Peptic ulcer disease.

Annual prevalence estimates of peptic ulcer disease range between 0·12% and 1·5%. Peptic ulcer disease is usually attributable to Helicobacter pylori infection, intake of some medications (such as aspirin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications), or being critically ill (stress-related), or it can be idiopathic. The clinical presentation is usually uncomplicated, with peptic ulcer disease management based on eradicating H pylori if present, the use of acid-suppressing medications-most often proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)-or addressing complications, such as with early endoscopy and high-dose PPIs for peptic ulcer bleeding. Special considerations apply to patients on antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents. H pylori treatment has evolved, with the choice of regimen dictated by local antibiotic resistance patterns. Indications for primary and secondary prophylaxis vary across societies; most suggest PPIs for patients at highest risk of developing a peptic ulcer, its complications, or its recurrence. Additional research areas include the use of potassium-competitive acid blockers and H pylori vaccination; the optimal approach for patients at risk of stress ulcer bleeding requires more robust determinations of optimal patient selection and treatment selection, if any. Appropriate continuation of PPI use outweighs most possible side-effects if given for approved indications, while de-prescribing should be trialled when a definitive indication is no longer present.

Primary and Specialty Care Trainees' Perceptions About Proton Pump Inhibitor Use.

OBJECTIVE: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed with proven efficacy in many indications, yet longstanding controversy about potential adverse events persists. We aimed to acquire knowledge about perceptions of outpatient PPI long-term prescribing (≥8 wk) among primary and specialty care trainees at 2 Canadian Universities. METHODS: Family medicine, internal medicine, and gastroenterology trainees completed a web-based survey that included 20 clinical scenarios assessing trainee knowledge about PPI efficacy. Contextual PPI prescribing decisions were also elicited, balancing possible PPI indications versus side effects. Management strategies were compared between junior and senior trainees, as well as across training programs. RESULTS: Over a 4-month period,163 trainees (age <26 y: 12%; age 26 to 45: 88%; 59% females) participated in the survey (family medicine: 51%, internal medicine: 44%, and gastroenterology: 5%); 83% were considered junior residents. Only 42% had received formal education on prescribing PPI long-term. Overall, 93% believed they would benefit from such teaching, with 98% stating they would follow related guidelines. No between-group differences were noted in knowledge of appropriate PPI indications nor possible side effects when comparing juniors to seniors, or among different specialties. Across different management scenarios, inappropriate PPI discontinuation was chosen by 14.3% to 67.2%, whereas inappropriate PPI continuation was reported in up to 57%. Trainee seniority and specialty did not differ in appropriate deprescribing rates. CONCLUSIONS: Training level and primary versus specialty care settings are associated with frequent inappropriate PPI prescribing and deprescribing. These findings highlight the need for and may inform future educational programs on PPI usage.

Comparative Evaluation of the ABC Score to Other Risk Stratification Scales in Managing High-risk Patients Presenting With Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

OBJECTIVE: The ABC risk score identifies patients at high risk of mortality in acute lower and upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We aimed to externally validate the ABC score while comparing it to other prognostication scales when assessing UGIB patients at high risk of negative outcomes before endoscopy. METHODS: UGIB patients from a national Canadian registry (REASON) were studied, with mortality prediction as a primary outcome. Secondary endpoints included prognostication of rebleeding, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU and hospitalization lengths of stay (LOS), and a previously proposed composite outcome measure. Univariable and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve analyses compared discriminatory abilities of the ABC score to the AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford Scale (GBS), and clinical Rockall score. RESULTS: The REASON registry included 2020 patients [89.4% nonvariceal; mean age (±SD): 66.3±16.4 y; 38.4% female]. Overall mortality, rebleeding, ICU admission, transfusion and composite score rates were 9.9%, 11.4%, 21.1%, 69.0%, and 67.3%, respectively. ICU and hospitalization LOS were 5.4±9.3 and 9.1±11.5 days, respectively. The ABC score displayed superior 30-day mortality prediction [0.78 (0.73; 0.83)] compared with GBS [0.69 (0.63; 0.75)] or clinical Rockall [0.64 (0.58; 0.70)] but not AIMS65 [0.73 (0.67; 0.79)]. Although most scales significantly prognosticated secondary outcomes in the univariable analysis except for ICU LOS, discriminatory abilities on areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were poor. CONCLUSIONS: ABC and AIMS65 display similar good prediction of mortality. Clinical usefulness in prognosticating secondary outcomes was modest for all scales, limiting their adoptions when informing early management of high-risk UGIB patients.

Role of the endoscopic Doppler probe in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The effectiveness of the Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) remains unclear in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). We thus performed a systematic review characterizing the effectiveness of DEP in patients with NVUGIB addressing this question. METHODS: A literature search was done until July 2021 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science. A series of meta-analyses were performed assessing outcomes among observational and interventional studies for DEP signal positive and negative lesions as well as DEP-assisted versus standard endoscopies. The primary outcome was "overall rebleeding"; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality, need for surgery, length of stay, intensive care unit stay, and angiography. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included from 1911 citations identified. Observational studies compared bleeding lesions with DEP-positive versus DEP-negative signals (11 studies, n = 800 prehemostasis; five studies, n = 148 with posthemostasis data). Three interventional studies (n = 308) compared DEP-assisted to standard endoscopy management. DEP signal positive versus negative lesions either prior to or following any possible hemostasis were at greater risk of overall rebleeding (odds ratio [OR] 6.54 [2.36, 18.11] and OR 25.96 [6.74, 100.0], respectively). The use of DEP during upper endoscopy significantly reduced overall rebleeding rates (OR 0.27 [0.14, 0.54]). When removing outcomes analysis for which only one study was available, all evaluable outcomes were improved with DEP characterization of management guidance except for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Although with low certainty evidence, DEP-related information improves on sole visual prediction of rebleeding in NVUGIB, with DEP-guided management yielding decreased overall rebleeding, bleeding-related mortality, and need for surgery.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Colon Cancer Screening among Patients with Long-Standing Ulcerative Colitis: 11 Years' Experience of Saudi Population.

Background: Clinical guidelines recommend that patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis (UC) should undergo periodic surveillance colonoscopy. However, the cost and clinical value of performing annual colonoscopy among high-risk patient populations is largely unknown in the Middle East. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the cost and consequence of annual colonoscopy among high-risk UC patients in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on UC patients who had UC for ≥ 8 years or had primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) at any time during their disease,and underwent colonoscopy surveillance between 2010 and 2021 at a university-affiliated tertiary care center. Patients who underwent annual screening were considered adherent, and those who did not were considered non-adherent. The dysplasia detection rate (%) and the costs were expressed in United States Dollars (USD). To generate the 95 % confidence intervals for annual cost and clinical consequence, nonparametric bias-corrected accelerated bootstrapping with 10,000 simulations were conducted. Results: Two-hundred and sixty-one UC patients met the inclusion criteria and were included. Most of the patients 54 % (141 patients), were non-adherent to annual screening, and the patients' mean age and duration of illness were 45 years and 15 years, respectively. The mean annual direct medical costs were USD 10,210.6 for patients who adhered to the annual screening program and USD 6,191.77 for those who did not adhere. The mean rates of dysplasia detection were 1.66 % and 7.09 % for patients who adhered and patients who did not adhere to annual colonoscopy, respectively. The difference in costs and rates of dysplasia detections between those who adhered to the annual screening and those who did not were USD 4,018.88 (95 % CI: 3097.46 - 6,798.06) and -5.43 % (95 % CI: -10.019 - -1.58730), respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 740.125 per 1 % reduction in the rates of dysplasia. According to the bootstrap cost effectiveness distributions, adherence to the annual screening for UC patients would result in higher cost and lower rates of dysplasia development with more than 99 % confidence level. Conclusion: Adherence to annual colonoscopy screening detects more dysplasia in UC patients but with an increased cost. Considering the low rate of progression to colorectal cancer among UC patients, the annual screening might not be cost effective.

Defining the endoscopic ultrasound features of chronic pancreatitis in Asians: a multicenter validation study.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features and criteria have been described in chronic pancreatitis, challenges remain with interoperator variability and ease of adoption. The aim of this study was to define and validate the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis in a multicenter prospective study in Asia. METHOD: The study was divided into two parts: the first part was conducted to derive the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis with adequate interoperator agreement; the second was to prospectively evaluate these features in a multicenter cross-sectional study and determine the optimal combination of features for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Prospectively enrolled cases had standard internationally validated radiologic or histologic features of chronic pancreatitis, and controls were patients without chronic pancreatitis who underwent EUS examination. RESULTS: The top six EUS features that had good interobserver agreement (mean kappa 0.73, range 0.60 - 0.90) were selected to be further evaluated in part II of the study. These included: hyperechoic foci with shadowing, lobularity with honeycombing, cysts, dilated main pancreatic duct, dilated side branches, and calculi in the main pancreatic duct. A total of 284 subjects (132 cases, 152 controls) were enrolled from 12 centers in Asia. All six features had high accuracy ranging from 63.3 % to 89.1 %. Two or more of these six EUS features accurately defined chronic pancreatitis (sensitivity 94.7 %, specificity 98.0 %), with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.986. CONCLUSION: This multicenter Asian study characterized and defined the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis. This provides a useful tool in clinical practice and further research in pancreatic cancer surveillance.

Customized bariatric stents for sleeve gastrectomy leak: are they superior to conventional esophageal stents? A systematic review and proportion meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Recently, there has been a burgeoning interest in the utilization of customized bariatric stents (CBS) for management of sleeve gastrectomy leak (SGL). We aimed to conduct a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of these new stents and to compare them with the conventional esophageal stents (CES). METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases was conducted through May 1, 2020. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success and post-procedure adverse events of CBS and CES. Secondary outcomes were number of stents and endoscopic sessions per patient, and time to leak closure. A proportion meta-analysis was performed on outcomes using a random-effects model, and the weighted pooled rates (WPRs) or mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: The WPR with 95% CI of technical success, clinical success, and stent migration for CBS were 99% (93-100%) I2 = 34%, 82% (69-93%) I2 = 58%, and 32% (17-49%), I2 = 69%, respectively. For CES, the WPR (95% CI) for technical success, clinical success, and stent migration were 100% (97-100%) I2 = 19%, 93% (85-98%) I2 = 30%, and 15% (7-25%), I2 = 41%, respectively. Adverse events other than migration were very low with both types of stents. On proportionate difference, CBS had lower clinical success (11%) and higher migration rate (17%) in comparison to CES. In successfully treated patients, CBS was associated with lower mean number of stents and endoscopic sessions, and shorter time to leak closure compared to CES. The overall quality of evidence was very low. CONCLUSIONS: In treatment of SGL, there is very low level evidence that CES are superior to CBS in terms of clinical success and migration rate, though may require more stent insertions and endoscopic procedures. The evidence however remains very uncertain. Perhaps relevant to some types of stents, CBS are promising; however design modification is strongly recommended to improve outcomes.

Recovery of endoscopy services in the era of COVID-19: recommendations from an international Delphi consensus.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on provision of endoscopy services globally as staff and real estate were repurposed. As we begin to recover from the pandemic, a cohesive international approach is needed, and guidance on how to resume endoscopy services safely to avoid unintended harm from diagnostic delays. The aim of these guidelines is to provide consensus recommendations that clinicians can use to facilitate the swift and safe resumption of endoscopy services. An evidence-based literature review was carried out on the various strategies used globally to manage endoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic and control infection. A modified Delphi process involving international endoscopy experts was used to agree on the consensus statements. A threshold of 80% agreement was used to establish consensus for each statement. 27 of 30 statements achieved consensus after two rounds of voting by 34 experts. The statements were categorised as pre-endoscopy, during endoscopy and postendoscopy addressing relevant areas of practice, such as screening, personal protective equipment, appropriate environments for endoscopy and infection control precautions, particularly in areas of high disease prevalence. Recommendations for testing of patients and for healthcare workers, appropriate locations of donning and doffing areas and social distancing measures before endoscopy are unique and not dealt with by any other guidelines. This international consensus using a modified Delphi method to produce a series of best practice recommendations to aid the safe resumption of endoscopy services globally in the era of COVID-19.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) to estimate the adequacy of a specimen for histological diagnosis during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition (FNTA) has recently been advocated. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of MOSE compared with conventional EUS-FNTA without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. After providing informed consent, consecutive adult patients referred for EUS-FNTA for solid lesions larger than 2 cm were randomized to a MOSE arm or to a conventional arm without ROSE. A designated cytopathologist from each center performed all cytopathological examinations for that center and was blinded to the randomization results. The primary outcome measure was the diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy, and the rate of procedure-related complications. RESULTS: 244 patients (122 conventional, 122 MOSE) were enrolled during the study period. No significant differences between the two arms were found in procedure time or rate of procedure-related adverse events. The diagnostic yield for the MOSE technique (92.6 %) was similar to that for the conventional technique (89.3 %; P  = 0.37), with significantly fewer passes made (median: conventional 3, MOSE 2; P  < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNTA with the MOSE technique provided a similar diagnostic yield to conventional EUS-FNTA technique in the absence of ROSE but with fewer passes. This technique can be used when ROSE is not available.

Using single-operator cholangioscopy for endoscopic evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures: results from a large multinational registry.

BACKGROUND: Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) of indeterminate biliary strictures aims to achieve a diagnosis through visual examination and/or by obtaining targeted biopsies under direct visualization. In this large, prospective, multinational, real-life experience of POCS-guided evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures, we evaluated the performance of POCS in this difficult-to-manage patient population. METHODS: This prospective registry enrolled patients, with indeterminate biliary strictures across 20 centers in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The primary end points were the ability to visualize the lesion, obtain histological sampling when intended, and an assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of POCS for malignant strictures. Patients were followed for 6 months after POCS or until a definitive malignant diagnosis was made, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: 289 patients underwent 290 POCS procedures with intent to biopsy in 182 cases. The stricture/filling defect was successfully visualized in 286/290 (98.6 %), providing a visual diagnostic impression in 253/290 (87.2 %) and obtaining adequate biopsies in 169/182 (92.9 %). Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 5/289 patients (1.7 %). POCS influenced patient management principally by elucidating filling defects or the causes of bile duct stricture or dilation. The visual impression of malignancy showed 86.7 % sensitivity, 71.2 % specificity, 65.8 % positive and 89.4 % negative predictive value, and 77.2 % overall accuracy compared with final diagnosis. Histological POCS-guided samples showed 75.3 % sensitivity, 100 % specificity, 100 % positive and 77.1 % negative predictive value, and 86.5 % overall accuracy. CONCLUSION: In this large, real-life, prospective series, POCS was demonstrated to be an effective and safe intervention guiding the management of patients with indeterminate biliary strictures.

International consensus statements for endoscopic management of distal biliary stricture.

Distal biliary strictures (DBS) are common and may be caused by both malignant and benign pathologies. While endoscopic procedures play a major role in their management, a comprehensive review of the subject is still lacking. Our consensus statements were formulated by a group of expert Asian pancreatico-biliary interventional endoscopists, following a proposal from the Digestive Endoscopy Society of Taiwan, the Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and the Tokyo Conference of Asian Pancreato-biliary Interventional Endoscopy. Based on a literature review utilizing Medline, Cochrane library, and Embase databases, a total of 19 consensus statements on DBS were made on diagnosis, endoscopic drainage, benign biliary stricture, malignant biliary stricture, and management of recurrent biliary obstruction and other complications. Our consensus statements provide comprehensive guidance for the endoscopic management of DBS.

Management of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Guideline Recommendations From the International Consensus Group.

Description: This update of the 2010 International Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Patients With Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) refines previous important statements and presents new clinically relevant recommendations. Methods: An international multidisciplinary group of experts developed the recommendations. Data sources included evidence summarized in previous recommendations, as well as systematic reviews and trials identified from a series of literature searches of several electronic bibliographic databases from inception to April 2018. Using an iterative process, group members formulated key questions. Two methodologists prepared evidence profiles and assessed quality (certainty) of evidence relevant to the key questions according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Group members reviewed the evidence profiles and, using a consensus process, voted on recommendations and determined the strength of recommendations as strong or conditional. Recommendations: Preendoscopic management: The group suggests using a Glasgow Blatchford score of 1 or less to identify patients at very low risk for rebleeding, who may not require hospitalization. In patients without cardiovascular disease, the suggested hemoglobin threshold for blood transfusion is less than 80 g/L, with a higher threshold for those with cardiovascular disease. Endoscopic management: The group suggests that patients with acute UGIB undergo endoscopy within 24 hours of presentation. Thermocoagulation and sclerosant injection are recommended, and clips are suggested, for endoscopic therapy in patients with high-risk stigmata. Use of TC-325 (hemostatic powder) was suggested as temporizing therapy, but not as sole treatment, in patients with actively bleeding ulcers. Pharmacologic management: The group recommends that patients with bleeding ulcers with high-risk stigmata who have had successful endoscopic therapy receive high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (intravenous loading dose followed by continuous infusion) for 3 days. For these high-risk patients, continued oral PPI therapy is suggested twice daily through 14 days, then once daily for a total duration that depends on the nature of the bleeding lesion. Secondary prophylaxis: The group suggests PPI therapy for patients with previous ulcer bleeding who require antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy for cardiovascular prophylaxis.

Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stone clearance in a single session of ERCP: results from a large multinational registry demonstrate high success rates.

BACKGROUND: Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) can be useful for difficult bile duct stone clearance. Large prospective multinational data on POCS-guided lithotripsy for clearing difficult bile duct stones in a single session of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are missing. METHODS: Patients with difficult bile duct stones (defined as one or more of: largest stone diameter ≥ 15 mm, failed prior attempt at stone clearance, impacted, multiple, hepatic duct location, or located above a stricture) were enrolled at 17 centers in 10 countries. The principal endpoint was stone clearance in a single ERCP procedure using POCS. RESULTS : 156 patients underwent 174 sessions of POCS-guided electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy. Stone clearance had failed in a previous ERCP using traditional techniques in 124/156 patients (80 %), while 32 /156 patients (21 %) were referred directly to POCS-guided therapy based on preprocedural assessment of the difficulty of stone clearance. In 101/156 patients (65 %), there were impacted stones. POCS-guided stone clearance was achieved in a single POCS procedure in 125 /156 patients (80 %, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 73 % - 86 %), and was significantly more likely for stones ≤ 30 mm compared with > 30 mm (odds ratio 7.9, 95 %CI 2.4 - 26.2; P = 0.002). Serious adverse events occurred in 3/156 patients (1.9 %, 95 %CI 0.4 % - 5.5 %), and included pancreatitis, perforation due to laser lithotripsy, and cholangitis (n = 1 each), all resolved within 1 week. CONCLUSION: POCS-guided lithotripsy is highly effective for clearance of difficult bile duct stones in a single procedure and successfully salvages most prior treatment failures. It may also be considered first-line therapy for patients with difficult choledocholithiasis to avoid serial procedures.

Drug utilization and cost associated with inflammatory bowel disease management in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outside the western countries. Treatment costs are an essential component for healthcare planning and priority setting. The utilization patterns and annual administration and cost of IBD medications are largely unknown in countries with an increasing incidence of disease, Saudi Arabia being an example. AIM: To evaluate the use of non-biologic and biologic agents and their associated annual administration costs in a sample of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Single-center retrospective chart review was performed to determine the use of biologic and non-biologic medications among IBD patients in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Daily and the annual acquisition cost of different IBD therapeutic agents was calculated. The utilization rates and cost of each type of medication by CD and UC patients were compared. RESULTS: Data of 258 CD patients and 249 UC patients were analyzed. Infliximab and adalimumab were the most commonly prescribed biologics among the study sample, however, their utilization rates were significantly higher among CD than UC patients (36.82% vs. 11.24%, and 20.54% vs. 9.64%, respectively, P < 0. 01). Azathioprine utilization rate was also higher among CD patients compared to their UC counterparts (71.71% vs. 40.16%, respectively, P < 0.01). However, the utilization rate of mesalazine in the UC patients was significantly higher than their CD counterparts (85.53% vs. 14.34% for CD, P < 0.01). The annual cost of biologics (including administration and lab test cost) ranged from 5572 USD for ustekinumab to 18,424 USD for vedolizumab. On the other hand, the annual cost of non-biologics ranged from 16 USD for prednisone to 527 USD for methotrexate. CONCLUSION: Biologics are extensively used in the management of IBD, particularly CD, and their utilization costs are significantly higher than non-biologics. Future studies should examine the cost effectiveness of IBD medications especially in countries with increasing incidence such as Saudi Arabia.

Consensus guidelines on the optimal management in interventional EUS procedures: results from the Asian EUS group RAND/UCLA expert panel.

OBJECTIVES: Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) procedures are gaining popularity and the most commonly performed procedures include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation. The aim of this paper is to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of the above procedures. METHODS: Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question. RESULTS: A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required. CONCLUSIONS: The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.

Plastic vs. Self-Expandable Metal Stents for Palliation in Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Series of Meta-Analyses.

OBJECTIVES: Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are thought to have an advantage over plastic stents in achieving biliary drainage. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge databases, from January 1980 to September 2015, for randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SEMS vs. plastic stents in the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Primary outcomes were durations of stent patency, patient survival, and 30-day mortality. Numerous secondary outcomes were assessed, and extensive sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: In all, 20 RCTs totaling 1,713 patients yielded a weighted mean difference (WMD) in time to stent patency (4 studies) of 4.45 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31, 8.59; GRADE=moderate) favoring SEMS. There were no differences in overall patient survival (5 studies) WMD=0.67 months (95% CI, -0.66, 1.99; GRADE=moderate), or 30-day mortality (8 studies) odds ratio (OR)=0.80 (95% CI, 0.52, 1.24; GRADE=moderate) but there was a higher symptom-free survival at 6 months (4 studies) OR=5.96 (95% CI, 1.71, 20.81; GRADE=moderate). SEMS use resulted in lower rates of late complications (11 studies) OR=0.43 (95% CI, 0.26, 0.71; GRADE=moderate), sepsis or cholangitis (14 studies) OR=0.53 (95% CI, 0.37, 0.77; GRADE=high), blocking from sludge (8 studies) OR=0.11(95% CI, 0.07, 0.17; GRADE=moderate), and mean number of re-interventions (8 studies) WMD=-0.83 interventions (95% CI, -1.64, -0.02; GRADE=moderate). There was a longer patency of SEMS for those without a prior drainage attempt (2 studies) WMD 7.70 months (95% CI, 7.14, 8.25; GRADE=high). Although a survival advantage was found when an uncovered SEMS was used (3 studies) WMD 1.31 months (95% CI, 0.30, 2.32; GRADE=high), but not partially or fully covered SEMS (2 studies) WMD -0.66 months (95% CI, -1.02, -0.30; GRADE=high) vs. plastic stents, and for SEMS in the setting of pre- or post-procedural antibiotic administration (2 studies) WMD 1.49 months (95% CI, 0.27, 2.70; GRADE=high), and performance of a sphincterotomy (2 studies) WMD 1.63 months (95% CI, 0.42, 2.84; GRADE=high). CONCLUSIONS: Keeping in mind the noted risk of bias in source data, the use of SEMS compared with plastic stents, in the palliation of patients with malignant biliary obstruction results in longer stent patency, lower complications rates, and fewer re-interventions, whereas exhibiting survival benefits in selected subgroups of patients.

Placebo response and remission rates in randomised trials of induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: It is important to minimize placebo rates in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to efficiently detect treatment differences between interventions. Historically, high placebo rates have been observed in clinical trials of ulcerative colitis (UC). A better understanding of factors influencing placebo rates may lead to more informed clinical trial design. OBJECTIVES: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate placebo response and remission rates in RCTs evaluating UC treatments in adult patients. SEARCH METHODS: Electronic databases (i.e. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL) were searched from inception to 1 March 2017 with no language restrictions applied. Reference lists and conference proceedings of major gastroenterology meetings were also handsearched to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Placebo-controlled RCTs of adult patients with UC treated with corticosteroids, aminosalicylates, immunosuppressives or biologics were eligible, provided enrolment and outcome assessment was conducted using the Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) or the Mayo Clinic Score. The minimum trial duration was two weeks for induction trials and four months maintenance trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of authors independently determined study eligibility and extracted data with any disagreements resolved through consensus. Outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients with clinical response and remission. Trial characteristics such as the design, participant demographics and disease history, interventions, and enrolment and assessment criteria were also recorded. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Pooled placebo response and remission rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using a binomial normal model for proportions. Induction of remission and maintenance studies were pooled separately. The impact of study-level characteristics on placebo response and remission rates was investigated using mixed-effects meta-regression analyses with logits of event rates as the outcome variables. An assessment of pooled placebo rates over time was conducted using a cumulative meta-analysis based on date of publication. Publication bias was examined using funnel plots. MAIN RESULTS: The screening process identified 61 included studies which encompass 58 induction phases (5111 patients randomised to placebo) and 12 maintenance phases (1579 patients randomised to placebo). For induction trials, the pooled estimate of placebo response was 33% (95% CI 30% to 36%) while the pooled estimate of placebo remission was 12% (95% CI 9% to 15%). For maintenance trials, the pooled estimate of placebo response was 23% (95% CI 19% to 28%) while the pooled estimate of placebo remission was 17% (95% CI 10% to 27%).Studies enrolling patients with more active disease confirmed objectively by endoscopy were associated with significantly lower placebo remission and response rates than trials enrolling patients with less active disease (27% versus 4%, OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.25 to 5.42, P = 0.01 for UCDAI endoscopy sub score ≥1 versus ≥ 2 for remission; and 27% versus 4%, OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.82, P = 0.02 for UCDAI endoscopy sub score greater than or equal to one versus greater than or equal to two for response). With respect to drug class, the lowest placebo response and remission rates were observed in trials evaluating corticosteroids (23%; 95% CI 19 to 29%, and 5%; 95% CI 2 to 11%, respectively). Trials of biologics had the highest placebo response rate (35%; 95% CI 30 to 41%), while trials evaluating aminosalicylates had the highest placebo remission rate (18%; 95% CI 12 to 24%). Disease duration of greater than five years prior to enrolment was associated with a significantly lower placebo response rate compared to disease duration of less than or equal to five years (29% versus 47%, respectively; OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.92, P = 0.02). The requirement of a minimum rectal bleeding score for study eligibility was associated with an increased placebo response rate compared to studies that did not use rectal bleeding for trial eligibility (37% versus 32%, respectively; OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.82, P = 0.02). Finally, the time point of primary outcome assessment was found to be significantly associated with placebo remission rates such that every one week increment in endpoint assessment was associated with a 6% increase in the placebo remission rate (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10, P = 0.01).Cumulative meta-analysis indicated a consistent increase in the placebo response rate from 1987 to 2007 (from 13% to 33%), although rates have remained constant from 2008 to 2015 (32% to 34%). Similarly, placebo remission rates increased from 1987 to 2007 (5% to 14%) but have remained constant from 2008 to 2015 (12 to 14%). On meta-regression, there were no statistically significant differences between the 1987-2007 and 2008-2015 point estimates for both response (P = 0.81) and remission (P = 0.32). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Placebo response and remission rates vary according to endoscopic disease severity and rectal bleeding score at trial entry, class of agent, disease duration, and the time point at which the primary outcome was measured. These observations have important implications for the design and conduct of future clinical trials in UC and will help researchers design trials, determine required sample sizes and also provide useful information about trial design features which should be considered when planning new trials.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions.

Drainage of obstructed bile duct and pancreatic duct under endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) guidance has evolved into viable techniques suitable for patients with failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or altered surgical anatomy. One of the major advantages of EUS guidance is the possibility of multiple access points depending upon patient and ductal anatomy. Unlike ERCP, an approachable papilla is not a requisite for successful EUS-guided biliary or pancreatic ductal drainage. Moreover, as the access is away from the papilla, there is the possibility of reduced pancreatitis. A variety of procedures have become available for EUS-guided drainage, and it is important to develop standard terminology and procedural details. EUS-specific stents, including lumen-apposing metal stents have recently become available, and are likely to impact the outcomes of these procedures. Available data show a high success rate and acceptable adverse event rate for EUS-guided biliary drainage. Success rate appears to be low for pancreatic duct drainage because of a variety of reasons. Outcomes of EUS-guided biliary drainage appear equivalent to percutaneous drainage and ERCP. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage appears promising for patients requiring gallbladder drainage but unfit for surgery. Further large controlled studies are needed to evaluate the exact role of these procedures.

Review article: Advances in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common emergency with substantial associated morbidity and mortality. Elective colonoscopy plays an essential role in management, with an even more important role for radiology in the acute setting. Recent advances in the management of patients with LGIB warrant review as the management has recently evolved. AIMS: To provide a comprehensive and updated overview of advances in the approach to patients with LGIB METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search to examine the current data for this narrative review supplemented by expert opinion. RESULTS: The incidence of LGIB is increasing worldwide, partly related to an ageing population and the increasing use of antithrombotics. Diverticulosis continues to be the most common aetiology of LGIB. Pre-endoscopic risk stratification tools, especially the Oakland score, can aid appropriate patient triage. Adequate resuscitation continues to form the basis of management, while appropriate management of antithrombotics is crucial to balance the risk of worsening bleeding against increased cardiovascular risk. Radiological imaging plays an essential role in the diagnosis and treatment of acute LGIB, especially among unstable patients. Colonoscopy remains the gold-standard test for the elective management of stable patients. CONCLUSIONS: The management of LGIB has evolved significantly in recent years, with a shift towards radiological interventions for unstable patients while reserving elective colonoscopy for stable patients. A multidisciplinary approach is essential to optimise the outcomes of patients with LGIB.