Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) Versus Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background and aim Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is the gold standard approach for the treatment of encapsulated pancreatic collections (EPCs) including pseudocyst and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), and is associated with an equivalent clinical efficacy to surgical drainage with fewer complications and less morbidity. Drainage may be achieved via several types of stents including a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS). However, to date there have been no randomized trials to compare these devices. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the SEMS versus LAMS for EUS-guided drainage of EPCs. Methods A phase IIB randomized trial was designed to compare the SEMS versus LAMS for the treatment of EPCs. Technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and procedure time were evaluated. A sample size of 42 patients was determined. Results There was no difference between the two groups in technical (LAMS 80.95% vs 100% SEMS, p=0.107), clinical (LAMS 85.71% vs 95.24% SEMS, p=0.606) or radiological success (LAMS 92.86% vs 83.33% SEMS, p=0.613). There was no difference in AEs including stent migration rate and mortality. The procedure time was longer in the LAMS group (mean time 43.81 min versus 24.43 min, p=0.001). There was also a difference in the number of intra-procedure complications (5 LAMS vs 0 SEMS, p=0.048). Conclusion SEMS and LAMS have similar technical, clinical, and radiological success as well as AEs. However, SEMS has a shorter procedure time and fewer intra-procedure complications compared to non-electrocautery-enhanced LAMS in this phase IIB randomized controlled trial (RCT). The choice of the type of stent used for EUS drainage of EPCs should consider device availability, costs, and personal and local experience.

Effects of intragastric balloon placement in metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease corresponds to a clinical entity that affects liver function triggered by the accumulation of fat in the liver and is linked with metabolic dysregulation. AIM: To evaluate the effects of the intragastric balloon (IGB) in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease through the assessment of liver enzymes, imaging and several metabolic markers. METHODS: A comprehensive search was done of multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Cochrane and Google Scholar) and grey literature from their inception until February 2021. Inclusion criteria involved patients with a body mass index > 25 kg/m2 with evidence or previous diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. Outcomes analyzed before and after 6 mo of IGB removal were alanine aminotransferase (IU/L), gamma-glutamyltransferase (IU/L), glycated hemoglobin (%), triglycerides (mg/dL), systolic blood pressure (mmHg), homeostatic model assessment, abdominal circumference (cm), body mass index (kg/m2) and liver volume (cm3). RESULTS: Ten retrospective cohort studies evaluating a total of 508 patients were included. After 6 mo of IGB placement, this significantly reduced alanine aminotransferase [mean difference (MD): 10.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.12-12.3], gamma-glutamyltransferase (MD: 9.41, 95%CI: 6.94-11.88), glycated hemoglobin (MD: 0.17%, 95%CI: 0.03-0.31), triglycerides (MD: 38.58, 95%CI: 26.65-50.51), systolic pressure (MD: 7.27, 95%CI: 4.79-9.76), homeostatic model assessment (MD: 2.23%, 95%CI: 1.41-3.04), abdominal circumference (MD: 12.12, 95%CI: 9.82-14.41) and body mass index (MD: 5.07, 95%CI: 4.21-5.94). CONCLUSION: IGB placement showed significant efficacy in improving alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyltransferase levels in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease as well as improving metabolic markers related to disease progression.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography drainage for palliation of malignant hilar biliary obstruction - stent-in-stent or side-by-side? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biliary drainage, either by the stent-in-stent (SIS) or side-by-side (SBS) technique, is often required when treating a malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). Both methods differ from each other and have distinct advantages. AIM: To compare both techniques regarding their efficacy and safety in achieving drainage of MHBO. METHODS: A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIREME, Cochrane) was conducted and grey literature from their inception until December 2020 with no restrictions regarding the year of publication or language, since there was at least an abstract in English. The included studies compared SIS and SBS techniques through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Outcomes analyzed included technical and clinical success, early and late adverse events (AEs), stent patency, reintervention, and procedure-related mortality. RESULTS: Four cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial evaluating a total of 250 patients (127 in the SIS group and 123 in the SBS group) were included in this study. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups concerning the evaluated outcomes, except for stent patency, which was higher in the SIS compared with the SBS technique [mean difference (d) = 33.31; 95% confidence interval: 9.73 to 56.90, I 2 = 45%, P = 0.006]. CONCLUSION: The SIS method showed superior stent patency when compared to SBS for achieving bilateral drainage in MHBO. Both techniques are equivalent in terms of technical success, clinical success, rates of both early and late AEs, reintervention, and procedure-related mortality.