RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has emerged as a popular alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for patients suffering from acute calculous cholecystitis who are at high risk for surgery. Multiple cohorts, meta-analyses, and a randomized controlled trial have shown that EUS-GBD has lower rates of recurrent cholecystitis and unplanned reinterventions, while achieving similar technical and clinical success rates than transpapillary cystic duct stenting. The essential steps, precautions in performing EUS-GBD and long-term management will be discussed in this article.
Asunto(s)
Drenaje , Endosonografía , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Humanos , Drenaje/métodos , Endosonografía/métodos , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/métodos , Colecistitis Aguda/cirugía , Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic method to palliate malignant gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to assess whether the use of EUS-GE with a double balloon occluder for malignant gastric outlet obstruction could reduce the need for reintervention within 6 months compared with conventional duodenal stenting. METHODS: The was an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted at seven sites in Hong Kong, Belgium, Brazil, India, Italy, and Spain. Consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with malignant gastric outlet obstruction due to unresectable primary gastroduodenal or pancreatobiliary malignancies, a gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) of 0 (indicating an inability in intake food or liquids orally), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or lower were included and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either EUS-GE or duodenal stenting. The primary outcome was the 6-month reintervention rate, defined as the percentage of patients requiring additional endoscopic intervention due to stent dysfunction (ie, restenosis of the stent due to tumour ingrowth, tumour overgrowth, or food residue; stent migration; or stent fracture) within 6 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified secondary outcomes were technical success (successful placement of a stent), clinical success (1-point improvement in gastric outlet obstruction score [GOOS] within 3 days), adverse events within 30 days, death within 30 days, duration of stent patency, GOOS at 1 month, and quality-of-life scores. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03823690) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 185 patients were screened and 97 (46 men and 51 women) were recruited and randomly allocated (48 to the EUS-GE group and 49 to the duodenal stent group). Mean age was 69·5 years (SD 12·6) in the EUS-GE group and 64·8 years (13·0) in the duodenal stent group. All randomly allocated patients completed follow-up and were analysed. Reintervention within 6 months was required in two (4%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 14 (29%) in the duodenal stent group [p=0·0020; risk ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·04-0·61]). Stent patency was longer in the EUS-GE group (median not reached in either group; HR 0·13 [95% CI 0·08-0·22], log-rank p<0·0001). 1-month GOOS was significantly better in the EUS-GE group (mean 2·41 [SD 0·7]) than the duodenal stent group (1·91 [0·9], p=0·012). There were no statistically significant differences between the EUS-GE and duodenal stent groups in death within 30 days (ten [21%] vs six [12%] patients, respectively, p=0·286), technical success, clinical success, or quality-of-life scores at 1 month. Adverse events occurred 11 (23%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 12 (24%) in the duodenal stent group within 30 days (p=1·00); three cases of pneumonia (two in the EUS-GE group and one in the duodenal stent group) were considered to be procedure related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction, EUS-GE can reduce the frequency of reintervention, improve stent patency, and result in better patient-reported eating habits compared with duodenal stenting, and the procedure should be used preferentially over duodenal stenting when expertise and required devices are available. FUNDING: Research Grants Council (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China) and Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva.
Asunto(s)
Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica , Neoplasias Gástricas , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Endosonografía/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Gastroenterostomía/efectos adversos , Gastroenterostomía/métodos , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/etiología , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/cirugía , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , StentsRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to compare the efficacy of partially covered duodenal stent (PCDS) vs. uncovered duodenal stent (UCDS) in patients suffering from unresectable primary malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). METHODS: This was a prospective international randomized controlled study conducted in 10 high-volume institutions. Consecutive patients suffering from malignant GOO were recruited. The primary outcome measurement was the reintervention rate. Secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality, causes of stent dysfunction, and the duration of stent patency. RESULTS: Between March 2017 and October 2020, 115 patients (59 PCDS, 56 UCDS) were recruited. The 1-year reintervention was not significantly different (PCDS vs. UDCS = 12/59, 20.3% vs. 14/56, 25%, P = 0.84). There was a trend to fewer patients with tumor ingrowth in the PCDS group (6/59 [10.2%]) vs. 13/56 [23.2%], P = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the technical success (100% vs. 100%, P = 1), clinical success (91.5% vs. 98.2%, P = 0.21), procedural time (21.5 [interquartile range [IQR] 17-30] vs. 20.0 [IQR 15-34.75], P = 0.62), hospital stay (4 [IQR 3-12] vs. 5 [IQR 3-8] days, P = 0.81), 30-day adverse events (18.6% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.62), or 30-day mortality (6.8% vs. 5.2%, P = 1.00). CONCLUSION: The use of PCDS was associated with a lower risk of tumor ingrowth but did not improve on reintervention rates or stent patency. Both kinds of stents could be used in this group of patients.
Asunto(s)
Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica , Neoplasias , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Stents/efectos adversos , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/etiología , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/cirugía , Cuidados PaliativosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several studies have compared primary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with insertion of metal stents in unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) and the results were conflicting. The aim of the current study was to compare the outcomes of the procedures in a large-scale study. METHODS: This was a multicenter international randomized controlled study. Consecutive patients admitted for obstructive jaundice due to unresectable MDBO were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to receive EUS-guided choledocho-duodenostomy (ECDS) or ERCP for drainage. The primary outcome was the 1-year stent patency rate. Other outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, time to stent dysfunction, reintervention rates, and overall survival. RESULTS: Between January 2017 and February 2021, 155 patients were recruited (ECDS 79, ERCP 76). There were no significant differences in 1-year stent patency rates (ECDS 91.1% vs ERCP 88.1%, P = .52). The ECDS group had significantly higher technical success (ECDS 96.2% vs ERCP 76.3%, P < .001), whereas clinical success was similar (ECDS 93.7% vs ERCP 90.8%, P = .559). The median (interquartile range) procedural time was significantly shorter in the ECDS group (ECDS 10 [5.75-18] vs ERCP 25 [14-40] minutes, P < .001). The rate of 30-day adverse events (P = 1) and 30-day mortality (P = .53) were similar. CONCLUSION: Both procedures could be options for primary biliary drainage in unresectable MDBO. ECDS was associated with higher technical success and shorter procedural time then ERCP. Primary ECDS may be preferred when difficult ERCPs are anticipated. This study was registered to Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03000855.
Asunto(s)
Colestasis , Neoplasias , Humanos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efectos adversos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/métodos , Colestasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Colestasis/etiología , Colestasis/cirugía , Duodenostomía , Conducto Colédoco , Neoplasias/etiología , Endosonografía/métodos , Stents/efectos adversos , Drenaje/efectos adversos , Drenaje/métodos , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/métodosRESUMEN
Patients with metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) have a grave prognosis with limited life expectancy. Here, a phase II clinical trial was conducted to investigate the effect of Andrographis paniculata (AP) on the palliative care of patients with metastatic ESCC. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced ESCC deemed unfit for surgery, and who have already completed palliative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or are not fit for these treatments, were recruited. These patients were prescribed AP concentrated granules for 4 months. They also received clinical and quality of life assessments for clinical response, as well as positron emission tomography-computed tomography at 3 and 6 months after AP treatment for the assessment of tumor volume. Furthermore, the change in gut microbiota composition after AP treatment was studied. From the results, among the 30 recruited patients, 10 completed the entire course of AP treatment, while 20 received partial AP treatment. Patients who completed the AP treatment achieved significantly longer overall survival periods with the maintenance of the quality of life during the survival period when compared to those who could not complete AP treatment. The treatment effect of AP also contributed to the shift of the overall structure of gut microbiota for ESCC patients towards those of healthy individuals. The significance of this study is the establishment of AP as a safe and effective palliative treatment for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first clinical trial of AP water extract in esophageal cancer patients demonstrating its new medicinal use.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/patología , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Andrographis paniculata , Calidad de Vida , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patologíaRESUMEN
Background and study aims Submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) is being increasingly performed for treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), while STER has been limited by close dissection within tunnel and risking breach of tumor capsule. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) allows resection of GIST with margins to prevent recurrence. This study aimed to compare EFTR against STER for treatment of gastric GIST. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed clinical outcomes of patients with gastric GIST who received either STER or EFTR. Patients with gastric GISTs <âthan 4âcm were included. Clinical outcomes including baseline demographics, perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results From 2013 to 2019, 46 patients with gastric GISTs were treated with endoscopic resection, 26 received EFTR and 20 received STER. Most of the GISTs were in the proximal stomach. There was no difference in operative time (94.9 vs 84.9 mins; P â=â0.401), while endoscopic suturing was applied more for closure after EFTR ( P â<â0.0001). Patients after STER had earlier resumption of diet and shorter hospital stay while there was no difference in adverse event rate between two groups. The en-bloc resection rate for EFTR was significantly higher than for STER (100â% vs 80â%; P â=â0.029), while there was no difference in the local recurrence. Conclusions This study demonstrated that although patients who received EFTR had longer hospital stays and slower resumption of diet compared to those who underwent STER, EFTR achieved a significantly higher rate of en-bloc resection compared to STER for treatment of gastric GIST.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has raised concerns on whether colonoscopies (CS) carry a transmission risk. The aim was to determine whether CS are aerosol-generating procedures. METHODS: This was a prospective observational trial including all patients undergoing CS at the Prince of Wales Hospital from 1 June to 31 July 2020. Three particle counters were placed 10 cm from each patient's anus and near the mouth of endoscopists and nurses. The particle counter recorded the number of particles of size 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, 5, and 10 µm. Patient demographics, seniority of endoscopists, use of CO2 and water immersion technique, and air particle count (particles/cubic foot, dCF) were recorded. Multilevel modeling was used to test all the hypotheses with a post-hoc analysis. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients were recruited. During CS, the level of 5 µm and 10 µm were significantly higher than the baseline period (P = 0.002). Procedures performed by trainees had a higher level of aerosols when compared to specialists (0.3 µm, P < 0.001; 0.5 µm and 0.7 µm, P < 0.001). The use of CO2 and water immersion techniques had significantly lower aerosols generated when compared to air (CO2 : 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 µm: P < 0.001; water immersion: 0.3 µm: P = 0.048; 0.7 µm: P = 0.03). There were no significant increases in any particle sizes during the procedure at the endoscopists' and nurses' mouth. However, 8/117 (6.83%) particle count tracings showed a simultaneous surge of all particle sizes at the patient's anus and endoscopists' and nurses' level during rectal extubation. CONCLUSION: Colonoscopy generates droplet nuclei especially during rectal extubation. The use of CO2 and water immersion techniques may mitigate these risks.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Dióxido de Carbono , Partículas y Gotitas de Aerosol , Agua , Pandemias , Inmersión , Aerosoles y Gotitas Respiratorias , Colonoscopía/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) can be relieved by either laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (LGJ), endoscopic stenting (SEMS) or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (endoscopic ultrasound-guided balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass; EPASS). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the three treatment methods. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who suffered from malignant GOO between January 2012 to November 2020 that received either EPASS, LGJ or SEMS. The outcomes included the technical and clinical success, 30-day adverse events and mortality, pre and post stenting GOO scores (GOOSs), stent patency and causes of stent dysfunction. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients were included (30 EPASS, 35 LGJ, 49 SEMS). The technical success of EPASS, LGJ and SEMS were 93.3%, 100%, 100% (P = 0.058) and clinical success rates were 93.3%, 80%, 87.8% (P = 0.276), respectively. Procedural time was longest for the LGJ group (P < 0.001). The EPASS group had the shortest hospital stay (EPASS 1.5 [1-17], LGJ 7 [2-44], SEMS 5 [2-46] days, P < 0.001). EPASS group also had the lowest rates of recurrent obstruction (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 36.7%, P = 0.002) and re-intervention (EPASS 3.3%, LGJ 17.1%, SEMS 26.5%, P = 0.031). The 1-month GOOS was highest in the EPASS group (EPASS 3 [1-3], LGJ 3 [0-3], SEMS 2 [0-3], P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy was associated with better clinical outcomes then the other two procedures. The procedure may be the best option provided that the expertise is available.
Asunto(s)
Derivación Gástrica , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica , Laparoscopía , Humanos , Derivación Gástrica/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Stents/efectos adversos , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/etiología , Obstrucción de la Salida Gástrica/cirugía , Ultrasonografía IntervencionalRESUMEN
Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is the preferred treatment for patients with acute calculous cholecystitis who are unfit for surgery. The aim of this study was to perform a cost-effective analysis (CEA) comparing EUS-GBD with percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD). Patients and methods CEA was performed on patients recruited for our prior randomized controlled trial. A budget impact model was developed to compare the base-case and scenario of EUS-GBD applications. The costs including peri-procedure and intra-procedure, reinterventions, expenses associated with treatment of adverse events (AEs), costs of hospital stay, subsequent clinic follow-up, and unplanned readmission were included. Results PT-GBD had a lower total procedure cost per patient (USD$4,375.00) than EUS-GBD (USD$9,397.44). For EUS-GBD, the cost of cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing stent accounted for the major part of the expense (USD$4,910.26). EUS-GBD resulted in a lower expected cost (USD$108.26 vs USD$1,601.54) for a re-procedure. The expected cost per patient in unplanned readmissions in the EUS-GBD group (USD$450.00) was lower than that in the PT-GBD group (USD$1,717.56). Based on the budget impact analysis, the net budget impact per year of introducing EUS-GBD to replace PT-GBD was higher (USD$16,424.10 vs USD$11,433.08). The net budget impact was most sensitive to the cost of stent and linear echoendoscope used in EUS-GBD. Conclusions The net budget impact per year was higher for introducing EUS-GBD. The cost of the stent accounted for the major cost difference between the two procedures. EUS-GBD saved on the cost in management of AEs, reinterventions, and unplanned readmissions but these did not offset the cost of the stent.
RESUMEN
The World Endoscopy Organization Stomach and Duodenal Diseases Committee extracted minimum elements for screening and diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC) in aim to support countries that do not have national guidelines on screening and diagnosis of GC. Current national or international guidelines were collected worldwide and recommendations were classified according to the quality of evidence and were finalized through a modified Delphi method. The minimum elements consist of seven categories: [1] Extraction of high-risk patients of GC before esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), [2] Patients who need surveillance of GC, [3] Method to ensure quality of EGD for detection of GC, [4] Individual GC risk assessment by EGD, [5] Extraction of high-risk patients of GC after EGD [6] Qualitative or differential diagnosis of GC by EGD, and [7] Endoscopic assessment to choose the therapeutic strategy for GC. These minimum elements will be a guide to promote the elimination of GC among countries with a high incidence of GC who lack national guidelines or screening programs.
RESUMEN
Biofilm eradication from medical implants is of fundamental importance, and the treatment of biofilm-associated pathogen infections on inaccessible biliary stents remains challenging. Magnetically driven microrobots with controlled motility, accessibility to the tiny lumen, and swarm enhancement effects can physically disrupt the deleterious biostructures while not developing drug resistance. Magnetic urchin-like capsule robots (MUCRs) loaded with magnetic liquid metal droplets (MLMDs, antibacterial agents) are designed using natural sunflower pollen, and the therapeutic effect of swarming MUCR@MLMDs is explored for eradicating complex mixtures of bacterial biofilm within biliary stents collected from patients. The external magnetic field triggers the emergence of the microswarm and induces MLMDs to transform their shape into spheroids and rods with sharp edges. The inherent natural microspikes of MUCRs and the obtained sharp edges of MLMDs actively rupture the dense biological matrix and multiple species of embedded bacterial cells by exerting mechanical force, finally achieving synergistic biofilm eradication. The microswarm is precisely and rapidly deployed into the biliary stent via endoscopy in 10 min. Notably, fluoroscopy imaging is used to track and navigate the locomotion of microswarm in biliary stents in real-time. The microswarm has great potential for treating bacterial biofilm infections associated with medical implants.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Bacterianas , Biopelículas , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Fluoroscopía , Humanos , Fenómenos Magnéticos , Stents/microbiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of radiotherapy is frequently required in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, the margins of the tumor are often difficult to ascertain on computed tomography. Thus, EUS-guided fiducial marker insertion can aid the localization of the margins of the tumor. However, the optimal technique of the procedure is still uncertain. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all patients that received EUS-guided fiducial marker insertion between March 2015 and December 2018. All patients suffering from esophageal squamous cell carcinoma scheduled for radiotherapy underwent the procedure within one week of the scheduled appointment. Gold fiducial markers were inserted under EUS guidance either intratumorally or within the submucosa just proximal and distal to the tumor. Outcome parameters included tumor characteristics, early and late migration rates, and tumor response rates. RESULTS: During the study period, 40 patients were recruited. 10 fiducial markers were placed intratumorally and 30 markers were placed submucosally. When comparing fiducials that were placed in the submucosa versus intratumorally, significantly more fiducials had early (40% vs 0%, RR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.36, 1.00) and late migration (60% vs 0%, RR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13, 0.84) in the intratumoral group. The submucosal group had significantly more patients intended for curative intent (96.7% vs 70%, RR = 0.34, 95%CI 0.003, 0.361) and more patients with partial and complete response. There was no difference between the gross tumor volume, the clinical target volume, and the total radiation dose. CONCLUSION: In esophageal carcinomas planned for radiotherapy, fiducial markers placed in the submucosa may lead to less migration.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago , Endosonografía/métodos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Esofágicas/radioterapia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/diagnóstico por imagen , Marcadores Fiduciales , Humanos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Recent advancement in endoscopic closure techniques have revolutionized the treatment of gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas. Traditionally, these have been managed surgically. The treatment strategy depends on the size and location of the defect, degree of contamination, presence of healthy surrounding tissues, patients' condition and the availability of expertise. One of the basic principles of management includes providing a barricade to the flow of luminal contents across the defect. This can be achieved with a wide range of endoscopic techniques. These include endoclips, stenting, suturing, tissue adhesives and glue, and endoscopic vacuum therapy. Each method has their distinct indications and shortcomings. Often, a combination of these techniques is required. Apart from endoscopic closure, drainage procedures by the interventional radiologist and surgical management also play an important role. In this review article, the outcomes of each of these endoscopic closure techniques in the literature is provided in tables, and practical management algorithms are being proposed.
Asunto(s)
Fístula , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior , Fuga Anastomótica/cirugía , Endoscopía , Humanos , Stents , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: As part of an investment by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to support the Government of Bihar to improve reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health and nutrition (RMNCHN) statewide, BBC Media Action implemented multiple communication tools to support front-line worker (FLW) outreach. We analyse the impacts of a package of mHealth audio messaging and paper-based job aids used by FLWs during government-sponsored village health, sanitation and nutrition days (VHSNDs) on knowledge and practices of childbearing women across the RMNCHN continuum of care. METHODS: Data from two surveys collected between July and September 2016 were analysed using logistic regression to compare health-related knowledge and behaviours between women who had been exposed at VHSNDs to the mHealth GupShup Potli (GSP) audio recordings or interpersonal communication (IPC) tools versus those who were unexposed. RESULTS: Exposure to GSP recordings (n=2608) was associated with improved knowledge across all continuum-of-care domains, as well as improved health-related behaviours in some domains. The odds of having taken iron-folic acid (IFA) tablets were significantly higher in exposed women (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.2), as was contraceptive use (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.2). There were no differences in birth preparedness or complementary feeding practices between groups. Exposure to IPC paper-based tools (n=2002) was associated with a twofold increased odds of IFA consumption (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.7 to 3.2) and contraceptive use (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.8). Women exposed to both tools were generally at least twice as likely to subsequently discuss the messages with others. CONCLUSION: BBC Media Action's mHealth audio messaging job aids and paper-based IPC tools were associated with improved knowledge and practices of women who were exposed to them across multiple domains, suggesting their important potential for improving health outcomes for beneficiaries at scale in low-resource settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02726230.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación en Salud , Madres , Niño , Femenino , Educación en Salud , Humanos , India/epidemiología , Salud del Lactante , Recién NacidoRESUMEN
Importance: Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers, with a high mortality-to-incidence ratio. It is uncertain whether developed nations may encounter an increasing burden of gastric cancer in young adults, as occurs for other cancers. Objectives: To evaluate the incidence and mortality of gastric cancer and compare the global incidence trends between younger (<40 years) and older (≥40 years) populations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study analyzed data from global and national cancer registries, including data from 1980 to 2018, with at least 15 calendar years of incidence and mortality data. Data on age-standardized incidence and mortality rates of gastric cancer among 48 countries were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, the National Cancer Institute, the Nordic Cancer Registries, and the World Health Organization Mortality Database. The 10-year incidence trend of gastric cancer was assessed by age and sex. The 2018 GLOBOCAN database was used for reporting the global incidence and mortality of gastric cancer, the most recent data available at the time of analysis. Analyses were performed between January 10, 2020, and March 20, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The average annual percent change (AAPC) of the incidence and mortality trends as evaluated by joinpoint regression analysis. Results: A total of 1â¯033â¯701 new cases of gastric cancer and 782â¯685 related deaths were reported in 2018. Overall, the incidence of gastric cancer decreased in 29 countries, and mortality decreased in 41 countries. The age-standardized incidence of gastric cancer decreased from a range of 2.6 to 59.1 in 1980 to a range of 2.5 to 56.8 in 2018 per 100â¯000 persons. The overall age-standardized mortality rate changed from a range of 1.3 to 25.8 in 1980 to a range of 1.5 to 18.5 in 2018 per 100â¯000 persons, but increasing mortality was observed in Thailand (female: AAPC, 5.30; 95% CI, 4.38-6.23; P < .001; male: AAPC, 3.92; 95% CI, 2.14-5.74; P < .001). The incidence of gastric cancer decreased in most regions among individuals 40 years or older and increased in populations younger than 40 years in several countries, including Sweden (male: AAPC, 13.92; 95% CI, 7.16-21.11; P = .001), Ecuador (female: AAPC, 6.05; 95% CI, 1.40-10.92; P = .02), and the UK (male: AAPC, 4.27; 95% CI, 0.15-8.55; P = .04; female: AAPC, 3.60; 95% CI, 3.59-3.61; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, an increasing incidence of gastric cancer was observed in younger individuals in some countries, highlighting the need for more preventive strategies in younger populations. Future research should explore the reasons for these epidemiologic trends.
Asunto(s)
Carga Global de Enfermedades/tendencias , Salud Global/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad/tendencias , Neoplasias Gástricas/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of coronavirus transmission to healthcare workers performing aerosol-generating procedures and the potential benefits of personal protective equipment during these procedures. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched using a combination of related MeSH terms and keywords. STUDY SELECTION: Cohort studies and case controls investigating common anesthetic and critical care aerosol-generating procedures and transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to healthcare workers were included for quantitative analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative and quantitative data on the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus to healthcare workers via aerosol-generating procedures in anesthesia and critical care were collected independently. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions tool was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventeen studies out of 2,676 yielded records were included for meta-analyses. Endotracheal intubation (odds ratio, 6.69, 95% CI, 3.81-11.72; p < 0.001), noninvasive ventilation (odds ratio, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.86-7.19; p < 0.001), and administration of nebulized medications (odds ratio, 10.03; 95% CI, 1.98-50.69; p = 0.005) were found to increase the odds of healthcare workers contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The use of N95 masks (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03-0.39; p < 0.001), gowns (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.73; p < 0.001), and gloves (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29-0.53; p < 0.001) were found to be significantly protective of healthcare workers from contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. CONCLUSIONS: Specific aerosol-generating procedures are high risk for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from patients to healthcare workers. Personal protective equipment reduce the odds of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
Asunto(s)
Aerosoles , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Cuidados Críticos , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa de Paciente a Profesional/estadística & datos numéricos , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio , SARS-CoV-2 , Coronavirus Relacionado al Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Severo , Humanos , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto , Oportunidad Relativa , Equipo de Protección Personal , Factores Protectores , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a safe alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy (PT-GBD) for acute cholecystitis. How the procedure compares with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is uncertain. The aim of the current study is to compare the outcomes of EUS-GBD with LC for acute cholecystitis. METHODS: This was propensity score analysis of all patients admitted for acute cholecystitis between 2012 and 2018. Consecutive patients who received EUS-GBD or LC were included. Patients were matched for age, sex, and age-adjusted Charlson score. Outcome measurements included 30-day adverse events, mortality, recurrent cholecystitis, recurrent biliary events, reinterventions, and readmissions. RESULTS: During the study period, 60 patients were selected (30 EUS-GBD vs 30 LC) after propensity score matching. Technical success rates (100% vs 100%), clinical success rates (93.3% vs 100%, P = 1), lengths of hospital stay (6.8 [8.1] vs 5.5 [2.7], P = 1), 30-day adverse events (4 [13.3%] vs 4 [13.3%], P = 1), and mortality rates (2 [6.7%] vs 0 [0%], P = .492) were similar. The rates of recurrent biliary events (3 [10%] vs 3 [10%], P = .784), reinterventions (4 [13.3%] vs 3 [10%], P = 1), and unplanned readmissions (3 [10%] vs 3 [10%], P = .784) in 1 year were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of EUS-GBD for acute cholecystitis were comparable with LC with acceptable rates of recurrent acute cholecystitis. These results support the role of EUS-GBD as an alternative to LC in patients who may or may not be surgically fit to undergo definitive cholecystectomy.
Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía Laparoscópica , Colecistitis Aguda , Colecistitis Aguda/cirugía , Drenaje , Estudios de Seguimiento , Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Humanos , Puntaje de Propensión , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Long-term placement of lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) with high lumen apposing force may result in adverse events. The aim of the current study was to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of a self-approximating LAMS with lower lumen apposing force for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) and -gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD). METHODS: Five Asian institutions participated in this study. Consecutive patients suffering from obstructive jaundice with failed ERCP or acute cholecystitis that were at high risk for cholecystectomy were recruited. We evaluated the technical and clinical success rates, adverse events rates, types of interventions through the stent and the patency profile. RESULTS: From June 2017 to Oct 2018, a total of 53 patients received EUS-CDS (26) and EUS-GBD (27). The technical and clinical success rates were similar between the two groups (88.5% vs 88.9%, P = 1 and 88.5% vs 88.9%, P = 1 respectively). The differences in 30-day mortality rates [2 (7.7%) vs 2 (7.7%), P = 1] and adverse events [3 (11.5%) vs 3 (11.5%), P = 1] did not reach significance. Regarding long-term outcomes, two patients in each group suffered from adverse events (P = 1). One patient in the EUS-GBD group who was on direct oral anticoagulant suffered from stent induced bleeding. CONCLUSION: The self-approximating LAMS with lower lumen apposing force was effective and safe with a low risk of buried stent syndrome and bleeding in the longer term. The ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier was NCT03002051.
Asunto(s)
Drenaje , Vesícula Biliar , Conductos Biliares , Endosonografía , Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Stents , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal method of gallbladder drainage (GBD) for acute cholecystitis in nonsurgical candidates is uncertain. The aim of the current study was to conduct a network meta-analysis comparing the 3 methods of GBD (percutaneous [PT], endoscopic transpapillary [ETP], and EUS-guided). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search for all comparative studies assessing the efficacy of either 2 or all modalities used for treatment of acute cholecystitis in patients at high risk for cholecystectomy was performed. Primary outcomes of technical and clinical success and postprocedure adverse events were assessed. Secondary outcomes were reintervention, unplanned readmissions, recurrent cholecystitis, and mortality. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified, comprising 1267 patients (472 EUS-GBD, 493 PT-GBD, and 302 ETP-GBD). In the network ranking estimate, PT-GBD and EUS-GBD had the highest likelihood of technical success (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 2.00 vs 1.02 vs 2.98) and clinical success (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.48 vs 1.55 vs 2.98). EUS-GBD had the lowest risk of recurrent cholecystitis (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.089 vs 2.02 vs 2.891). PT-GBD had the highest risk of reintervention (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.81 vs 2.99 vs 1.199) and unplanned readmissions (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.582 vs 2.944 vs 1.474), whereas ETP-GBD was associated with the lowest rates of mortality (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 2.62 vs 2.09 vs 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: The 3 modalities of GBD have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Selection of technique will depend on available expertise. In centers with expertise in endoscopic GBD, the techniques are preferred over PT-GBD with improved outcomes. (Clinical trial registration number: CRD42020181972.).