Secondary uncovered versus fully-covered metal stents for the management of occluded stent in unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been widely placed for unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction (UDMBO). However, the dysfunction rate is 19-40% and its treatment is controversial. We aimed asses the efficacy and safety of a secondary biliary stents (uncovered (UC) versus fully-covered (FC) stent) for the management of occluded SEMS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2015 and June 2023, 41 patients with UDMBO underwent secondary biliary stent placement as "stent-in-stent" (20 FCSEMS and 21 UCSEMS). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success of SEMS placement. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), patency and survival. Patients were prospectively followed until death or loss of follow-up. RESULTS: Technical (100% vs 85.5%) and clinical (100% vs 95.2%) success rates were similar in FCSEMS and UCSEMS groups. The median follow-up period was 510 days (range 290-630). The median duration of stent patency of FCSEMS (220 days, IQR 137.5-442.5) was longer than UCSEMS (150 days, IQR 110-362.5) (P=0.395), although stent dysfunction within 6 months was not different between groups. Multivariate analysis indicated that sex (HR=0.909, 0.852-0.970), antitumor treatment (HR=0.248, 0.032-0.441), stent patency (HR=0.992, 0.986-0.998) and clinical success (HR=0.133, 0.026-0.690) were significant factors for overall survival. There were no remarkable differences in AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of additional biliary stent using the stent-in-stent method is an effective and safe rescue treatment for patients with UDMBO and occluded stent. In addition, the use of FCSEMS compared UCSEMS has unclear benefits regarding stent patency and overall survival.

Management and Outcomes of Bleeding Within 30 Days of Colonic Polypectomy in a Large, Real-Life, Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Management of delayed (within 30 days) postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) has not been standardized. Patients often undergo colonoscopies that do not provide any benefit. We aimed to identify factors associated with therapeutic intervention and active bleeding after DPPB. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 548 patients with bleeding within 30 days after an index polypectomy (DPPB; 71.9% underwent colonoscopy, 2.6% underwent primary angiographic embolization, and 25.5% were managed without intervention) at 6 tertiary centers in Spain, from January 2010 through September 2018. We collected demographic and medical data from patients. The primary outcomes were the need for therapeutic intervention and the presence of active bleeding during colonoscopy. RESULTS: A need for therapeutic intervention was associated independently with the use of antithrombotic agents, hemoglobin decrease greater than 2 g/dL, hemodynamic instability, and comorbidities (P < .05). The bleeding point during colonoscopy was identified in 344 patients; 74 of these patients (21.5%) had active bleeding. Active use of anticoagulants (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5), left-sided polyps (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1-3.8), prior use of electrocautery (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.1), and pedunculated polyp morphology (OR, 1.8, 95% CI, 1-3.2) significantly increased the risk of encountering active bleeding. We developed a visual nomogram to estimate the risk of active bleeding. Overall, 43% of the cohort did not require any hemostatic therapy. Rebleeding (<6%) and transfusion requirements were low in those managed without intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In a study of patients with DPPB, we found that almost half do not warrant any therapeutic intervention. Colonoscopy often is overused for patients with DPPB. We identified independent risk factors for active bleeding that might be used to identify patients most likely to benefit from colonoscopy.

A multicentric Spanish study on the characteristics and survival of gastric adenocarcinoma under the age of 60.

INTRODUCTION: In Europe, gastric adenocarcinoma (GADC) is commonly regarded as a disease of the elderly. This study aims to assess the proportion, characteristics, and survival of patients diagnosed with GADC under the age of 60. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicentric, and analytical study conducted at four tertiary Spanish hospitals. All patients diagnosed with GADC between 2008 and 2015 were included. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic, histologic, and survival data were retrieved. A multivariate analysis was performed to compare GADC in young (age≤60 years) and elderly patients. RESULTS: A total of 1374 patients with GADC were included. The mean age was 74 years (SD:11.1); 62.2% were males. There were 177 patients under the age of 60 (12.9%, 95% CI: 11.2-14.8%). GADC was frequently encountered as a metastatic disease in both young and elderly patients (Stage IV: 45.7% and 41%, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, alcohol abuse, ASA functional status I-II, diffuse subtype, neoadjuvant, and palliative therapy were independently associated (P<0.05) with age ≤60 years. No differences were found in 2-year survival (GADC ≤60: 39% vs. 35%, P=0.45). Curative-intent surgery, TNM stage I-II, body mass index<30kg/m2, and better functional status at diagnosis were independent predictors of survival in GADC under the age of 60. CONCLUSIONS: One out of eight cases of GADC were diagnosed under the age of 60. Metastatic disease was frequent at diagnosis and overall survival was poor regardless of age. Factors associated with localized disease correlated with improved survival in younger patients. Our results underline the need for early diagnosis strategies in our country.

Rate of missed oesophageal cancer at routine endoscopy and survival outcomes: A multicentric cohort study.

Background: Missed oesophageal cancer (MEC) at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) is poorly documented. Objective: The objectives of this study were: (1) to assess the rate, predictors and survival of MEC; (2) to compare MEC and non-MEC tumours. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at four tertiary centres. Oesophageal cancers (ECs) diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 were included. Patients with a premalignant condition (Barrett, achalasia), prior diagnosis of EC or oesophagogastric junction tumour of gastric origin were excluded. MEC was defined as EC detected within 36 months after negative UGE. Results: 123,395 UGEs were performed during the study period, with 502 ECs being diagnosed (0.4%). A total of 391 ECs were finally included. Overall MEC rate was 6.4% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 4.4-9.3%). The interval between negative and diagnostic UGE was less than 2 years in 84% of the cases. Multivariate analysis showed that a negative endoscopy was associated with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and less experienced endoscopists. MEC was smaller than non-MEC at diagnosis (25 versus 40 mm, p = 0.021), more often flat or depressed (p = 0.013) and less frequently diagnosed as metastatic disease (p = 0.013). Overall 2-year survival rate was similar for MEC (20%) and non-MEC (24.1%) (p = 0.95). Conclusions: MEC accounted for 6.4% of all ECs and was associated with poor survival. High-quality UGE and awareness of MEC may help to reduce its incidence.

Characteristics and consequences of missed gastric cancer: A multicentric cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Missed gastric cancer (MGC) is poorly documented in Mediterranean populations. AIMS: (1) To assess the rate, predictors and survival of MGC. (2) To compare MGC and non-MGC tumors. METHODS: This is a retrospective-cohort study conducted at four centers. MGC was defined as cancer detected within three years after negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Gastric adenocarcinomas diagnosed between 2008-2015 were included. Patients with no follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: During the study period 123,395 esophagogastroduodenoscopies were performed, with 1374 gastric cancers being diagnosed (1.1%). A total of 1289 gastric cancers were finally included. The overall rate of MGC was 4.7% (61/1289, 3.7-6%). A negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy in MGC patients was independently associated with PPI therapy (p < 0.001), previous Billroth II anastomosis (p = 0.002), and lack of alarm symptoms (p < 0.001). The most frequent location for MGC was the gastric body(52.4%). MGCs were smaller than non-MGCs (31 vs 41 mm, p = 0.047), more often flat or depressed (p = 0.003) and less likely to be encountered as advanced disease. Overall 2-year survival was similar between MGC (34.1%) and Non-MGC (35.3 %) (p = 0.59). CONCLUSION: MGC accounted for nearly five percent of newly-diagnosed gastric adenocarcinomas. Overall survival was poor and not different between MGC and non-MGC.