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.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 7341, 2024 03 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38538734

RESUMO

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary therapeutic procedure for pancreaticobiliary disorders, and studies highlighted the impact of papilla anatomy on its efficacy and safety. Our objective was to quantify the influence of papilla morphology on ERCP outcomes. We systematically searched three medical databases in September 2022, focusing on studies detailing the cannulation process or the rate of adverse events in the context of papilla morphology. The Haraldsson classification served as the primary system for papilla morphology, and a pooled event rate with a 95% confidence interval was calculated as the effect size measure. Out of 17 eligible studies, 14 were included in the quantitative synthesis. In studies using the Haraldsson classification, the rate of difficult cannulation was the lowest in type I papilla (26%), while the highest one was observed in the case of type IV papilla (41%). For post-ERCP pancreatitis, the event rate was the highest in type II papilla (11%) and the lowest in type I and III papilla (6-6%). No significant difference was observed in the cannulation failure and post-ERCP bleeding event rates between the papilla types. In conclusion, certain papilla morphologies are associated with a higher rate of difficult cannulation and post-ERCP pancreatitis.


Assuntos
Ampola Hepatopancreática , Pancreatite , Humanos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efeitos adversos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/métodos , Cateterismo/métodos , Ampola Hepatopancreática/cirurgia , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/efeitos adversos , Pancreatite/etiologia
2.
Biomedicines ; 11(2)2023 Feb 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36831090

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are recommendations for anticoagulation resumption after gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), although data addressing this topic by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-treated patients is lacking. We aim to determine the safety and efficacy of restarting DOACs after GIB. METHODS: Studies that reported rebleeding, thromboembolic events, and mortality after restarting or withholding DOACs were selected. The systematic research was conducted in five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus). The random effect model was implemented to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR). The ROBINS-I tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Four retrospective cohort studies (1722 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. We did not find a significant increase in the risk of rebleeding in patients restarting DOACs after index GIB (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.74-1.68). The outcomes of thromboembolic events and mortality data were not suitable for meta-analytic calculations. Single studies did not show statistically significant differences. Data quality assessment showed a serious overall risk of bias and very low quality of evidence (GRADE D). CONCLUSION: DOAC resumption after a GIB episode may not elevate the risk of rebleeding. However, the need for high-quality randomized clinical trials is crucial.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA