Pure cut vs. Endocut in endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Background and study aims Biliary sphincterotomy is a crucial step in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a procedure known to carry a 5% to 10% risk of complications. The relationship between Pure cut, Endocut, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and bleeding is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared these two current types and their relationships with adverse events. Patients and methods This systematic review involved searching articles in multiple databases until August 2023 comparing pure cut versus Endocut in biliary sphincterotomy. The meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Results A total of 987 patients from four randomized controlled trials were included. Overall pancreatitis: A higher risk of pancreatitis was found in the Endocut group than in the Pure cut group ( P =0.001, RD=0.04 [range, 0.01 to 0.06]; I 2 =29%). Overall immediate bleeding: Statistical significance was found to favor Endocut, ( P =0.05; RD=-0.15 [range, -0.29 to -0.00]; I 2 =93%). No statistical significance between current modes was found in immediate bleeding without endoscopic intervention ( P =0.10; RD=-0.13 [range, -0.29 to 0.02]; I 2 =88%), immediate bleeding with endoscopic intervention ( P =0.06; RD=-0.07 [range, -0.14 to 0.00]; I 2 =76%), delayed bleeding (P=0.40; RD=0.01 [range, -0.02 to 0.05]; I 2 =72%), zipper cut ( P =0.58; RD=-0.03 [range, -0.16 to 0.09]; I 2 =97%), perforation ( P =1.00; RD=0.00 [range, -0.01 to 0.01]; I 2 =0%) and cholangitis ( P =0.77; RD=0.00 [range, -0.01 to 0.02]; I 2 =29%). Conclusions The available data in the literature show that Endocut carries an increased risk for PEP and does not prevent delayed or clinically significant bleeding, although it prevents intraprocedural bleeding. Based on such findings, Pure cut should be the preferred electric current mode for biliary sphincterotomy.

Correction: Intraductal radiofrequency ablation plus biliary stent versus stent alone for malignant biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-2204-8316.].

Intraductal radiofrequency ablation plus biliary stent versus stent alone for malignant biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and study aims Recurrent biliary stent occlusion and tumor ingrowth remain a major concern among patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) with significant impact on patient morbidity and survival. Intraductal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has emerged as a promising treatment that seeks to extend stent patency. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of RFA on overall survival (OS) and stent patency among patients with unresectable MBO. Methods A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA plus biliary stent (RFA+S) versus biliary stent alone (S-alone). Outcomes assessed included overall survival, stent patency, and adverse events (AEs) with mean difference (MD) calculated from pooled proportions. Subgroup analyses were performed for hilar strictures and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Results Six RCTs (n=439 patients) were included and demonstrated improved survival among patients who received RFA+S (MD 85.80 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35.02-136.58; I 2 =97%; P <0.0009). The pooled MD for total stent patency was 22.25 days (95% CI 17.38-61.87; I 2 =97%; P =0.27). There was no difference in AEs between RFA+S vs S-alone ( P >0.05). On subgroup analyses, RFA+S was associated with improved stent patency (MD 76.73 days; 95% CI 50.11-103.34; I 2 =67%; P <0.01) and OS (MD 83.14 (95% CI 29.52-136.77; I 2 =97%; P <0.01] for CCA. For hilar strictures, stent patency was improved among patients with RFA+S [MD 83.71 days (95% CI 24.85-142.56; I 2 =84%; P <0.01]. Conclusions RFA+S improved OS in the treatment of MBO when compared with S-alone. Moreover, the RFA therapy prolonged stent patency in hilar strictures and CCA, with similar rates of AEs.

Pure Cut or Endocut for Biliary Sphincterotomy? A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse events (AE) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are not uncommon and post-ERCP acute pancreatitis (PEP) is the most important one. Thermal injury from biliary sphincterotomy may play an important role and trigger PEP or bleeding. Therefore, this study evaluated the outcomes of 2 electric current modes used during biliary sphincterotomy. METHODS: From October 2019 to August 2021, consecutive patients with native papilla undergoing ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy were randomized to either the pure cut or endocut after cannulation. The primary outcome was PEP incidence. Secondary outcomes included intraprocedural and delayed bleeding, infection, and perforation. RESULTS: A total of 550 patients were randomized (272 pure cut and 278 endocut). The overall PEP rate was 4.0% and significantly higher in the endocut group (5.8% vs 2.2%, P = 0.034). Univariate analysis revealed >5 attempts ( P = 0.004) and endocut mode ( P = 0.034) as risk factors for PEP. Multivariate analysis revealed >5 attempts ( P = 0.005) and a trend for endocut mode as risk factors for PEP ( P = 0.052). Intraprocedural bleeding occurred more often with pure cut ( P = 0.018), but all cases were controlled endoscopically during the ERCP. Delayed bleeding was more frequent with endocut ( P = 0.047). There was no difference in perforation ( P = 1.0) or infection ( P = 0.4999) between the groups. DISCUSSION: Endocut mode may increase thermal injury leading to higher rates of PEP and delayed bleeding, whereas pure cut is associated with increased intraprocedural bleeding without clinical repercussion. The electric current mode is not related to perforation or infection. Further RCT assessing the impact of electric current on AE with overlapping preventive measures such as rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and hyperhydration are needed. The study was submitted to the Brazilian Clinical Trials Platform ( http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br ) under the registry number RBR-5d27tn.

Diagnosis and Endoscopic Treatment of Hemobilia Due to Biliary Angiodysplasia: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Hemobilia is described as bleeding from the intra- or extrahepatic biliary tree expressed through the major duodenal papilla into the duodenum, with angiodysplasia of the major biliary duct as a rare etiological factor with few cases reported in the literature. Cholangioscopy plays a pivotal role in diagnosing and making therapeutic decisions regarding biliary tract lesions. We report a case of the diagnosis and treatment of hemobilia secondary to bleeding from angiodysplasia of the major biliary duct, which was resolved after the placement of a fully covered metallic stent, with a review of the literature.

Biliary drainage in inoperable malignant biliary distal obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic drainage remains the treatment of choice for unresectable or inoperable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of plastic stent (PS) vs self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement for treatment of MDBO. METHODS: This meta-analysis was developed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and grey literature to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing clinical success, adverse events, stent dysfunction rate, reintervention rate, duration of stent patency, and mean survival. Risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 statistic. Subgroup analyses were performed by SEMS type. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were included in this study, totaling 1005 patients. There was no difference in clinical success (RD = -0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.01, 0.07; I 2 = 0%), rate of adverse events (RD = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.10, 0.03; I 2 = 57%), and mean patient survival (MD = -0.63, 95%CI: -18.07, 19.33; I 2 = 54%) between SEMS vs PS placement. However, SEMS placement was associated with a lower rate of reintervention (RD = -0.34, 95%CI: -0.46, -0.22; I 2 = 57%) and longer duration of stent patency (MD = 125.77 d, 95%CI: 77.5, 174.01). Subgroup analyses revealed both covered and uncovered SEMS improved stent patency compared to PS (RD = 152.25, 95%CI: 37.42, 267.07; I 2 = 98% and RD = 101.5, 95%CI: 38.91, 164.09; I 2 = 98%; respectively). Stent dysfunction was higher in the covered SEMS group (RD = -0.21, 95%CI: -0.32, -0.1; I² = 205%), with no difference in the uncovered SEMS group (RD = -0.08, 95%CI: -0.56, 0.39; I² = 87%). CONCLUSION: While both stent types possessed a similar clinical success rate, complication rate, and patient-associated mean survival for treatment of MDBO, SEMS were associated with a longer duration of stent patency compared to PS.

Adverse Events and Complications with Intragastric Balloons: a Narrative Review (with Video).

Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a minimally invasive and reversible therapy for weight loss with a good efficacy and safety profile. Introduced in the 1980s, IGBs have significantly evolved in the last couple of decades. They mechanically act by decreasing the volume of the stomach and its reservoir capacity, delaying gastric emptying, and increasing satiety leading to a subsequent weight loss. Despite the low rates of complications and mortality associated with IGBs, adverse events and complications still occur and can range from mild to fatal. This review aims to provide an update on the current scientific evidence in regard to complications and adverse effects of the use of the IGB and its treatment. This is the first comprehensive narrative review in the literature dedicated to this subject.

Laparoscopic SpyGlass cholangioscopy evaluation during bilioenteric anastomosis for hepatolithiasis, a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Careful evaluation of intrahepatic injury of biliary tract diseases is crucial to assure proper management and estimate disease prognosis. Hepatholithiasis is a rare condition that can be associated to cholestatic liver diseases. Additional tools to improve diagnosis and patient care are of great interest specially if associated to decreased morbidity. Recently the spread of single-operator platforms of cholangioscopy brought this procedure back to scene. Our aim was to identify safety, feasibility and utility of SpyGlass cholangioscopy of biliary tract during laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 53 years-old man with hepatolithiasis associated to choledolithiasis under treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid and fenofibrate for 8 months, was submitted to laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy with cholangioscopy for biliary duct evaluation. Spyscope was inserted through a right lateral laparoscopic trocar entering the common bile duct. Examination of intra-hepatic bile ducts showed injury of right biliary. Few microcalculi were visualized. Left biliary ducts presented normal mucosa. Histopathological examination showed a chronic inflammatory process. During the procedure contrasted radiologic images were performed to assure Spyscope location. Following cholangioscopy evaluation, a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy was performed. To enlarge hepatic duct, a small longitudinal incision was made, and a PDS-5.0 running suture was used for bilioenteric anastomosis. Patient was discharged on postoperative day 6, with drain removal on day 20. CONCLUSION: SpyGlass cholangioscopy during laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy is feasible leading to minimal additional invasion of the surgical. In this case the method was performed safely, providing detailed examination of injured biliary ducts, adding elements to determine disease prognosis and patient care.

Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones has a high success rate ranging from 85% to 95%. Bile duct stones >15 mm are difficult and frequently require lithotripsy. Peroral cholangioscopy (POC) allows lithotripsy with similar success rates. AIM: To determine the efficacy and safety of cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy used in the treatment of difficult to remove bile duct stones vs. conventional therapy. METHODS: Search was based in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme. Studies enrolling patients referred for the removal of difficult bile duct stones via POC were considered eligible. Two analyses were carried out separately, one included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and another observational studies. RESULTS: Forty-six studies were selected (3 RTC and 43 observational). In the analysis there was no statistical significant difference between successful endoscopic clearance (RD=-0.02 CI: -0.17, 0.12/I²=0%), mean fluoroscopy time (MD=-0.14 CI -1.60, 1.32/I²=21%) and adverse events rates (RD=-0.06 CI: -0.14, 0.02/I²=0%), by contrast, the mean procedure time favored conventional therapy with statistical significance (MD=27.89 CI: 16.68, 39.10/I²=0%). In observational studies, the successful endoscopic clearance rate was 88.29% (CI95: 86.9%-90.7%), the first session successful endoscopic clearance rate was 72.7 % (CI95: 69.9%-75.3%), the mean procedure time was 47.50±6 min for session and the number of sessions to clear bile duct was 1.5±0.18. The adverse event rate was 8.7% (CI95: 7%-10.9%). CONCLUSIONS: For complex common bile duct stones, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy has a success rate that is similar to traditional ERCP techniques in terms of therapeutic success, adverse event rate and means fluoroscopy time. Conventional ERCP methods have a shorter mean procedure time.

Impact of coronavirus pandemic crisis in endoscopic clinical practice: Results from a national survey in Brazil.

Background and study aims In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic, mobilizing all countries to contain the disease spread. Activity in endoscopy centers globally was severely affected. We conducted a national survey aiming to assess the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on endoscopic clinical practice in Brazil. Methods In April 2020, 3,719 associate members of SOBED (Brazilian Society of Digestive Endoscopy) were invited to respond to an electronic survey. An Internet link was established to provide access to the online questionnaire with 40 questions regarding personal profile, endoscopy unit logistics and schedule, availability and use of personal protective equipment (PPE), financial impact, and exposure to COVID-19. Results A total of 2,131 individuals (67 %) accessed the questionnaire and 1155 responses were received. After review, 980 responses were considered valid. According to almost 90 % of respondents, endoscopy activity was restricted to urgent procedures, in both public and private hospitals. All respondents increased PPE use after the outbreak, however, institutions provided adequate PPE to only 278 responders (28.7 %). Significant income loss was universally reported. A total of 10 practitioners (1 %) reported COVID-19 infection and attributed the contamination to endoscopic procedures. Conclusions Based on this nationwide survey with almost 1,000 respondents, the COVID-19 pandemic substantially reduced the activity of endoscopy units in private and public settings. The pandemic increased awareness of PPE use, but its availability was not universal and 1 % of the respondents became infected with COVID-19, allegedly due to exposure during endoscopic procedures.

Approach to Endoscopic Procedures: A Routine Protocol from a Quaternary University Referral Center Exclusively for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The present coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has ushered in an unprecedented era of quality control that has necessitated advanced safety precautions and the need to ensure the adequate protection of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Endoscopy units, endoscopists, and other HCP may be at a significant risk for transmission of the virus. Given the immense burden on the healthcare system and surge in the number of patients with COVID-19, well-designed protocols and recommendations are needed. We aimed to systematically characterize our approach to endoscopic procedures in a quaternary university hospital setting and provide summary protocol recommendations. METHOD: This descriptive study details a COVID-19-specific protocol designed to minimize infection risks to patients and healthcare workers in the endoscopy unit. RESULTS: Our institution, located in São Paulo, Brazil, includes a 900-bed hospital, with a 200-bed-specific intensive care unit exclusively designed for patients with moderate and severe COVID-19. We highlighted recommendations for infection prevention and control during endoscopic procedures, including appropriate triage and screening, outpatient management and procedural recommendations, role and usage of personal protective equipment (PPE), and role and procedural logistics involving COVID-19-positive patients. We also detailed hospital protocols for reprocessing endoscopes and cleaning rooms and also provided recommendations to minimize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission. CONCLUSION: This COVID-19-specific administrative and clinical protocol can be replicated or adapted in multiple institutions and endoscopy units worldwide. Furthermore, the recommendations and summary protocol may improve patient and HCP safety in these trying times.

Efficacy of digital single-operator cholangioscopy in the visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Indeterminate biliary strictures remain a significant diagnostic challenge. Digital single-operator cholangioscopy (D-SOC) incorporates digital imaging which enables higher resolution for better visualization and diagnosis of biliary pathology. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature in an attempt to determine the efficacy of D-SOC in the visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. All D-SOC studies that reported the diagnostic performance in visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures and biliary malignancies were included. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. All data were extracted and pooled to construct a 2 × 2 table. The visual interpretation of D-SOC was compared to resected surgical specimens or clinical follow-up in the included patients. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, prevalence, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood ratio (-LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) were calculated. The summarized receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve corresponding with the area under the curve (AUC) was also analyzed. RESULTS: The search yielded 465 citations. Of these, only six studies with a total of 283 procedures met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of D-SOC in the visual interpretation of biliary malignancies was 94% (95% CI 89-97) and 95% (95%CI 90-98), respectively, while +LR, -LR, diagnostic OR, and AUC were 15.20 (95%CI 5.21-44.33), 0.08 (95%CI 0.04-0.14), 308.83 (95%CI 106.46-872.82), and 0.983, respectively. The heterogeneity among 6 included studies was moderate for specificity (I2 = 0.51) and low for sensitivity (I2 = 0.17) and diagnostic OR (I2 = 0.00). CONCLUSION: D-SOC is associated with high sensitivity and specificity in the visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures and malignancies. D-SOC should be considered routinely in the diagnostic workup of indeterminate biliary lesions.

Adverse events after biliary sphincterotomy: Does the electric current mode make a difference? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Biliary sphincterotomy is an invasive method that allows access to the bile ducts, however, this procedure is not exempt of complications. Studies in the literature indicate that the mode of electric current used for sphincterotomy may carry different incidences of adverse events such as pancreatitis, hemorrhage, perforation, and cholangitis. AIM: To evaluate the safety of different modes of electrical current during biliary sphincterotomy based on incidence of adverse events. METHODS: We searched articles for this systematic review in Medline, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, Lilacs, and gray literature from inception to September 2019. Data from studies describing different types of electric current were meta-analyzed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The following electric current modalities were evaluated: endocut, blend, pure cut, pure cut followed by blend, monopolar, and bipolar. RESULTS: A total of 1791 patients from 11 randomized clinical trials evaluating the following comparisons: 1. Endocut vs Blend: No statistical difference in the incidence of bleeding (7% vs 13.4%; RD: -0.11 [-0.31, 0.08], P=0.27, I2=86%), pancreatitis (4.4% vs 3.5%; RD: 0.01 [-0.03, 0.04], P=0.62, I2=48%) and perforation (absence of cases in both arms). 2. Endocut vs Pure cut: Higher incidence of mild bleeding (without drop in hemoglobin levels, clinical repercussion or need for endoscopic intervention) in the pure cut group (9.2% vs 28.8%; RD: -0.19 [-0.27, -0.12], P<0.00001, I2=0%). No statistical difference regarding pancreatitis (5.2% vs 0.9%; RD: 0.05 [-0.01, 0.11], P=0.12, I2=57%), perforation (0.4% vs 0%; RD: 0.00 [-0.01, 0.02], P=0.7, I2=0%) or cholangitis (1.8% vs 3.2%; RD: -0.01 [-0.09, 0.06], P=0,7). 3. Pure cut vs blend: higher incidence of mild bleeding in the pure cut group (40.4% vs 16.7%; RD: 0.24 [0.15, 0.33], P<0.00001, I2=0%). No statistical difference concerning incidence of pancreatitis or cholangitis. 4. Pure cut vs Pure cut followed by Blend: No statistical difference regarding incidence of bleeding (22.5% vs 11.7%; RD: -0.10 [-0.24, 0.04], P=0.18, I2=61%) and pancreatitis (8.9% vs 14.8%; RD 0.06 [-0.02, 0.13], P=0.12, I2=0%). 5. Blend vs pure cut followed by blend: no statistical difference regarding incidence of bleeding and pancreatitis (11.3% vs 10.4%; RD -0.01 [-0.11, 0.09], P=0.82, I2=0%). 6. Monopolar vs bipolar: higher incidence of pancreatitis in the monopolar mode group (12% vs 0%; RD 0.12 [0.02, 0.22], P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Pure cut carries higher incidences of mild bleeding compared to endocut and blend. However, this modality might present a lower incidence of pancreatitis. The monopolar mode elicits higher rates of pancreatitis in comparison with the bipolar mode. There is no difference in incidence of cholangitis or perforation between different types of electric current. There is a lack of evidence in the literature to recommend one method over the others, therefore new studies are warranted. As there is no perfect electric current mode, the choice in clinical practice must be based on the patient risk factors.

Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis / Litotripsia guiada por colangioscopia vs. terapias convencionais no tratamento da litíase biliar complexa: revisão sistemática e metanálise

ABSTRACT Introduction: Endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones has a high success rate ranging from 85% to 95%. Bile duct stones >15 mm are difficult and frequently require lithotripsy. Peroral cholangioscopy (POC) allows lithotripsy with similar success rates. Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy used in the treatment of difficult to remove bile duct stones vs. conventional therapy. Methods: Search was based in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme. Studies enrolling patients referred for the removal of difficult bile duct stones via POC were considered eligible. Two analyses were carried out separately, one included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and another observational studies. Results: Forty-six studies were selected (3 RTC and 43 observational). In the analysis there was no statistical significant difference between successful endoscopic clearance (RD=-0.02 CI: -0.17, 0.12/I²=0%), mean fluoroscopy time (MD=-0.14 CI -1.60, 1.32/I²=21%) and adverse events rates (RD=-0.06 CI: -0.14, 0.02/I²=0%), by contrast, the mean procedure time favored conventional therapy with statistical significance (MD=27.89 CI: 16.68, 39.10/I²=0%). In observational studies, the successful endoscopic clearance rate was 88.29% (CI95: 86.9%-90.7%), the first session successful endoscopic clearance rate was 72.7 % (CI95: 69.9%-75.3%), the mean procedure time was 47.50±6 min for session and the number of sessions to clear bile duct was 1.5±0.18. The adverse event rate was 8.7% (CI95: 7%-10.9%). Conclusions: For complex common bile duct stones, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy has a success rate that is similar to traditional ERCP techniques in terms of therapeutic success, adverse event rate and means fluoroscopy time. Conventional ERCP methods have a shorter mean procedure time.

RESUMO Introdução: A remoção endoscópica das litíases do ducto biliar comum tem alta taxa de sucesso variando de 85% a 95%. Litíases do ducto biliar >15 mm são difíceis e frequentemente requerem litotripsia. A colangioscopia peroral permite litotripsia com taxas de sucesso semelhantes. Objetivo: Determinar a eficácia e segurança da litotripsia guiada por colangioscopia no tratamento de litíases biliares difíceis em comparação à terapias convencionais guiadas por colangiopancreatografia retrógrada endoscópica. Método: Pesquisa na Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme de estudos avaliando a eficácia da colangioscopia na remoção de cálculos biliares difíceis. Duas análises foram realizadas separadamente, uma incluiu ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR) e outros estudos observacionais. Resultados: Quarenta e seis estudos foram selecionados (3 ECR e 43 observacionais). Na análise, não houve diferença estatisticamente significativa na taxa de extração litiásica total (RD=-0,02 IC: -0,17,0,12/I²=0%), tempo médio de fluoroscopia (MD=-0,14 CI -1,60, 1,32/I²=21%) e na taxa de eventos adversos (RD=-0,06 IC: -0,14, 0,02/I²=0%).Por outro lado, o tempo médio do procedimento favoreceu terapêuticas convencionais guiadas por CPRE com significância estatística (MD=27,89 IC: 16,68, 39,10/I²=0%). Nos estudos observacionais, a taxa do tratamento completo por endoscopia foi de 88,29% (IC95: 86,9% a 90,7%), a taxa de sucesso na primeira sessão foi de 72,7% (IC95: 69,9% a 75,3%), o tempo médio do procedimento foi de 47,50±6 min por sessão e o número de procedimentos necessários para remoção total da litíase foi de 1,5±0,18. A taxa de eventos adversos foi de 8,7% (IC95: 7% a 10,9%), com 0,5% considerado como severo. Conclusão: Para litíases biliares difíceis, a litotripsia guiada por colangioscopia tem taxa de sucesso semelhante às terapêuticas convencionais guiadas CPRE em termos de sucesso terapêutico, taxa de eventos adversos e tempo de fluoroscopia. As terapêuticas convencionais guiadas por CPRE têm tempo médio de procedimento menor.

Approach to endoscopic procedures: a routine protocol from a quaternary university referral center exclusively for coronavirus disease 2019 patients

OBJECTIVES: The present coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has ushered in an unprecedented era of quality control that has necessitated advanced safety precautions and the need to ensure the adequate protection of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Endoscopy units, endoscopists, and other HCP may be at a significant risk for transmission of the virus. Given the immense burden on the healthcare system and surge in the number of patients with COVID-19, well-designed protocols and recommendations are needed. We aimed to systematically characterize our approach to endoscopic procedures in a quaternary university hospital setting and provide summary protocol recommendations. METHOD: This descriptive study details a COVID-19-specific protocol designed to minimize infection risks to patients and healthcare workers in the endoscopy unit. RESULTS: Our institution, located in São Paulo, Brazil, includes a 900-bed hospital, with a 200-bed-specific intensive care unit exclusively designed for patients with moderate and severe COVID-19. We highlighted recommendations for infection prevention and control during endoscopic procedures, including appropriate triage and screening, outpatient management and procedural recommendations, role and usage of personal protective equipment (PPE), and role and procedural logistics involving COVID-19-positive patients. We also detailed hospital protocols for reprocessing endoscopes and cleaning rooms and also provided recommendations to minimize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission. CONCLUSION: This COVID-19-specific administrative and clinical protocol can be replicated or adapted in multiple institutions and endoscopy units worldwide. Furthermore, the recommendations and summary protocol may improve patient and HCP safety in these trying times.

Cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection for refractory post liver transplant anastomotic strictures: a rescue case series.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Post liver transplant biliary anastomotic strictures have traditionally been treated with balloon dilation and multiple plastic stents. Fully covered self-expandable metallic stents may be used as an initial alternative or after multiple plastic stents failure. Refractory strictures can occur in 10-22% and require revisional surgery. Alternatively, cholangioscopy allows direct visualization and therapeutic approaches. We aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of balloon dilation combined with cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection for the treatment of refractory anastomotic biliary strictures. METHODS: Three post-orthotopic liver transplant patients who failed standard treatment of their biliary anastomotic strictures underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with balloon dilation followed by cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection at a tertiary care center. Patients had follow-up with images and laboratorial tests to evaluate for residual stricture. RESULTS: Technical success of balloon dilation + cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection was achieved in all patients. Cholangioscopy permitted accurate evaluation of bile ducts and precise localization for steroid injection. No adverse events occurred. Mean follow-up was 26 months. Two patients are stent free and remain well in follow-up, with no signs of biliary obstruction. No further therapeutic endoscopic procedures or revisional surgery were required. One patient did not respond to balloon dilation + cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection after 11 months of follow-up and required repeat balloon dilation of new strictures above the anastomosis. CONCLUSION: Cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection combined with balloon dilation in the treatment of refractory post liver transplant strictures is feasible and safe. This method may be used as a rescue alternative before surgical approach. Randomized controlled trials comparing balloon dilation + cholangioscopy-guided steroid injection to fully covered self-expandable metallic stents are needed to determine the role of this treatment for anastomotic biliary strictures.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO. AIM: To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO. METHODS: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS: The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I 2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of -0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I 2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I 2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I 2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I 2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.