Risk of Bleeding with Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition in Patients on Antithrombotic Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The present guidelines stratify endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) as a high-bleeding risk procedure in patients on antithrombotics. However, the data regarding the same are conflicting. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to analyze the bleeding event rates associated with EUS-TA in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. METHODS: A literature search from January 2000 to August 2022 was done for studies on EUS-guided TA in patients receiving antithrombotics. The primary outcome was incidence of overall and major bleeding. Pooled event rates across studies were expressed with summative statistics. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled risk of overall bleeding and major bleeding in patients on antithrombotics was 2.0% (0.6-3.4) and 0.8% (0.0-1.6), respectively. In patients taking thienopyridine or anticoagulants, the pooled risk of overall bleeding and major bleeding was 2.4% (0.9-3.9) and 1.7% (0.4-3.1), respectively. Patients on antithrombotics had a higher odd of overall bleeding (OR 2.12, 1.20-3.83) and major bleeding (OR 3.58, 1.11-11.52) compared to controls. The odds of overall bleeding (OR 0.95, 95%CI 0.38-2.42) and major bleeding (OR 1.57, 95%CI 0.45-5.54) were comparable between patients on antithrombotics who continued and those who discontinued it preprocedural. CONCLUSION: Despite an increase risk of bleeding with EUS-TA in patients on antithrombotics, the pooled incidence remains low. Compared to the previous guidelines stating thienopyridine use as high risk for bleeding, the present analysis showed a bleeding rate of less than 1%. Discontinuing antithrombotics prior to EUS-TA does not reduce the bleeding risk significantly, requiring strict monitoring.

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Both endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) are used for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis (CDL). Previous studies have shown conflicting results regarding the optimal diagnostic strategy for suspected CDL; hence, this meta-analysis was conducted. METHODS: A comprehensive search of literature from 1990 till April 2022 was done of three databases for studies comparing EUS and MRCP to diagnose CDL. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for EUS were 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-0.98], and 0.92 (95% CI 0.85-0.96), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for MRCP were 0.85 (95% CI 0.78-0.90) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.79-0.96), respectively. EUS had a higher relative sensitivity [Relative risk (RR) 1.12, 95% CI 1.05-1.19], a higher diagnostic accuracy (Odds ratio 1.98, 95% CI 1.35-2.90) but comparable specificity (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96-1.08) with MRCP. CONCLUSION: There is little difference concerning specificity, although EUS likely provides a higher sensitivity and accuracy for diagnosing CDL, compared to MRCP.

Prevalence of hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The data on the prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are conflicting. The present systematic review was thus conducted to study the prevalence of HBV and HCV markers in patients with IBD. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of 3 databases was conducted from 2000 to April 2022 for studies evaluating the prevalence of HBV or HCV in patients with IBD. Pooled prevalence rates across studies were expressed with summative statistics. RESULTS: A total of 34 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibodies were 3.3% and 14.2%, respectively. In HBsAg positive IBD patients, hepatitis B e antigen positivity and detectable HBV DNA were seen in 15.3% and 61.0% of patients, respectively. Only 35.6% of the IBD patients had effective HBV vaccination. The pooled prevalence of anti-HCV and detectable HCV RNA were 1.8% and 0.8%, respectively. The pooled prevalence of markers of HBV infection was higher in Asian studies, while the prevalence of markers of HCV infection was higher in European studies. The prevalence of viral hepatitis markers was similar between IBD patients and the general population and that between ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of markers of viral hepatitis remains same as the general population with significant regional variations, although the quality of evidence remains low due to publication bias. Only a small proportion of IBD patients had an effective HBV vaccination, requiring improvement in screening and vaccination practices.