1.02-2.88]). Overall, MIAB ranked as the best intervention for lesions <20 mm (SUCRA score 0.86 for adequacy and 0.91 for accuracy), with EUS-FNB only slightly superior to EUS-FNA. When rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) was available, no difference between EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA, and MIAB was observed. CONCLUSION: EUS-FNB and MIAB appeared to provide better performance, whereas bite-on-bite sampling was significantly inferior to the other techniques. MIAB seemed to be the best option for smaller lesions, whereas EUS-FNA remained competitive when ROSE was available.

Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia During Colonoscopy : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence computer-aided detection (CADe) of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy may increase adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and reduce adenoma miss rates, but it may increase overdiagnosis and overtreatment of nonneoplastic polyps. PURPOSE: To quantify the benefits and harms of CADe in randomized trials. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. (PROSPERO: CRD42022293181). DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases through February 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials comparing CADe-assisted with standard colonoscopy for polyp and cancer detection. DATA EXTRACTION: Adenoma detection rate (proportion of patients with ≥1 adenoma), number of adenomas detected per colonoscopy, advanced adenoma (≥10 mm with high-grade dysplasia and villous histology), number of serrated lesions per colonoscopy, and adenoma miss rate were extracted as benefit outcomes. Number of polypectomies for nonneoplastic lesions and withdrawal time were extracted as harm outcomes. For each outcome, studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one randomized trials on 18 232 patients were included. The ADR was higher in the CADe group than in the standard colonoscopy group (44.0% vs. 35.9%; relative risk, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.33]; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to a 55% (risk ratio, 0.45 [CI, 0.35 to 0.58]) relative reduction in miss rate (moderate-certainty evidence). More nonneoplastic polyps were removed in the CADe than the standard group (0.52 vs. 0.34 per colonoscopy; mean difference [MD], 0.18 polypectomy [CI, 0.11 to 0.26 polypectomy]; low-certainty evidence). Mean inspection time increased only marginally with CADe (MD, 0.47 minute [CI, 0.23 to 0.72 minute]; moderate-certainty evidence). LIMITATIONS: This review focused on surrogates of patient-important outcomes. Most patients, however, may consider cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality important outcomes. The effect of CADe on such patient-important outcomes remains unclear. CONCLUSION: The use of CADe for polyp detection during colonoscopy results in increased detection of adenomas but not advanced adenomas and in higher rates of unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: European Commission Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship.

Endoscopic Management of Difficult Biliary Stones: An Evergreen Issue.

Choledocholithiasis is one of the most common indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in daily practice. Although the majority of stones are small and can be easily removed in a single endoscopy session, approximately 10-15% of patients have complex biliary stones, requiring additional procedures for an optimum clinical outcome. A plethora of endoscopic methods is available for the removal of difficult biliary stones, including papillary large balloon dilation, mechanical lithotripsy, and electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy. In-depth knowledge of these techniques and the emerging literature on them is required to yield the most optimal therapeutic effects. This narrative review aims to describe the definition of difficult bile duct stones based on certain characteristics and streamline their endoscopic retrieval using various modalities to achieve higher clearance rates.

Endoscopic Treatment of Large Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials (2752 patients) comparing different treatments for management of large bile stones (>10 mm) (endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon sphincteroplasty, sphincterotomy followed by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation [S+EPLBD], mechanical lithotripsy, single-operator cholangioscopy [SOC]) with each other were identified. Study outcomes were the success rate of stone removal and the incidence of adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria to appraise the quality of evidence. RESULTS: All treatments except mechanical lithotripsy significantly outperformed sphincterotomy in terms of stone removal rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.03-1.29). SOC was superior to other adjunctive interventions (vs balloon sphincteroplasty [RR, 1.24; 95% CIs, 1.07-1.45], vs S+EPLBD [RR, 1.23; range, 1.06-1.42] and vs mechanical lithotripsy [RR, 1.34; range, 1.14-1.58]). Cholangioscopy ranked the highest in increasing the success rate of stone removal (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score, 0.99) followed by S+EPLBD (SUCRA score, 0.68). SOC and S+EPLBD outperformed the other modalities when only studies reporting on stones greater than 15 mm were taken into consideration (SUCRA scores, 0.97 and 0.71, respectively). None of the assessed interventions was significantly different in terms of adverse event rate compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy or with other treatments. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding were the most frequent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with large bile stones, cholangioscopy represents the most effective method, in particular in patients with larger (>15 mm) stones, whereas S+EPLBD could represent a less expensive and more widely available alternative.

Impact of center and endoscopist ERCP volume on ERCP outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist experience and center volume might be associated with ERCP outcomes, as in other fields of endoscopy and in surgery. An effort to assess this relationship is important to improve practice. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate these comparative data and to assess the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP procedure outcomes. METHODS: We performed a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus through March 2022. Volume classification included high- and low-volume (HV and LV) endoscopists and centers. The primary outcome was the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP success. Secondary outcomes were the overall adverse event (AE) rate and the specific AE rate. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data synthesis was obtained by direct meta-analyses using a random-effects model; results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 6833 relevant publications, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Procedure success was higher among HV endoscopists (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.59-2.06; I2 = 57%) and in HV centers (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.22-2.57; I2 = 67%). The overall AE rate was lower for procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .71; 95% CI, .61-.82; I2 = 38%) and in HV centers (OR, .70; 95% CI, .51-.97; I2 = 92%). Bleeding was less frequent in procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .67; 95% CI, .48-.95; I2 = 37%) but did not differ based on center volume (OR, .68; 95% CI, .24-1.90; I2 = 89%). No statistical differences were detected concerning pancreatitis, cholangitis, and perforation rates. CONCLUSIONS: HV endoscopists and centers provide higher ERCP success rates with fewer overall AEs, especially bleeding, compared with respective LV comparators.

Performance and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The introduction of motorized spiral enteroscopy (mSE) into clinical practice holds diagnostic and therapeutic potential for small-bowel investigations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the performance of this modality in diagnosing and treating small-bowel lesions. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were performed through September 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as the identification of a lesion relative to the indication. Secondary outcomes were successful therapeutic manipulation, total enteroscopy rate (examination from the duodenojejunal flexion to the cecum), technical success (passage from the ligament of Treitz or ileocecal valve for anterograde and retrograde approach, respectively), and adverse event rates. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and the results are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: From 2016 to 2022, 9 studies (959 patients; 42% women; mean age >45 years; 474 patients [49.4%] investigated for mid-GI bleeding/anemia) were considered eligible and included in analysis. The diagnostic success rate of mSE was 78% (95% CI, 72-84; I2 = 78.3%). Considering secondary outcomes, total enteroscopy was attempted in 460 cases and completed with a rate of 51% (95% CI, 30-72; I2 = 96.2%), whereas therapeutic interventions were successful in 98% of cases (95% CI, 96-100; I2 = 79.8%) where attempted. Technical success rates were 96% (95% CI, 94-97; I2 = 1.5%) for anterograde and 97% (95% CI, 94-100; I2 = 38.6%) for retrograde approaches, respectively. Finally, the incidence of adverse events was 17% (95% CI, 13-21; I2 = 65.1%), albeit most were minor adverse events (16%; 95% CI, 11-20; I2 = 67.2%) versus major adverse events (1%; 95% CI, 0-1; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: mSE provides high rates of diagnostic and therapeutic success with a low prevalence of severe adverse events.

Early (<4 weeks) versus standard (≥4 weeks) endoscopic drainage of pancreatic walled-off fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies have demonstrated that the ideal time for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is 4 to 6 weeks after their development. However, some pancreatic collections, notably infected pancreatic fluid collections, require earlier drainage. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of the first intervention is unclear, and consensus data are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections <4 weeks after development compared with ≥4 weeks after development. METHODS: Search strategies were developed for PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception. Outcomes of interest were technical success, defined as successful endoscopic placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent; clinical success, defined as a reduction in cystic collection size; and procedure-related adverse events. A random-effects model was used for analysis, and results are expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Six studies (630 patients) were included in our final analysis, in which 182 patients (28.9%) were enrolled in the early drainage cohort and 448 patients (71.1%) in the standard drainage cohort. The mean fluid collection size was 143.4 ± 18.8 mm for the early cohort versus 128 ± 19.7 mm for the standard cohort. Overall, technical success was equal in both cohorts. Clinical success did not favor either standard drainage or early drainage (OR, .39; 95% CI, .13-1.22; P = .11). No statistically significant differences were found in overall adverse events (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, .63-4.45; P = .31) or mortality (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, .29-4.48; P = .85). Hospital stay was longer for patients undergoing early drainage compared with standard drainage (23.7 vs 16.0 days, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both early (<4 weeks) and standard (≥4 weeks) drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections offer similar technical and clinical outcomes. Patients requiring endoscopic drainage should not be delayed for 4 weeks.

Comparative diagnostic performance of different techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of tissue sampling techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques. METHODS: Rates of sample adequacy, blood contamination, and tissue integrity using fine-needle biopsy sampling needles were evaluated. Direct and indirect comparisons were performed among the slow-pull, dry-suction, modified wet-suction, or no-suction techniques. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 9 randomized controlled trials (756 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, the no-suction technique was significantly inferior to the other techniques (RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs slow pull; RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs dry suction; RR, .83 [95% CI, .76-.90] vs modified wet suction) in terms of sample adequacy. Consequently, modified wet suction was shown to be the best technique (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .90), with the no-suction technique showing poorer performance in terms of sample adequacy (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .14). Dry suction was associated with significantly higher rates of blood contamination as compared with the slow-pull technique (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), whereas no suction led to less blood contamination of samples in comparison with other techniques (RR, .71 [95% CI, .52-.97] vs slow pull; RR, .49 [95% CI, .36-.66] vs dry suction; RR, .57 [95% CI, .40-.81] vs modified wet suction). The modified wet-suction technique significantly outperformed dry suction in terms of tissue integrity of the sample (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Modified wet suction seemed to provide high rates of integrity and adequate samples, albeit with high blood contamination. The no-suction technique performed significantly worse than other sampling strategies.

Clinical value of alarm features for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common neoplasm in Western countries. Prioritizing access to colonoscopy appears of critical relevance. Alarm features are considered to increase the likelihood of CRC. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic performance of alarm features for CRC diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of alarm features (rectal bleeding, anemia, change in bowel habit, and weight loss) for CRC, published up to September 2021. Colonoscopy was required as the reference diagnostic test. Diagnostic accuracy measures were pooled by a bivariate mixed-effects regression model. The number needed to scope (NNS; i. e. the number of patients who need to undergo colonoscopy to diagnose one CRC) according to each alarm feature was calculated. RESULTS: 31 studies with 45 100 patients (mean age 31-88 years; men 36 %-63 %) were included. The prevalence of CRC ranged from 0.2 % to 22 %. Sensitivity was suboptimal, ranging from 12.4 % for weight loss to 49 % for rectal bleeding, whereas specificity ranged from 69.8 % for rectal bleeding to 91.9 % for weight loss. Taken individually, rectal bleeding and anemia would be the only practical alarm features mandating colonoscopy (NNS 5.3 and 6.7, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When considered independently, alarm features have variable accuracy for CRC, given the high heterogeneity of study populations reflected by wide variability in CRC prevalence. Rectal bleeding and anemia are the most practical to select patients for colonoscopy. Integration of alarm features in a comprehensive evaluation of patients should be considered.

Influence of Frailty in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Biliary Stone Disease: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreaticobiliary diseases are common in the elderly. To this end, frailty represents a state of vulnerability that should be considered when assessing the risks and benefits of therapeutic endoscopic procedures. We aim to determine the rate of readmissions and clinical outcomes using the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHODS: Using the National Readmissions Database, we identified patients with an admission diagnosis of cholangitis with obstructive stone from 2016 to 2019. Patients were determined to be of low frailty risk with a score of < 5, while patients of medium to high frailty risk had a score of > 5. RESULTS: During the study period, 5751 patients were identified with acute cholangitis with obstructing stone. Mean age of index admissions was 69.4 years and 51.8% were female. From the total cohort, 5119 (89.2%) patients underwent therapeutic ERCP, 38.0% (n = 1947) of whom were regarded as frail (risk score > 5). Following ERCP, frail patients had a less but statistically insignificant readmission rate compared to non-frail patients (2.76% vs 4.05%, p = 0.450). However, compared to non-frail patients, frail patients experienced higher post-ERCP complications (6.20% vs 14.63%, p < 0.001). Frail patients were more likely to have longer lengths of stay, higher hospital cost, and mortality risk. CONCLUSION: ERCP is not a risk factor for readmission among frail patients. However, frail patients are at higher risk for procedure-related complications, healthcare utilization, and mortality.

Patient adverse events and technical failures with the bravo capsule pH system: insights from the MAUDE database.

BACKGROUND: The BRAVO pH monitor system can benefit patients with ongoing GERD symptoms despite treatment and/or atypical symptoms. We aim to investigate the number and type of complications associated with the BRAVO pH capsule. METHODS: From April 2016 through February 2021, we analyzed post-marketing surveillance data from the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. RESULTS: During the study period, approximately 1,651 reports were identified with 2391 cases associated with a device failure, and 254 reporting a patient-related adverse event. Most device complications were due to aspiration n = 153), followed by reported pain (n = 79), injury (unspecified) (n = 63), and additional radiologic imaging (n = 44). Laceration and bleeding accounted for 29 and 19 cases. Furthermore, three patients suffered perforation. Most device failures were due to loss or failure of the Bravo capsule to bond or adhere to the esophageal mucosa as planned (n = 1269), followed by an activation or positioning failure (n = 972), premature detachment of device (n = 284), and failure of the device to record or transmit data (n = 158). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the MAUDE database highlight the risk of aspiration, hemorrhage/bleeding, perforation, injury, and retention as potential complications of BRAVO capsule placement.

Nutrition in acute pancreatitis: when, what and how.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review intends to discuss recently available evidence in three topics related to nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis, namely timing of refeeding, type of nutritional therapy and its route of administration. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent lines of research confirm that early oral feeding leads to shorter length of stay, fewer complications and lower costs in patients with acute pancreatitis. Moreover, early (<48 h) enteral nutrition led to decreased hospital mortality in patients with mild and severe acute pancreatitis; thus, in case of intolerance to oral feeding or severe disease, nutritional therapy should be offered within 24-72 h. Furthermore, enteral nutrition should be preferred against parenteral nutrition, as it is related to shorter length of stay and less complications, while initial data bring to light the potential role of the soluble dietary fibre polydextrose as an agent that could lead to faster achievement of energy goal with concomitant lower rates of feeding intolerance. Finally, enteral nutrition can be administered through gastric or jejunal feeding, depending on digestive tolerance, whereas latest data also address the safety of percutaneous gastrostomy with a jejunal extension for enteral nutrition administration. However, more data about its real benefit are warranted. SUMMARY: Accumulating evidence confirms the importance of early oral refeeding or early administration of enteral nutrition as vital parts of the armamentarium for the management of patients with acute pancreatitis.

Percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy: when, how, and when to avoid it.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The current review summarizes current evidence regarding the indications, contraindications, and technical aspects of placing a direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (DPEJ), as well as procedure-related and patient-related outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: DPEJ is indicated for patients who require long-term (>4 weeks) jejunal nutrition due to existing altered foregut anatomy (e.g., previous gastrectomy) or because the gastric route is not an option (e.g., due to high risk of aspiration, intolerance, gastroparesis). DPEJ may also offer decompression of the gastrointestinal tract in cases of small bowel obstruction (e.g., peritoneal carcinomatosis). Absolute contraindications include active peritonitis, uncorrectable coagulopathy, and ongoing bowel ischemia. Technically, the 'pull' technique using a paediatric colonoscope will be sufficient for most cases. Recent publications demonstrate high rates of technical success (>85%), while patient outcomes do not differ among patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and those undergoing DPEJ. Obesity is a risk factor for technical failure, while age more than 80 years, diabetes mellitus, and ongoing inflammatory status may be considered risk factors for DPEJ-associated mortality. SUMMARY: DPEJ is a safe and efficacious modality for long-term jejunal nutrition with an acceptable risk of mild complications. Careful patient selection and respect of preprocedural, periprocedural, and postprocedural precautions are of the utmost importance to ensuring a favourable outcome.

Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of newer end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of available FNB needles for sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. METHODS: A systematic literature review (Medline and Cochrane Database) was conducted for studies evaluating the accuracy of newer FNB needles in adults undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sample adequacy, diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and adverse event rate. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses and appraised the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. RESULTS: Overall, 16 RCTs (1934 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, Franseen needles (Acquire; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA) significantly outperformed reverse-bevel needles (risk ratio [RR], 1.21 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.40] for accuracy and 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05-1.22] for adequacy) and FNA needles (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.25] for accuracy and 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.13] for adequacy). Likewise, the Fork-tip needle (SharkCore; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) was significantly superior to the reverse-bevel needle (RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.03-1.33] for accuracy and 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.16] for adequacy) and to the FNA needle (RR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.19] for accuracy and 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.07] for adequacy). Other comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. As a consequence, Franseen (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .89 for accuracy and .94 for adequacy) and Fork-tip needles (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .76 for accuracy and .73 for adequacy) ranked as the 2 highest-performing FNB needles. When considering different needle sizes, 25-gauge Franseen and 25-gauge Fork-tip needles were not superior to 22-gauge reverse-bevel needles (RR, 1.18 [95% CI, .96-1.46] and 1.04 [95% CI, .62-1.52]). None of the tested needles was significantly superior to the other FNB devices or to FNA needles when rapid onsite cytologic evaluation was available. CONCLUSIONS: Franseen and Fork-tip needles, particularly 22-gauge size, showed the highest performance for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates.

Comparative efficacy of different methods for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several methods with variable efficacy have been proposed for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP. We assessed the comparative efficacy of different strategies for difficult biliary cannulation through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons. METHODS: We identified 17 randomized controlled trials (2015 patients) that compared the efficacy of different adjunctive methods for difficult biliary cannulation (needle-knife techniques, pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, pancreatic-assisted technique, and transpancreatic sphincterotomy) either with each other or with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. The success rate of biliary cannulation and the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were the outcomes of interest. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria to appraise quality of evidence. RESULTS: Low-quality evidence supported the use of transpancreatic sphincterotomy over persistence with standard cannulation techniques (risk ratio [RR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.59) and over any other adjunctive intervention (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.44] vs pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.01-1.43] vs early needle-knife techniques, RR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.03-2.10] vs pancreatic stent-assisted technique) for increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. No other significant results were observed in any other comparisons. Based on the network model, transpancreatic sphincterotomy (P-score, .97) followed by early needle-knife techniques (P-score, .62) were ranked highest in terms of increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. Early needle-knife techniques outperformed persistence with standard cannulation techniques in terms of decreasing PEP rate (RR, .61; 95% CI, .37-1.00), whereas both early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy led to lower PEP rates as compared with pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique (RR, .49 [95% CI, .23-.99] and .53 [95% CI, .30-.92], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Transpancreatic sphincterotomy increases the success rate of biliary cannulation as compared with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. Early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy are superior to other interventions in decreasing PEP rates and should be considered in patients with difficult cannulation.

Predictors of adverse events after endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy of pancreatic cysts: a recursive partitioning analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS : Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is associated with a non-negligible risk for adverse events (AEs). We aimed to identify the hierarchic interaction among independent predictors for TTNB-related AEs and to generate a prognostic model using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). PATIENTS AND METHODS : Multicenter retrospective analysis of 506 patients with PCLs who underwent TTNB. RPA of predictors for AEs was performed and the model was validated by means of bootstrap resampling. RESULTS : Mean cysts size was 36.7 mm. Most common diagnoses were intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN, 45 %), serous cystadenoma (18.8 %), and mucinous cystadenoma (12.8 %). Fifty-eight (11.5 %) AEs were observed. At multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.32, 1.09-2.14; p = 0.05), number of TTNB passes (OR from 2.17, 1.32-4.34 to OR 3.16, 2.03-6.34 with the increase of the number of passes), complete aspiration of the cyst (OR 0.56, 0.31-0.95; p = 0.02), and diagnosis of IPMN (OR 4.16, 2.27-7.69; p < 0.001) were found to be independent predictors of AEs, as confirmed by logistic regression and random forest analyses. RPA identified three risk classes: high-risk (IPMN sampled with multiple microforceps passes, 28 % AEs rate), low-risk (1.4 % AE rate, including patients < 64 years with other-than-IPMN diagnosis sampled with ≤ 2 microforceps passes and with complete aspiration of the cyst) and middle-risk class (6.1 % AEs rate, including the remaining patients). CONCLUSION : TTNB should be selectively used in the evaluation of patients with IPMN. The present model could be applied during patient selection as to optimize the benefit/risk of TTNB.

Circulating DNA in the neoadjuvant setting of early stage colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: While circulating tumour (ct)DNA is an indicator of minimal residual disease and negative prognostic factor in stage II-III colon cancer, no study has ever analysed the value of this biomarker in colon cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We sought to fill this gap by using prospectively collected plasma samples from 80 stage III colon cancer patients, receiving one cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFOX followed by surgery +/- adjuvant FOLFOX in the PePiTA trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Samples were collected at baseline, 2 weeks and surgery. NPY and WIF1 were selected as universal methylation markers for ctDNA, and analysed with ddPCR technology. ROC curves were applied for cut-off points, and outcome measures included 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 6-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 52.5 months, baseline circulating-free (cf) DNA was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (HR 3.35, 95% CI: 1.15-9.77, p = .03), and a trend towards a similar association was observed for relative cfDNA changes between baseline and surgery (HR 2.57, 95% CI: 0.94-7.05, p = .07). Among 60 ctDNA assessable patients, 25 (42%) had detectable ctDNA at baseline. While detection of ctDNA at any pre-operative timepoint was not associated with outcome, patients with ctDNA increase (change of the worst trending methylation marker ≥11%, or mean ctDNA change of NPY and WIF1 ≥ 0%) between baseline and surgery showed a trend towards worse 5-year DFS (HR 3.66, 95% CI: 0.81-16.44, p = .09). CONCLUSION: This is the first study of ctDNA in the neoadjuvant setting of early-stage colon cancer. Results are hypothesis-generating and should be confirmed in larger series.

State of the Art in Endoscopic Therapy for the Management of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

OPINION STATEMENT: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NENs) comprise a heterogeneous group of slow growing tumors arising from the neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Although they are considered relatively rare, their incidence is rising and it is believed that the more frequent use of endoscopy and imaging studies have at least in part contributed to the increased diagnosis especially of localized neoplasms. The management of these neoplasms should be guided by a multidisciplinary NEN team following appropriate staging investigations. Localized neoplasms of the GI tract may be suitable for endoscopic therapy, while patients with pancreatic NENs, unsuitable for surgery, should be considered for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ablation. In this review, we discuss the evidence regarding endoscopic resection of luminal NENs and EUS-guided therapy of pancreatic NENs. The efficacy, safety, and other longer-term outcomes of these techniques are summarized. In conclusion, this review of endoscopic therapies for localized NENs may be a useful guide for NEN clinicians and endoscopists who are considering these therapeutic options for the management of focal GEP NENs.

Nutrition in acute pancreatitis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to discuss recent developments in different topics regarding nutrition and acute pancreatitis (AP), including oral refeeding, nutritional therapy, and implications of gut microbiota. RECENT FINDINGS: Obesity increases the risk for severe AP and mortality. Considering the worldwide obesity rates, this finding could have major implications in the global outcomes of patients admitted with AP. Recent research confirms that early oral feeding leads to shorter length of stay, fewer complications, and lower costs. In case of intolerance to oral feeding or severe disease, nutritional therapy should be offered within 24-72 h, whereas enteral nutrition (EN) has been shown superior to parenteral nutrition. EN can be administered through gastric or jejunal feeding, depending on digestive tolerance and the presence of ileus. Nevertheless, modalities of EN in patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of pancreatitis-related collections are still undetermined. Weight-loss after discharge occurs frequently and could reflect post-AP pancreatic exocrine failure. Finally, novel research regarding gut microbiota could open new therapeutic opportunities to prevent bacterial translocation and pancreatic necrosis' infection. SUMMARY: Despite available evidence many questions regarding nutritional management in patients with AP remain open. Modulation of gut microbiota could play an important role in further therapeutic management.