Dye Chromoendoscopy Outperforms High-Definition White Light Endoscopy in Dysplasia Detection for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Whether dye spray chromoendoscopy (DCE) adds value in surveillance colonoscopy with high-definition (HD) scopes remains controversial. This updated meta-analysis compares dysplasia detection using DCE and high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing HD-WLE and DCE in patients with IBD. The primary outcome was to compare the proportion of patients with at least 1 dysplastic lesion detected by DCE vs HD-WLE. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using the random-effects model, with I2 > 60% indicating substantial heterogeneity. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence (CoE). RESULTS: Six RCT involving 978 patients were analyzed (DCE = 479 vs HD-WLE = 499 patients). DCE detected significantly more patients with dysplasia than HD-WLE (18.8% vs 9.4%), OR 1.94 (95% CI 1.21-3.11, I2 = 28%, P = 0.006, high CoE). This remained significant after excluding 2 RCT published as abstracts. A sensitivity analysis excluding a noninferiority RCT with a single experienced operator eliminated the results' heterogeneity, OR 2.46 (95% CI 1.56-3.90, I2 = 0%). Although high-grade dysplasia detection was numerically higher in the DCE group (2.8% vs 1.1%), the difference was statistically insignificant, OR 2.21 (95% CI 0.64-7.62, I2 = 0%, low CoE). DISCUSSION: Our updated meta-analysis supports DCE as a superior strategy in overall dysplasia detection in IBD, even with HD scopes. When expertise is available, DCE should be considered for surveillance colonoscopy in patients with high-risk IBD, with the acknowledgment that virtual chromoendoscopy shows equivalence in recent studies. Further multicenter trials with multiple endoscopists with varying expertise levels and longer-term outcome data showing a reduction in cancer or cancer-related death are needed.

Early Diagnostic Paracentesis Improves Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients with Cirrhosis and Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Diagnostic paracentesis is recommended for patients with cirrhosis admitted to the hospital, but adherence is suboptimal with unclear impact on clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the outcomes of early vs. delayed diagnostic paracentesis among hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites. METHODS: We searched multiple databases for studies comparing early vs. delayed diagnostic paracentesis among hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with confidence intervals (CI) for proportional and continuous variables were calculated using the random-effects model. Early diagnostic paracentesis was defined as receiving diagnostic paracentesis within 12-24 hours of admission. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were length-of-hospital-stay (LOS), acute kidney injury (AKI), and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Seven studies (n=78,744) (n=45,533 early vs. n=33,211 delayed diagnostic paracentesis) were included. Early diagnostic paracentesis was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.82, P=0.001), LOS (MD -4.85 days; 95% CI -6.45, -3.20; P<0.001), and AKI (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.92, P=0.02) compared to delayed diagnostic paracentesis, with similar 30-day readmission (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.52-2.39, P=0.79). Subgroup analysis revealed consistent results for in-hospital mortality whether early diagnostic paracentesis performed within 12 hours (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.79, P=0.003, I2=0%) or within 24 hours of admission (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, P=0.04, I2=82%). Notably, the mortality OR was numerically lower when diagnostic paracentesis was performed within 12 hours, and the results were precise and homogenous (I2=0%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that early diagnostic paracentesis is associated with better patient outcomes. Early diagnostic paracentesis within 12 hours of admission may be associated with the greatest mortality benefit. Data from large-scale randomized trials are needed to validate our findings, especially if there is a greater mortality benefit for early diagnostic paracentesis within 12 hours.

Plasma exchange for acute and acute-on-chronic liver failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Plasma exchange (PE) is a promising therapeutic option in patients with acute liver failure (ALF) and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). However, the impact of PE on patient survival in these syndromes is unclear. We aimed to systematically investigate the use of PE in patients with ALF and ACLF compared with standard medical therapy (SMT). We searched PubMed/Embase/Cochrane databases to include all studies comparing PE versus SMT for patients ≥ 18 years of age with ALF and ACLF. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. The primary outcome was 30-day survival for ACLF and ALF. Secondary outcomes were overall and 90-day survival for ALF and ACLF, respectively. Five studies, including 343 ALF patients (n = 174 PE vs. n = 169 SMT), and 20 studies, including 5,705 ACLF patients (n = 2,856 PE vs. n = 2,849 SMT), were analyzed. Compared with SMT, PE was significantly associated with higher 30-day (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.87, p = 0.02) and overall (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.12-1.63, p = 0.002) survival in ALF patients. In ACLF, PE was also significantly associated with higher 30-day (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.22-1.52, p < 0.001) and 90-day (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10-1.34, p < 0.001) survival. On subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials, results remained unchanged in ALF, but no differences in survival were found between PE and SMT in ACLF. In conclusion, PE is associated with improved survival in ALF and could improve survival in ACLF. PE may be considered in managing ALF and ACLF patients who are not liver transplant (LT) candidates or as a bridge to LT in otherwise eligible patients. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the survival benefit of PE in ACLF.

G-EYE Improves Polyp, Adenoma, and Serrated Polyp Detection Rates in Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the gold-standard test to decrease mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC). G-EYE is an inflated balloon on the bending section of the scope with the ability to flatten the folds to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of G-EYE in improving ADR and other quality indicators of colonoscopy. METHODS: A literature search was performed through March 21, 2023, on databases including Embase, Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science Core Collection, KCI-Korean Journal Index, and Global Index Medicus. Core concepts of G-EYE, colonoscopy, ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR), and withdrawal time were searched. Statistical analysis was performed with OpenMeta[Analyst]. The odds ratio (OR) for the proportional variable and mean difference for the continuous variable along with 95% CI was used with a P-value <0.05 considered statistically significant. We used the DerSimonian-Laird method and random effects model for pooling data. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded a total of 143 articles. Three studies with 3868 total colonoscopies were finalized. The pooled ADR, PDR, and SPDR showed statistical improvement with G-EYE (OR: 1.744, 95% CI: 1.534-1.984, P<0.001; OR: 1.766, 95% CI: 1.547-2.015, P<0.001; and OR: 1.603, 95% CI: 1.176-2.185, P=0.003). The withdrawal time was also noted to be higher in the G-EYE group (mean difference: 0.114, CI: 0.041-0.186, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that G-EYE can improve ADR, PDR, and SPDR. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of G-EYE on interval CRC and mortality rate.

Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-effectiveness of Bezlotoxumab in Preventing Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection : Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) remains a global health challenge. Bezlotoxumab (BEZ) is a monoclonal antibody against C. difficile toxin B. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), MODIFY I and II, confirmed BEZ efficacy in preventing recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI). However, there are safety concerns about its use in patients with a history of congestive heart failure. Observational studies have since been conducted, and it is important to explore the consistency of BEZ efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and its safety utilizing these real-world data. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to pool the rate of rCDI in patients receiving BEZ and explore its efficacy and safety in preventing rCDI compared with control. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from inception through April 2023 for relevant RCTs or observational studies assessing BEZ in preventing rCDI. Single-arm studies describing experience with BEZ in preventing rCDI were also included for proportion meta-analysis. A proportion meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to pool the rCDI rate with its corresponding 95% CI. In a meta-analysis of efficacy, we generated the relative risk (RR) to compare BEZ versus control in preventing rCDI. RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 2 RCTs and 11 observational studies totaling 2337 patients, of which 1472 received BEZ, were included in the analysis. Of the constituent studies, 5 (1734 patients) compared BEZ versus standard-of-care (SOC). Pooled rate of rCDI in patients receiving BEZ was 15.8% (95% CI: 14%-17.8%), and was 28.9% (95% CI: 24%-34.4%) in the SOC. BEZ significantly reduced rCDI risk compared with SOC [RR=0.57 (95% CI: 0.45-0.72, I2 =16%)]. There was no difference in the overall mortality or heart failure risk. Of the 9 included cost-effectiveness analyses, 8 demonstrated BEZ+SOC cost-effectiveness compared with SOC alone. DISCUSSION: Our meta-analysis comprising real-world data revealed lower rCDI in patients receiving BEZ and supported its efficacy and safety when added to SOC therapy. The results were consistent across various subgroups. Available cost-effectiveness analyses mostly support BEZ+SOC cost-effectiveness compared with SOC alone.

Histological Outcomes of Pharmacological Interventions in Eosinophilic Esophagitis for Adults and Children: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple pharmacological interventions have been studied for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We performed a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCT) to assess the efficacy and safety of these interventions in EoE in adults and children. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive review of Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE OVID, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science through May 10, 2023. We performed frequentist approach network meta-analysis using random effects model. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: Our search yielded 25 RCTs with 25 discrete interventions and 2067 patients. Compared with placebo, the following interventions improved histology (using study definitions) in decreasing order on ranking: orodispersible budesonide (ODB) low dose, ODB high dose, oral viscous budesonide (OVB) high dose, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg twice daily, fluticasone 3 mg twice daily, esomeprazole, dupilumab every 2 weeks, dupilumab weekly, OVB medium dose, fluticasone 3 mg daily, cendakimab 180 mg, prednisone, swallowed fluticasone, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg daily, OVB low dose, reslizumab 3 mg/kg, reslizumab 1 mg/kg, and reslizumab 2 mg/kg. CONCLUSIONS: Network meta-analysis demonstrates histological efficacy of multiple medications for EoE. Because of the heterogeneity and large effect size, we recommend more trials comparing pharmacotherapeutic interventions with each other and placebo. An important limitation of this study is absence of clinical efficacy data due to insufficient data. Other limitations include heterogeneity of operator, population, and outcome analysis.

Comparative Risks of Post-ERCP Adverse Events in Patients with Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Choledocholithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care for the management of choledocholithiasis but carries risk of complications which may result in significant morbidity and mortality. While currently available guidelines endorse the use of ERCP for the management of symptomatic common bile duct stones, the need for ERCP in incidentally found asymptomatic choledocholithiasis is more controversial, and practice varies on a geographic and institutional level. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare post-ERCP adverse events between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed/Embase/Web of Science databases to include all studies comparing post-ERCP outcomes between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), while secondary outcomes included post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. RESULTS: Our analysis included six observational studies, totaling 2,178 choledocholithiasis patients (392 asymptomatic and 1786 symptomatic); 53% were female. Asymptomatic patients exhibited a higher risk of PEP compared with symptomatic patients (11.7% versus 4.8%; RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.56-4.31, p ≤ 0.001). No significant difference was observed in post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, or perforation rates between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic patients with choledocholithiasis appear to have a higher risk of PEP than symptomatic patients, while the risk of other post-ERCP adverse events is similar between the two groups. Interventional endoscopists should thoroughly discuss potential adverse events (particularly PEP) with asymptomatic patients before performing ERCP and utilize PEP-prevention measures more liberally in this subgroup of patients.

Cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and metanalysis of randomized control trials.

Major depression (MD) is prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF) and contributes to increased risk of hospitalization and mortality. The implementation of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has become a key strategy for treating HF patients' depression. We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive CBT compared to the standard of care (SOC) in HF patients with MD. The primary outcome was the depression scale (post-intervention and by the end of follow-up). The secondary outcomes were the quality of life (QoL), self-care scores, and 6-min walk test distance(6-MW). The standardized mean difference (SMD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random-effects model. A total of 6 RCTs with 489 patients (244 in the CBT group and 245 in the SOC group) were included. As compared to the SOC, CBT was associated with a statistically significant improvement in the post-interventional depression scale (SMD: -0.45, 95%CI: -0.69, -0.21; P < 0.01) and by the end of follow-up (SMD: -0.68, 95%CI: -0.87, -0.49; P < 0.01). Furthermore, CBT significantly improved the QoL (SMD: -0.45, 95%CI: -0.65, -0.24; P < 0.01). However, there were no differences in the self-care scores (SMD: 0.17, 95%CI: -0.08, 0.42; P = 0.18) or in 6-MW (SMD: 0.45, 95%CI: -0.39, 1.28; P = 0.29) between the two groups. According to our meta-analysis of published clinical studies, CBT may be more effective than standard therapy at enhancing depression scores and quality of life. To assess the long-term clinical effects of CBT in heart failure patients, larger and more powerful RCTs are required.

Predictors of Fecal Microbiota Transplant Failure in Clostridioides difficile Infection : An Updated Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an effective treatment for recurrent/refractory Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) with a 10% to 20% risk of recurrence after a single FMT. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the predictors of FMT failure. METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases through July 2021 was performed. All studies that evaluated risk factors associated with FMT failure in a multivariate model were included. We calculated pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for risk factors reported in ≥3 studies using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 4327 patients (63.6% females) with recurrent/refractory CDI who underwent FMT were included. FMT failed in 705 patients (16.3%) with 2 to 3 months of follow-up in most studies. A total of 12 different risk factors were reported in a multivariate model in ≥3 studies. Meta-analysis showed that advanced age, severe CDI, inflammatory bowel disease, peri-FMT use of non-CDI antibiotics, prior CDI-related hospitalizations, inpatient status, and poor quality of bowel preparation were significant predictors of FMT failure. Charlson Comorbidity Index, female gender, immunosuppressed status, patient-directed donor, and number of CDI recurrences were not associated with FMT failure. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate bowel preparation at the time of FMT and optimizing antibiotic stewardship practices in the peri-FMT period can improve the success of FMT. Patients with nonmodifiable risk factors should be counseled about the risk of FMT failure. Our results may help develop a risk stratification model to predict FMT failure in CDI patients.

The effect of preoperative endoscopic tattooing on lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The effect of preoperative endoscopic tattooing (ET) on accurate colorectal cancer localization and resection has been well established. However, its effect on lymph node (LN) retrieval remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to systematically compare LN retrieval between patients with colorectal cancer who underwent preoperative ET and those who did not. METHODS: A systematic search for relevant studies was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies that compared LN retrieval in patients with colorectal cancer with and without preoperative ET were included. Weighted pooled odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes using the random-effects model were calculated. RESULTS: 10 studies, including 2231 patients with colorectal cancer were included. Six studies reported total LN yield and showed significantly higher LN yield in the tattooed group (MD:2.61; 95% CI:1.01-4.21, P=0.001). Seven studies reported the number of patients with adequate LN retrieval and showed a significantly higher number of patients with adequate LN retrieval in the tattooed group (OR:1.89, 95% CI:1.08-3.32, P=0.03). However, subgroup analysis revealed that both outcomes were only statistically significant in patients with rectal cancer, and not in patients with colon cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that preoperative ET is associated with increased LN retrieval in patients with rectal cancer, but not in colon cancer. Further large-scale randomized control trials are necessary to validate our findings.

Dexamethasone versus prednisone/prednisolone in the management of pediatric patients with acute asthmatic exacerbations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Acute asthmatic exacerbation is a common condition for pediatric emergency visits. Recently, dexamethasone has increasingly been used as an alternative to prednisone. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone (DEX) against prednisone/prednisolone (PRED) in managing pediatric patients with acute asthmatic exacerbation. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to August 2022 by two independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022353462). STUDY SELECTIONS: From 316 studies screened, seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria, with 5967 pediatric patients experiencing an asthma exacerbation requiring treatment with either DEX (n = 2865) or PRED (n = 3102). Baseline patient characteristics (age, sex, PRAM (pediatric respiratory assessment measure), previous corticosteroid and beta-agonist inhaler) were comparable between groups. RESULTS: After treatment administration, the DEX group had fewer vomiting incidents (OR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.51, I2 = 58%) and reduced noncompliance events (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.34, I2 = 0%) when compared to the PRED group. Regarding emergency-department (ED)-related outcomes, there were no differences in hospital admission rates (OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.58, 1.19, I2 = 15%), time spent in the ED (MD= -0.11 h, 95% CI: -0.52; 0.30, I2 = 82%) or relapse occurrences (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.30, 1.49, I2 = 52%) between both groups. CONCLUSION: Although there were no differences between the DEX and PRED groups in terms of hospital admission rates, time spent in the ED or relapse events, pediatric patients receiving DEX experienced lower noncompliance and vomiting rates.

Etiologies and Outcomes of Transaminase Elevation > 1000 IU/L: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Among liver injury causes, few result in marked elevation of liver enzymes to a level > 1,000 international units per liter (IU/L). This review summarizes common etiologies of marked transaminase elevation and associated prognostic factors. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from inception through December 2022 using MOOSE guidelines for studies reporting frequency of etiologies of marked transaminase elevation. We used a proportion meta-analysis to pool frequencies with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). I2 was used to adjudicate heterogeneity. We used CMA software for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Seven relevant studies (n = 1608 patients) were included. The pooled frequency of ischemic hepatitis was 51% (95% CI 42-60%, I2 = 91%), viral hepatitis was 13.1% (95% CI 9.7-17.6%, I2 = 80%), toxins or drug-induced liver injury (DILI) was 13% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 85%), and pancreaticobiliary-related injury was 7.8% (95% CI 4.4-13.6%, I2 = 89%). Mortality was significantly higher in ischemic hepatitis versus other causes of marked transaminase elevation, with an odds ratio of 21 (95% CI 9.9-44.8, P value < 0.0001, I2 = 64% Q 11.1). DISCUSSION: This is the first meta-analysis to examine etiologies of marked transaminase elevation > 1000 IU/L. Liver ischemia is the most common cause, while other causes include DILI or toxins, viral hepatitis, and biliary pathologies. We found biliary pathologies to be the fourth most common cause. This is clinically relevant as it has been traditionally linked to a cholestatic pattern of liver injury. Being aware of this presentation may help prevent delayed or missed diagnoses and unnecessary testing.

Choledocholithiasis Can Present with Marked Transaminases Elevation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Extreme transaminase elevation > 1000 international units per liter (IU/L) is typically caused by hepatocellular injury due to ischemia, drugs, or viral infection. Acute choledocholithiasis can also present with marked transaminase elevation mimicking severe hepatocellular injury, contrary to the presumed cholestatic pattern. METHODS: We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for studies reporting the proportion of marked elevation of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) > 1000 IU/L in patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones. A proportion meta-analysis with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to pool the proportion of patients with extreme transaminase elevation. I2 was used to examine heterogeneity. We used CMA software utilizing a random effect model for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Three studies (n = 1328 patients) were included in our analysis. The reported frequency of ALT or AST > 1000 IU/L in choledocholithiasis patients ranged between 6 and 9.6%, with pooled frequency of 7.8% (95% CI 5.5-10.8%, I2 61%). The frequency of patients with ALT or AST > 500 IU/L was higher, ranging between 28 and 47%, with pooled frequency of 33.1% (95% CI 25.3-42%, I2 88%). CONCLUSION: This is the first meta-analysis to study prevalence of severe hepatocellular injury in patients with CBD stones. Results revealed that approximately one-third of patients with choledocholithiasis present with ALT or AST > 500 IU/L. Furthermore, levels > 1000 IU/L are not uncommon. An elaborate work-up for alternative etiologies of severe transaminase elevation is likely unwarranted in cases with clear evidence of choledocholithiasis.

Endoscopic Versus Conservative Therapy for Bleeding Peptic Ulcer with Adherent Clot: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Peptic ulcers with adherent clots are associated with a high-risk of rebleeding and mortality. However, the optimal management of bleeding ulcers with adherent clots remains unclear. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare endoscopic therapy and conservative therapy to manage bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases through October 2022 to include all studies comparing the endoscopic and conservative therapeutic approaches for bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. Our primary outcome was rebleeding (overall and 30-day). The secondary outcomes were mortality (overall and 30-day), need for surgery, and length of hospital stay (LOS). The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with the corresponding confidence intervals (CI) for proportional and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: Eleven studies (9 RCTs) with 833 patients (431 received endoscopic therapy vs. 402 received conservative therapy) were included. Overall, endoscopic therapy was associated with lower overall rebleeding (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.79, P = 0.007), 30-day rebleeding (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.89, P = 0.002), overall mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.95, P = 0.04), 30-day mortality (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.89, P = 0.002), need for surgery (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.95, P = 0.04), and LOS (MD - 3.17 days, 95% CI - 4.14, - 2.19, P < 0.00001). However, subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no significant difference in overall mortality (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.24-2.52, P = 0.68) between the two strategies, with numerically lower but statistically non-significant rates of overall rebleeding (7.2% vs. 18.5%, respectively; OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.17-1.05, P = 0.06), statistically lower rate of need for surgery (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.96, P = 0.04) with endoscopic therapy compared to conservative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis demonstrates that endoscopic therapy was overall associated with lower rates of rebleeding (overall and 30-day), mortality (overall and 30-day), need for surgery, and LOS, compared to conservative therapy for the management of bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. However, subgroup analysis of RCTs showed that endoscopic therapy was associated with numerically lower but statistically non-significant rates of overall rebleeding and a statistically lower rate of need for surgery compared to conservative therapy with similar overall mortality rates. Combined treatment with thermal therapy and injection therapy was the most effective treatment modality in reducing rebleeding risk. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to validate our findings.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of benign gastrointestinal tract strictures: a single-center experience and proposed treatment algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are an alternative therapeutic option for benign gastrointestinal (GI) tract strictures. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAMS for the management of benign GI strictures. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent a LAMS placement for benign luminal GI strictures at a tertiary care center between January 2014 and July 2021 were reviewed. Primary outcomes included technical success, early clinical success, and adverse events (AEs). Other outcomes included rates of stent migration and re-intervention after LAMS removal. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients who underwent 128 LAMS placements (67.9% female, mean age of 54.3 ± 14.2 years) were included, and 70.6% of the patients had failed prior endoscopic treatments. The majority of strictures (83.5%) were anastomotic, and the most common stricture site was the gastrojejunal anastomosis (65.9%). Technical success was achieved in 100% of procedures, while early clinical success was achieved in 98.4%. The overall stent-related AE rate was 25%. The migration rate was 27.3% (35/128). Of these, five stents were successfully repositioned endoscopically. The median stent dwell time was 119 days [interquartile range (IQR) 68-189 days], and the median follow-up duration was 668.5 days [IQR: 285.5-1441.5 days]. The re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was 58.3%. CONCLUSIONS: LAMS is an effective therapeutic option for benign GI strictures, offering high technical and early clinical success. However, the re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was high. In select cases, using LAMS placement as destination therapy with close surveillance is a reasonable option.

How Good Is Online Information for Patients on the Treatment for Luminal Gastrointestinal Cancers? A Comprehensive Evaluation in English and Spanish.

The internet has become a necessary communication platform for health information. The quality of online material for patients varies significantly, and this is not different for material on gastrointestinal cancers. We aimed to assess English and Spanish online patient information addressing esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer treatment. Six independent Google searches were conducted using the terms: esophageal cancer treatment, gastric cancer treatment, colorectal cancer treatment, and their translations in Spanish. Websites were included in the top 50 results for each search. Readability was assessed using two validated tests for each language. Understandability/actionability, quality, and cultural sensitivity were assessed using Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), DISCERN, and Cultural Sensitivity Assessment Tool (CSAT), respectively. Pearson's chi-squared was used for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum (2 groups) or Kruskal-Wallis (> 2 groups) for continuous. One hundred twelve websites were analyzed. Readability levels were high in both languages (between 11th grade and university level) and significantly higher in English. Mean quality scores for English and Spanish were consistent with good quality. CSAT scores met the cultural acceptability with lower CSAT scores for gastric cancer treatment in English. Higher actionability scores were found in English for colorectal cancer. Also, there was a clear trend for higher cultural sensitivity and quality of Spanish material for gastric cancer treatment. Online patient information on esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer treatment, in English and Spanish, were at a readability level above the average literacy level and even significantly higher in English. Initiatives to improve online information on gastrointestinal cancer treatments are warranted.

Pulse versus nonpulse steroid regimens in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Systemic steroids are associated with reduced mortality in hypoxic patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there is no consensus on the doses of steroid therapy in these patients. Several studies showed that pulse dose steroids (PDS) could reduce the progression of COVID-19 pneumonia. However, data regarding the role of PDS in COVID-19 is still unclear. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the role of PDS in COVID-19 patients compared to nonpulse steroids (NPDS). Comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception through February 10, 2022 was performed for all published studies comparing PDS to NPDS therapy to manage hypoxic patients with COVID-19. Primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation, hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse events in the form of superimposed infections. A total of 10 observational studies involving 3065 patients (1289 patients received PDS and 1776 received NPDS) were included. The mortality rate was similar between PDS and NPDS groups (risk ratio [RR]: 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-1.65, p = 0.16). There were no differences in the need for endotracheal intubation (RR: 0.71, 95%: CI 0.37-1.137, p = 0.31), LOS (mean difference: 1.93 days; 95% CI: -1.46-5.33; p = 0.26), or adverse events (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.56-1.57, p = 0.80) between the two groups. Compared to NPDS, PDS was associated with similar mortality rates, need for endotracheal intubation, LOS, and adverse events. Given the observational nature of the included studies, randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings.

Lung ultrasound-guided management to reduce hospitalization in chronic heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pulmonary edema is a leading cause of hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality in heart failure (HF) patients. A point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is a useful tool to detect subclinical pulmonary edema. We performed a comprehensive literature search of multiple databases for studies that evaluated the clinical utility of LUS-guided management versus standard care for HF patients in the outpatient setting. The primary outcome of interest was HF hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, urgent visits for HF worsening, acute kidney injury (AKI), and hypokalemia rates. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using random-effect model meta-analysis. A total of 3 randomized controlled trials including 493 HF patients managed in the outpatient setting (251 managed with LUS plus physical examination (PE)-guided therapy vs. 242 managed with PE-guided therapy alone) were included in the final analysis. The mean follow-up period was 5 months. There was no significant difference in HF hospitalization rate between the two groups (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.34-1.22; P = 0.18). Similarly, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.39; 95% CI 0.68-2.82; P = 0.37), AKI (RR 1.27; 95% CI 0.60-2.69; P = 0.52), and hypokalemia (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.21-2.44; P = 0.59). However, LUS-guided therapy was associated with a lower rate for urgent care visits (RR 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.59; P = 0.0002). Our study demonstrated that outpatient LUS-guided diuretic therapy of pulmonary congestion reduces urgent visits for worsening symptoms of HF. Further studies are needed to evaluate LUS utility in the outpatient treatment of HF.

Efficacy of remote physiological monitoring-guided care for chronic heart failure: an updated meta-analysis.

Previous studies have reported contradictory findings on the utility of remote physiological monitoring (RPM)-guided management of patients with chronic heart failure (HF). Multiple databases were searched for studies that evaluated the clinical efficacy of RPM-guided management versus standard of care (SOC) for HF patients. The primary outcome was HF-related hospitalization (HFH). The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related (CV) mortality, and emergency department (ED) visits. Pooled relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using a random-effects model. A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 8679 HF patients (4574 managed with RPM-guided therapy vs. 4105 managed with SOC), were included in the final analysis. The average follow-up period was 15.2 months. There was no significant difference in HFH rate between the two groups (RR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.84-1.07; P = 0.36). Similarly, there were no significant differences in CV mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.02, P = 0.08) or in ED visits (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.59-1.08, P = 0.14). However, RPM-guided therapy was associated with a borderline statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78-1.00; P = 0.05). Subgroup analysis based on the strategy of RPM showed that both hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring-guided management can reduce the risk of HFH (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64-0.97; P = 0.02) and (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.67-0.94; P = 0.008) respectively. Our study demonstrated that RPM-guided diuretic therapy of HF patients did not reduce the risk of HFH but can improve survival. Hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring-guided management could reduce the risk of HF-related hospitalizations.

Fluvoxamine in Nonhospitalized Patients With Acute COVID-19 Infection and the Lack of Efficacy in Reducing Rates of Hospitalization, Mechanical Ventilation, and Mortality in Placebo-Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials have investigated the use of fluvoxamine in preventing clinical deterioration in nonhospitalized patients with acute COVID-19 infection via stimulation of sigma-1 receptors, which regulates cytokine production and functional inhibition of acid sphingomyelinase activity, which may prevent infection of epithelial cells with SARS-CoV-2. However, the role of fluvoxamine is currently unclear because of a paucity of studies, particularly because the drug is being repurposed as an immunomodulatory and antiviral agent. STUDY QUESTION: Aim of our meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of fluvoxamine in nonhospitalized patients with acute COVID-19 infection. DATA SOURCE: Comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and Web of Science was performed from inception to February 10, 2022, for studies comparing fluvoxamine versus placebo for outpatient management of COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: The primary outcome of interest was rate of hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were rates of patients requiring mechanical ventilation and mortality. The random-effects model was used to calculate the risk ratios (RR) and confidence intervals (CI). A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I2 index. RESULTS: Three studies (2 randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort trial) involving 1762 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In patients who received fluvoxamine compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in rates of hospitalization (RR 0.26, 95% CI, 0.04-1.73, P = 0.16, I2 = 62%), mechanical ventilation (RR 0.73, 95% CI, 0.45-1.19, P = 0.21, I2 = 0%), and mortality (RR 0.67, 95% CI, 0.37-1.22, P = 0.19, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: Current evidence does not indicate a significant effect of fluvoxamine on the rates of hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and mortality of patients with COVID-19 infection.