Comparison between Enteroscopy-Based and Laparoscopy-Assisted ERCP for Accessing the Biliary Tree in Patients with Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Although balloon-assisted enteroscopy-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (BAE-ERCP) is a well-described means of accessing the duodenal papilla in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), it is associated with modest clinical success rates. Laparoscopy-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP)-performed by advancing a standard duodenoscope through a gastrostomy into the excluded stomach and duodenum-has emerged as a viable alternative to BAE-ERCP, with apparently higher success rates. In this systematic review, we compare LA-ERCP with enteroscopy-based techniques in post-RYGB patients, including 22 case series that provided data on papilla identification, papilla cannulation, and complications. We found that LA-ERCP was superior to the enteroscopy-based techniques in its capacity to reach the duodenal papilla, although complication rates were lower for the latter. Comparative studies are needed in order to corroborate our findings.

The Effectiveness of Endoscopic Gastroplasty for Obesity Treatment According to FDA Thresholds: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.

Endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) are promising alternatives to conventional surgery for obesity. The aim of this study is to compare efficacy and safety through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the endoscopic gastroplasty techniques versus conservative treatment. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Lilacs/Bireme. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling obese patients comparing endoscopic gastroplasty to sham or diet/exercise were considered eligible. Among 6014 records, three RCTs were selected for meta-analysis. The total sample was 459 patients (312 EBTs vs 147 control). Mean total body weight loss in the intervention group (IG) was 4.8% higher than the control group (CG) at 12 months (p = 0.01). The IG responder rate was 44.31% at 12 months. Therefore, the endoscopic gastroplasty is more effective than conservative therapies but do not achieve FDA thresholds.

Erratum: Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-0591-2883.].

Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) due to CRC occurs in 8 % to 29 % of patients.The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing colonic SEMS versus emergency surgery (ES) for MCO in palliative patients. This was the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting. METHODS: A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA method using online databases with no restriction regarding idiom or year of publication. Data were extracted by two authors according to a predefined data extraction form. Primary outcomes were: mean survival, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Stoma formation, length of stay on intensive care unit (ICU), technical success and clinical success were recorded for secondary outcomes. Technical success (TS) was defined as successful stent placement across the stricture and its deployment. Clinical success (CS) was defined as adequate bowel decompression within 48 h of stent insertion without need for re-intervention. RESULTS: We analyzed data from four RCT studies totaling 125 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.3 % for SEMS-treated patients and 6.4 % for ES-treated patients, with no difference between groups (RD: - 0.00, 95 % CI [-0.10, 0.10], I 2 : 0 %). Mean survival was 279 days for SEMS and 244 days for ES, with no significant difference between groups (RD: 20.14, 95 % CI: [-42.92, 83.21], I 2 : 44 %). Clinical success was 96 % in the ES group and 86.1 % in the SEMS group (RD: - 0.13, 95 % CI [-0.23, - 0.02], I 2 : 51 %). Permanent stoma rate was 84 % in the ES group and 14.3 % in the SEMS group (RR: 0.19, 95 % CI: [0.11, 0.33], I 2 : 28 %). Length of hospital stay was shorter in SEMS group (RD: - 5.16, 95 % CI: [-6.71, - 3.61], I 2 : 56 %). There was no significant difference between groups regarding adverse events (RD 0.18, 95 % CI: [-0.19, 0.54;]) neither regarding ICU stay. (RD: - 0.01, 95 % CI: [-0.08, 0.05], I 2 : 7 %). The most common stent-related complication was perforation (42.8 % of all AE). CONCLUSION: Mortality, mean survival, length of stay in the ICU and early complications of both methods were similar. SEMS may be an alternative to surgery with the advantage of early hospital discharge and lower risk of permanent stoma.

Urodynamic effects of the combination of tamsulosin and daily tadalafil in men with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of association of tamsulosin/tadalafil taken daily compared with tamsulosin/placebo in the lower urinary tract with urodynamic study (UDS). METHODS: All patients underwent baseline UDS before randomization to tamsulosin 0.4 mg/tadalafil 5 mg (Group 1; n = 20) or tamsulosin 0.4 mg/placebo (Group 2; n = 20) once daily for 30 days. End-of-study UDS were performed on completion of the treatment period. The primary end point was to demonstrate changes in urodynamic variables in the voiding phase, detrusor pressure at maximum flow (PdetQmax), and maximum flow rate (Qmax), from baseline to week four. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure of this clinical trial, PdetQmax, showed a significant reduction in tamsulosin/tadalafil group (13 ± 17.0) compared to tamsulosin/placebo (-1.2 ± 14.35) group (P = 0.03). Qmax increased in both groups, tamsulosin/tadalafil (1.0 ± 2.4) and tamsulosin/placebo (1.4 ± 2.4), but the difference was not significant between treatment groups (P = 0.65). Total IPSS, storage, and voiding sub-score improved significantly in tamsulosin/tadalafil compared with tamsulosin/placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The association of tamsulosin/tadalafil reduces detrusor pressure at maximum flow without changing the maximum flow rate during micturition and significantly improves lower urinary tract symptoms compared with the isolated use of tamsulosin.