International Consensus Recommendations for Safe Use of LAMS for On- and Off-Label Indications Using a Modified Delphi Process.

INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications. METHODS: Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round. RESULTS: Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events. DISCUSSION: Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS.

Safety and adverse events of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents and percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided gallbladder drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents (EUS-GBD-LAMSs) and percutaneous cholecystostomy for gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) are the alternative treatment modalities in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis (AC). The aim of this study was to compare the safety of these procedures for AC in surgically suboptimal candidates. METHODS: Six studies compared the 2 groups' early, delayed, and overall adverse events; they also compared length of hospital stay, re-interventions, and re-admissions rate. A random effect model calculated odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The 2 groups had similar early adverse events; however, EUS-GBD-LAMS was associated with a lower rate of delayed (OR, .21; 95% CI, .07-.61; P ≤ .01) and overall (OR, .43; 95% CI, .30-.61; P ≤ .01) adverse events. Patients with EUS-GBD-LAMSs had a shorter hospital stay than PTGBD. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GBD-LAMS is a safer option than PTGBD and is associated with a shorter hospital stay in nonsurgical candidates with AC.

Indirect comparison of various lumen apposing metal stents for EUS-guided biliary and gallbladder drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies assessing endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) or gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) using lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) have shown variable results based on the type of LAMS. We performed a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Multiple online databases were searched for studies using LAMS (AXIOS or SPAXUS) for EUS-BD and EUS-GB. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success and adverse events. Pooled proportions along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 18 observational studies were included: 11 for AXIOS stent (433 patients with mean age 72 years and 54% males) and 7 for SPAXUS stent (242 patients with mean age 74 years and 50% males). The respective pooled outcomes for AXIOS stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB) were: technical success (96.2% and 96.2%), clinical success (92.8% and 92.7%), total adverse events (10.1% and 23.6%), and bleeding (3.7% and 4.8%). The respective pooled outcomes for SPAXUS stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB) were: technical success (93.8% and 95.9%), clinical success (90.1% and 94.2%), total adverse events (12.6% and 9.5%), and bleeding (3.1% and 1.8%). CONCLUSION: AXIOS and SPAXUS stents demonstrate similar pooled technical and clinical success rates. Adverse events occurred in 23.6% patients (AXIOS stent) and 9.5% patients (SPAXUS stent) during EUS-GB.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Therapy in Symptomatic Pancreatic Divisum: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital malformation of the pancreas and is implicated as a cause of pancreatitis. The role of endotherapy has been variable in symptomatic PD indicated by recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), or chronic pancreatic-type abdominal pain (PP). The aim of this study was to analyze the pooled data to determine the success of endoscopic intervention for pancreas divisum. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2023) to identify studies reporting on the use of endoscopic therapy in symptomatic pancreatic divisum. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2% values were used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were retrieved that reported endoscopic intervention in pancreatic divisum. The calculated pooled rate of technical success was 92% (95% CI: 87-95; I2=63%). The calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 65% (95% CI: 60-70; I2=60%). The rate of clinical success by PD subtypes was highest in RAP at 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). Available studies had significant heterogeneity in defining clinical success. The rate of adverse events was 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). CONCLUSIONS: The role of endoscopic therapy in pancreatic divisum is variable with the highest success rate in recurrent acute pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is associated with a higher-than-usual rate of adverse events, including post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Conventional Versus Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for colorectal lesions, the traction method (T-ESD) allows the lesion to be stabilized with easier dissection. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results on the clinical outcomes of T-ESD as compared with C-ESD. We conducted a meta-analysis to compile the data. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for RCTs evaluating C-ESD versus T-ESD for colorectal tumors. The end points of interest were procedure time (min), resection speed (mm²/min), R0 resection, en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Six RCTs with a total of 566 patients (C-ESD n=284, T-ESD n=282) were included. The mean age was 67±10 y and 60% were men. As compared with the T-ESD technique, the C-ESD group was associated with longer procedure time (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23, P<0.00001) and lesser resection speed (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.06, P=0.04). No significant difference was found in the 2 groups with respect to R0 resection rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, P=0.87), en bloc resection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, P=0.35), delayed bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.59, P=0.55) and perforation (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 6.27, P=0.16). DISCUSSION: On meta-analysis, pooled procedure time was significantly faster with T-ESD compared with C-ESD. The clinical outcomes, however, were comparable.

Cold Snare Polypectomy in Small (<10 mm) Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10 mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10 mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement. RESULTS: Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5 mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.

Comparing EUS-directed Transgastric ERCP (EDGE) Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted ERCP Versus Enteroscopic ERCP: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Management of choledocholithiasis in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery is challenging. This study aims to compare technical success rates, adverse events, and procedural time between 3 current approaches: endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (EDGE), enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP), and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP). METHODS: A systematic search of 5 databases was conducted. Direct and network meta-analyses were performed to compare interventions using the random effects model. A significance threshold of P < 0.05 was applied. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. On direct meta-analysis, technical success rates were comparable between EDGE and LA-ERCP (odds ratio: 0.768, CI: 0.196-3.006, P = 0.704, I2 = 14.13%). However, EDGE and LA-ERCP showed significantly higher success rates than E-ERCP. No significant differences in adverse events were found between EDGE versus LA-ERCP, EDGE versus E-ERCP, and LA-ERCP versus E-ERCP on direct meta-analysis. In terms of procedural time, EDGE was significantly shorter than E-ERCP [mean difference (MD): -31 minutes, 95% CI: -40.748 to -21.217, P < 0.001, I2 = 19.89%), and E-ERCP was shorter than LA-ERCP (MD: -44.567 minutes, 95% CI: -76.018 to -13.116, P = 0.005, I2 = 0%). EDGE also demonstrated a significant time advantage over LA-ERCP (MD: -78.145 minutes, 95% CI: -104.882 to -51.407, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%). All findings were consistent with network meta-analysis on random effects model. The heterogeneity of the model was low. CONCLUSIONS: EDGE and LA-ERCP showed superior technical success rates compared with E-ERCP. Adverse events did not significantly differ among the three approaches. Furthermore, EDGE demonstrated the shortest procedural duration. We recommend considering EDGE as a first-choice procedure.

Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Complex Colorectal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for complex colorectal lesions have shown variable results. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies comparing EFTR versus ESD for complex colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were resection rates, procedure time (min), and complications. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) along with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4 studies with 530 patients (n=215 EFTR, n=315 ESD) were included. The mean follow-up duration was 5 months. The mean age of the patients was 68 years and 64% were men. The EFTR and ESD groups had similar rates of en bloc resection (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 0.60-4.97, P=0.31) and R0 resection (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 0.55-4.14, P=0.42). The EFTR group had significantly reduced procedure time (SMD -1.87, 95% CI: -3.13 to -0.61, P=0.004), total complications (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13-0.44, P<0.00001), perforation (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.39, P=0.0005) and postresection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.48, P=0.008). Delayed bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.12, P=0.66). Residual/recurrent lesions were significantly higher in the EFTR group (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 1.39-15.66, P=0.01). DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis of small studies with high heterogeneity showed that EFTR and ESD have comparable resection rates for complex colorectal lesions. EFTR is faster and has fewer complications, but it increases residual or recurrent lesions.

Safety and efficacy of thalidomide in treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to angioectasias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thalidomide has been used for angioectasia-associated refractory gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), with studies showing variable efficacy and side effects profile. We conducted a meta-analysis to reconcile the data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies evaluating thalidomide in patients with refractory/recurrent GIB due to angioectasias. The outcomes of interest were cessation of bleeding, rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, hospitalization and adverse events. Pooled proportions for incidence, and odds ratios (OR) for comparison with control were calculated along with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of seven studies with 346 patients (n = 269 thalidomide, n = 77 control) were included. Thalidomide dose was usually started at 50-100mg/day. The mean age was 65 years, 45% patients were men, and mean follow-up was 1.8 years. The pooled clinical outcomes with thalidomide were: cessation of bleeding 42.2% (95% CI 36.02 to 48.41), rebleeding 30%, need for blood transfusion 20.1%, hospitalization 40% and adverse events 55.9%. When compared with the control group in 2 studies, patients on thalidomide had significantly higher odds of cessation of bleeding (OR 21.40, 95% CI 5.78 to 79.29, p < 0.00001) and adverse events, with lower need for blood transfusion and hospitalization. DISCUSSION: In patients with angioectasias-related refractory/recurrent GIB, the use of thalidomide results in significantly decreased bleeding risk and may play a role in the management of such patients.

Safety of Endoscopic Procedures in Thrombocytopenia and Neutropenia: Embracing Assurance.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the post-endoscopic adverse events in patients with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Current guidelines do not provide clear direction on this topic. AIM: We explore the pooled rates of safety and adverse effects of endoscopic interventions in thrombocytopenia and neutropenia patients via a systematic review & meta-analysis. METHODS: Databases, including Medline, Scopus, and Embase, were searched (in May 2023) using specific terms for studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of endoscopy in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: Six studies and four studies evaluated endoscopic outcomes in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia respectively with mean age was 56 years. The pooled rate of total post-biopsy bleeding and total post-polypectomy bleeding among patients with thrombocytopenia was 4% (95% CI 1-11), I2 = 84%, and 12% (95% CI 3-36) I2 = 43%. The total rate of post procedure-related bleeding in thrombocytopenia was 5% (95% CI 1-14) I2 = 95%. The pooled rate of post-endoscopic infection (fever from any cause, bacteremia) in neutropenia was 10% (95% CI 3-28%) I2 = 96%. On sub analysis, the pooled rate of bacteremia and 30 days all-cause mortality in neutropenia was 4% (95% CI 3-5%) I2 = 0% and 13% (95% CI 4-34%) I2 = 95% respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data supports the notion that endoscopic procedures are safe for neutropenic, thrombocytopenic patients with suitable indications and reasonable functional status and have an acceptable risk/benefit ratio.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Stent Types for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is required in select cases including infected or symptomatic collections. In this network meta-analysis, we have compared lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS), and double-pigtail stents (DPS) to identify the most useful stent type in the management of PFCs. METHODS: We reviewed several databases to identify studies that compared DPS or FCSEMS with LAMS and the ones which compared DPS with FCSEMS for the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success, adverse events, technical success, recurrence of PFCs, and procedure duration. Random effects model and frequentist approach were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We included 28 studies with 2974 patients. Rate of clinical success was significantly lower with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.32, 0.59). Rate of recurrence was higher with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 2.06 (1.19, 3.57). We found no significant difference in rate of adverse events between groups. Rate of technical success was higher for FCSEMS compared to LAMS. Procedure duration was significantly shorter for LAMS compared to DPS and FCSEMS. Based on frequentist approach, LAMS was found to be superior to DPS and FCSEMS in achieving higher clinical success, lower rate of adverse events and recurrence, and shorter procedure time. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis demonstrates the superiority of LAMS over DPS and FCSEMS in the management of PFCs in achieving a higher clinical success, shorter procedure time, and lower rate of recurrence. Some of the analyses are not adequately powered to make firm conclusions, and future large multicenter RCTs are required to further evaluate this issue.

Adverse Events and Device Failures Associated with Pancreatic Stents: A Comprehensive Analysis Using the FDA's MAUDE Database.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic duct stents (PDS) are widely used for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the adverse events associated with PDS placement. This study aims to investigate the reported adverse events and device failures related to PDS, utilizing the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database maintained by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). METHODS: Post-marketing surveillance data from January 2013 to December 8, 2023, were extracted from the FDA's MAUDE database to analyze the reports pertaining to the use of commonly used PDS. The primary outcomes of interest were device issues and patient-related adverse events. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel 2010, with the calculation of pooled numbers and percentages for each device and patient adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 579 device issues and 194 patient-related adverse events were identified. Device issues were primarily attributed to stent deformation (n = 72; 12.4%), followed by migration of the device into the pancreatic duct or expulsion out of the duct (n = 60; 10.4%), and stent fracture/breakage (n = 55; 9.4%). Among the patient-reported adverse events, inflammation was the most common (n = 26; 13.4%), followed by reports of stents becoming embedded in tissue (n = 21; 10.8%) and stent occlusion/obstruction (n = 16; 8.2%). The most prevalent device failures associated with Advanix stents were material deformation, with perforation (n = 3, 30%) being the most frequently reported adverse event. Concerning Geenen stents, migration or expulsion of the device (n = 34, 16.9%) constituted the most common device-related adverse events, while inflammation (n = 20, 16.7%) was the most frequently reported patient-related issue. For Zimmon stents, migration or expulsion of the device (n = 22, 8.8%) were the most frequently reported device-related problems, whereas perforation (n = 7, 10.9%) and bleeding (n = 7, 10.9%) were the most frequent patient-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight important device and patient adverse events that endoscopists and referring providers should be aware of before considering pancreatic stent placement.

G-POEM for gastroparesis: past, present and future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gastroparesis is a chronic debilitating condition with rising incidence and healthcare burden. As abdominal surgeries, diabetes, viral infections and autoimmune diseases become more prevalent, gastroparesis will continue to upsurge. Conservative treatment options for gastroparesis are limited by their side effects and short-term efficacy. Gastric endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) is a novel incisionless endosurgical technique with excellent long-term outcomes. This review is in time, as the demand for G-POEM will continue to escalate. RECENT FINDINGS: This review encompasses the conservative and nonconservative treatment options for gastroparesis. G-POEM is a nonconservative treatment option, and the aim of this review is to discuss the variations in technique of G-POEM, short-term and long-term clinical efficacy of G-POEM and adverse events associated with it. SUMMARY: G-POEM has high technical and clinical success with minimal adverse events. G-POEM outcomes are similar or superior when compared with other treatment options for refractory gastroparesis. G-POEM is being widely adopted and will become the preferred treatment choice in patients with refractory gastroparesis.

Patient-related adverse events and device failures associated with commercially available enteral or duodenal self-expanding metal stents: an analysis of the MAUDE database.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Duodenal stents are widely used to treat patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO), most commonly from pancreatic cancer. The WallFlex (Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass, USA) and Evolution (Cook Endoscopy, Winston-Salem, NC, USA) duodenal stents are in widespread use for treating MGOO. The objective of this study was to analyze device failures and patient-related adverse events reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for these 2 stents. METHODS: We analyzed postmarketing surveillance data on the WallFlex and Evolution duodenal stents from January 2000 to January 2022 through the FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm). RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four MAUDE reports were identified and analyzed, from which 176 device failures and 186 patient-related adverse events were identified. Device-related failures for the WallFlex stent were delivery system failure (15.4%) and failure to activate the stent (13.2%). Device failures for the Evolution stent were failure to activate the stent (16.5%) and delivery system failure (15.3%). Patient-related adverse events for the WallFlex stent were perforation (18.9%), death (6.6%), and hemorrhage (3.8%), whereas patient-related adverse events for the Evolution duodenal stent were obstruction (16.3%), perforation (6.3%), aspiration (3.8%), and fragments of broken delivery system left in the patient (3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Both stents are associated with device failures such as failure to activate the stent, stent migration, and occlusion by tumor growth. Despite high success rates, duodenal stents can be associated with serious device failures and patient-related adverse events.

Efficacy of cap-assisted endoscopy for the visualization of the major duodenal papilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The current standard of practice is to use a duodenoscope for the evaluation of the major duodenal papilla (MDP). Recently, cap-assisted endoscopy (CAE), which uses a transparent cap at the tip of a standard front-viewing endoscope, has emerged as an alternative. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in several databases from inception to January 2023 to identify studies evaluating the efficacy of CAE for the evaluation of the MDP. RESULTS: Nine studies including 806 patients met our inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of technical success for CAE was 93.2% (95% confidence interval, 85.6-96.9; I2 = 84.6%). A subgroup analysis comparing CAE with a standard endoscope showed higher odds for the evaluation of the MDP with CAE (but not a duodenoscope, which was better than CAE) with an odds ratio of 57.294 (95% confidence interval, 17.767-184.755; I2 = 45.303%). CONCLUSIONS: CAE offers a significant advantage with high rates of complete MDP evaluation compared with standard forward-viewing endoscopy. However, CAE is associated with lower rates of success when compared with side-viewing endoscopes.

Risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding with antiplatelet and anticoagulant use: a propensity-matched analysis of the U.S. Collaborative Network.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: GI bleeding after ERCP is a serious adverse event and most commonly occurs after endoscopic biliary and/or pancreatic sphincterotomy. Although the strength of available evidence for post-sphincterotomy GI bleeding risk is high for therapeutic warfarin and heparin, it remains unknown for antiplatelet agents like clopidogrel and prasugrel. We conducted a retrospective United States-based, propensity-matched cohort study to assess the risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding in patients receiving anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (APT) therapy. METHODS: We analyzed the U.S. Collaborative Network in the TriNetX platform through December 27, 2022, to include patients receiving APT and AC therapy who underwent ERCP within 7 days of hospitalization. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed. The primary outcome was the incidence of GI bleeding within 7 days of sphincterotomy. Secondary outcomes included need for blood transfusion, intensive care unit care, and all-cause mortality within 30 days of bleeding. RESULTS: Overall, 2806 patients (1806 in the AC cohort and 1000 in the APT cohort) underwent ERCP with sphincterotomy. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for age, body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, gender, race, ethnicity, diabetes mellitus, nicotine dependence, presence and severity of chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, and thrombocytopenia between the cohorts. Patients in both cohorts had an increased risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding compared with matched control subjects (adjusted odds ratios of 3.6 [95% confidence interval, 2.58-5.06] and 2.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.43-3.56], respectively). Although heparin bridging therapy and concurrent use of aspirin did not further increase the risk of GI bleeding, resumption of AC within 24 hours' postprocedure did. Neither cohort of patients was at an increased risk for blood transfusion, intensive care unit care, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our database analysis shows that patients receiving AC and APT therapy are at a higher risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding compared with matched control subjects. An appropriate drug cessation period or alternative biliary decompression modalities may be used in these patients.

Efficacy of topical hemostatic agents in malignancy-related GI bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite advances in endoscopic therapies, malignancy-related GI bleeding remains difficult to manage with high rates of treatment failure and rebleeding. Topical hemostatic agents (THAs) are easier to apply to the wide bleeding surface of tumors. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases to identify studies reporting on the use of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleeding. The primary outcome was the achievement of hemostasis; secondary outcomes were early rebleeding (≤3 days), delayed rebleeding (>3 days), aggregate rebleeding, all-cause mortality, and GI bleeding-related mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions was done for all outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 355 citations, 16 studies with 530 patients were included. Primary hemostasis was achieved in 94.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.5-96.0). Early rebleeding was seen in 13.9% (95% CI, 9.7-19.4) and delayed rebleeding in 11.4% (95% CI, 5.8-21.1). Aggregate rebleeding was seen in 24.2% (95% CI, 18.5-31.0). All-cause mortality was 33.1% (95% CI, 23.7-44.0), whereas GI bleeding-related mortality occurred in 5.9% (95% CI, 2.2%-14.8). CONCLUSIONS: THAs are highly effective for achieving primary hemostasis in malignancy-related GI bleeding. It should be considered as an alternative to traditional endotherapy methods in malignancy-related GI bleeding. Future studies should be designed to evaluate its efficacy and safety as a primary method of hemostasis as compared with traditional endotherapy measures.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty reintervention score using supervised machine learning.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Reintervention after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) can be indicated because of postprocedural adverse events from various preinterventional or postprocedural comorbidities. We developed and internally validated an ESG reintervention score (ESG-RS) that determines the individualized risk of reintervention within the first 30 days after ESG. METHODS: We used data from a sample of 3583 patients who underwent ESG in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Program database (2016-2021). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO)-penalized regression was used to select the most promising predictors of reintervention after ESG within 30 days. The predictive variables extracted by LASSO regression were entered into multivariate analysis to generate an ESG-RS by using the coefficients of the statistically significant variables. The model performance was assessed using receiver-operator curves by 10-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: Eleven variables were selected by LASSO regression and used in the final multivariate analysis. The ESG-RS was inferred using 5 factors (history of previous foregut surgery, preoperative anticoagulation use, female gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥II, and hypertension) weighted by their regression coefficients in the multivariable logistic regression model. The area under the curve of the ESG-RS was .74 (95% confidence interval, .70-.78). For the ESG-RS, the optimal cutpoint was 67.9 (high risk vs low risk), with a sensitivity of .76 and specificity of .71. CONCLUSIONS: The ESG-RS aids clinicians in preoperative risk stratification of patients undergoing ESG while clarifying factors contributing to a higher risk of reintervention.

Single-incision needle-knife biopsy for the diagnosis of GI subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A histologic diagnosis of GI subepithelial tumors (SETs) is important because of the malignant potential of these lesions. The current modalities of choice, including EUS-guided FNA and biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) have demonstrated suboptimal diagnostic success. Single-incision with needle-knife (SINK) biopsy has emerged as an alternative diagnostic approach to increase tissue acquisition and diagnostic success. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the technical success, diagnostic success, and adverse events of SINK biopsy. METHODS: We searched multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from inception to July 2022. The primary outcomes assessed were the technical success and diagnostic success of SINK in GI SETs. The secondary outcomes assessed were adverse events and whether immunohistochemical analysis could be successfully performed on tissue samples obtained via SINK. RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 219 SINK biopsy procedures were included in this meta-analysis. The technical success rate was 98.1% (95% CI, 94.9%-99.3%; P = .000; I2 = .0%), and the diagnostic success rate was 87.9% (95% CI, 82.6%-91.7%; P = .000; I2 = .0%). The immunohistochemical success rate was 88.3% (95% CI, 78.7%-93.9%; P = .000; I2 = 3.5%). The rate of adverse events was 7.5% (95% CI, 4.3%-12.7%; P = .00; I2 = 7.2%), and bleeding was the most common adverse event. CONCLUSION: SINK biopsy is a safe diagnostic procedure with a high technical and diagnostic success in patients with GI SET. Further randomized controlled trials and direct comparison studies are needed to validate these findings.

Early (<4 weeks) versus standard (≥4 weeks) endoscopic drainage of pancreatic walled-off fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies have demonstrated that the ideal time for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is 4 to 6 weeks after their development. However, some pancreatic collections, notably infected pancreatic fluid collections, require earlier drainage. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of the first intervention is unclear, and consensus data are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections <4 weeks after development compared with ≥4 weeks after development. METHODS: Search strategies were developed for PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception. Outcomes of interest were technical success, defined as successful endoscopic placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent; clinical success, defined as a reduction in cystic collection size; and procedure-related adverse events. A random-effects model was used for analysis, and results are expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Six studies (630 patients) were included in our final analysis, in which 182 patients (28.9%) were enrolled in the early drainage cohort and 448 patients (71.1%) in the standard drainage cohort. The mean fluid collection size was 143.4 ± 18.8 mm for the early cohort versus 128 ± 19.7 mm for the standard cohort. Overall, technical success was equal in both cohorts. Clinical success did not favor either standard drainage or early drainage (OR, .39; 95% CI, .13-1.22; P = .11). No statistically significant differences were found in overall adverse events (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, .63-4.45; P = .31) or mortality (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, .29-4.48; P = .85). Hospital stay was longer for patients undergoing early drainage compared with standard drainage (23.7 vs 16.0 days, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both early (<4 weeks) and standard (≥4 weeks) drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections offer similar technical and clinical outcomes. Patients requiring endoscopic drainage should not be delayed for 4 weeks.