Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Gastroenterology Res ; 16(5): 254-261, 2023 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37937229

RESUMO

Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection is a frequently employed method for removing colonic polyps. Nonetheless, the recurrence of these polyps over a healed submucosal base can complicate the extraction of leftover lesions through standard procedures. EndoRotor®, a non-thermal device specifically designed for endoscopic mucosal resection, has recently been assessed for its utility in removing colonic polyps, non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, and pancreatic necrosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the safety and efficacy of EndoRotor® in resecting scared or recurrence colonic polyps. Methods: We conducted an exhaustive review of existing literature using databases such as Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until January 2023. Our aim was to find all studies that assessed the safety of non-thermal endoscopic resection devices in removing colonic polyps. The primary outcome we focused on was the rate of technical success. Secondary outcomes that we considered included the frequency of remaining lesions and instances of adverse events. To analyze these data, we used comprehensive meta-analysis software. Results: Our analysis incorporated three studies comprising 54 patients who underwent resection of 60 lesions. The combined technical success rate was 93.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 77.7-98.6%, I2 = 25.5%). In patients who had another endoscopic examination, 20 were found to have a residual lesion. After the initial session, the combined rate of remaining lesions was 39.8% (95% CI: 15.3-70.8%, I2 = 74.5%). There were eight occurrences of intraoperative bleeding and four instances of bleeding post-procedure. The combined rate of intraoperative bleeding was 13.2% (95% CI: 6.7-24.3%, I2 = 0%), and post-procedure bleeding stood at 8.5% (95% CI: 3.4-19.8%, I2 = 0%). Only one major bleeding event was recorded, and no cases of perforation were reported. Conclusion: Our research indicates that the EndoRotor® effectively removes scarred colonic polyps, though the rate of remaining lesions is significant, potentially necessitating several sessions for a thorough removal. There is a need for broader prospective studies, mainly randomized controlled trials, to further assess EndoRotor®'s efficiency and safety in eliminating colonic polyps.

2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37889110

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) after Trans-jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a common clinical problem. According to recent studies, Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use can serve as an independent risk factor for HE. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze the association between HE with PPI use versus without PPI use in patients undergoing TIPS. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted a comprehensive literature search from inception through February 15th, 2022 on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases. Odds ratio (OR) was calculated when comparing dichotomous variables of patients with HE vs no HE in PPI use versus no PPI use in post TIPS patients. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and P values (<0.05 considered significant) were also generated. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search strategy yielded a total of 27 articles. We finalized four studies with a total of 825 patients. There was statistically significant difference in TIPS patients with HE in PPI users versus non-PPI users (OR 3.39 [1.79-6.43], P<0.01, I2=55.5%). Pooled mean average days to hospitalization was 215.2 days to hospitalization for hepatic encephalopathy in non-PPI users compared to 139.5 days in PPI users. CONCLUSIONS: Our study determines that there is a higher risk of post-TIPS HE in patients on PPI therapy vs. patients not receiving PPI therapy. We recommend using PPIs at a lower tolerable dose where necessary. Larger studies are needed to draw stronger conclusions.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA