Prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of post-ampullectomy pancreatitis: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of 1858 patients.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting (PPDS) in preventing post-ampullectomy pancreatitis (PAP) at the time of endoscopic ampullectomy (EA) has been reported, however, results are conflicting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis looking at the use of PPDS in reducing PAP as well as overall post-ampullectomy complications. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through May 2023 for studies reporting on EA. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of PAP, with and without PPDS. Pooled rates of adverse events including perforation, delayed bleeding, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were assessed. Random effects model was used for our meta-analysis and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (14 case series, 18 cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trials) with 1868 patients were included. The overall pooled rate of PAP was 12.3% (CI 10.3-14.5). We found no statistically significant difference in rates of PAP among patients with PPDS, 11.9% (CI 8.9-15.7) and without PPDS, 16.6% (CI 13.4-20.4), RR 0.8 (CI 0.51-1.28), p = 0.4. In terms of severe PAP, we found no difference between the two groups. The overall pooled rates of successful en-bloc and piecemeal resection were 74.8% (CI 67.3-81.1) and 25.1% (CI 19-32.4). Additionally, pooled rates of ampullary stenosis, post procedural bleeding, perforation, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were 3.6%, 11.1%, 4.2%, 3.5%, and 1.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that PPDS at the time of EA does not offer a significant protective effect against PAP. While the incidence of PAP was higher among the no PPDS group, it is plausible that this is more likely due to variation among studies in terms of lesion size, length/size of pancreatic stent used and etiology of ampullary lesions. Future well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Utilization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance Programs in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Patients with cirrhosis are advised to undergo hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance every 6 months. Routine surveillance is associated with early tumor detection and improved survival. However, surveillance is underutilized. We aimed to characterize the uptake of HCC surveillance in cirrhotic patients following the implementation of interventional programs. We performed a comprehensive literature search of major databases (from inception to October 2020). Surveillance was defined as having an abdominal sonogram every 6 months. Nine studies were included for meta-analysis which involved 4550 patients. The etiology of liver cirrhosis was largely due to hepatitis C or B (n=2023), followed by alcohol (n=857), and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (n=432). Patients enrolled in surveillance programs were 6 times more likely to undergo abdominal sonography when compared with standard of care (odds ratio=6.00; 95% confidence interval: 3.35-10.77). On subgroup analysis, clinical reminders were associated with a 4 times higher rate of HCC surveillance compared with standard of care (odds ratio=3.80; 95% confidence interval: 2.25-6.39). Interventional programs significantly improve the rate of HCC surveillance. This is clinically impactful and should be considered as a means for improving surveillance rates.

Efficacy & safety of EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy: a systematic review & meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy, laparoscopic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LA-ERCP) and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) have been utilized to achieve pancreaticobiliary access. Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) has recently emerged as an alternate and efficient approach. As data regarding EDGE continues to evolve, concerns about safety and efficacy remain, limiting wide adoptability. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of EDGE and compare it to the current standard of care. METHODS: A comprehensive search of major databases (inception to Nov 2022) identified published studies on EDGE. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and heterogeneity (I2). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized difference in means (SMD) were utilized for head-to-head comparison analysis between EDGE vs. LA-ERCP and EDGE vs. E-ERCP. Primary outcomes assessed pooled EDGE safety (adverse events) and efficacy (technical/clinical success). Secondary outcomes assessed efficacy and safety profiles via a comparative analysis of EDGE vs. LA-ERCP and EDGE vs. E-ERCP. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies (470 patients) were included. EDGE pooled technical success (TS) rate was 96% (95% CI 92-97.6, I2 = 0), and clinical success was 91% (85-95, I2 = 0). Pooled rate of all adverse events with EDGE was 17% (14-24.6, I2 = 32%). On sub-group analysis, these included failure of fistula closure 17% (10-25.5, I2 = 48%), stent migration 7% (4-12, I2 = 51%), bleeding 5% (3.2-7.9, I2 = 0), post-EDGE weight gain 4% (2-9, I2 = 0), perforation 4% (2.1-5.8, I2 = 0), and post-ERCP pancreatitis 2% (1-5, I2 = 0). EDGE TS was comparable to LA-ERCP (97% vs. 98%; RR, 1.00; CI, 0.85-1.17, p = 0.95) and E-ERCP (100% vs. 66%; RR, 1.26; CI, 0.99-1.6, p = 0.06). No statistical difference was noted in adverse events between EDGE and LA-ERCP (13% vs. 17.6%; RR, 0.61; CI, 0.28-1.35, p = 0.52) and E-ERCP (9.6% vs. 16%; RR, 0.61; CI, 0.28-1.35, p = 0.22). EDGE procedure time and hospital stay were shorter than LA-ERCP and E-ERCP (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that EDGE is safe and efficacious to the current standard of care. Further head-to-head comparative trials are needed to validate our findings.

Colonoscopy-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Abnormal Stool-Based Tests: A Systematic Review of Literature and Meta-analysis of Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and guaiac-based fecal occult blood (gFOBT) are associated with a substantial reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate colonoscopy-related adverse events in individuals with a positive FIT or gFOBT. METHODS: A systematic and detailed search was run in January 2021, with the assistance of a medical librarian for studies reporting on colonoscopy-related adverse events as part of organized CRC screening programs. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, and the results were expressed for pooled proportions along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 771,730 colonoscopies were performed in patients undergoing CRC screening using either gFOBT or FIT across 31 studies. The overall pooled incidence of severe adverse events in the entire patient cohort was 0.42% (CI 0.20-0.64); I2 = 38.76%. In patients with abnormal gFOBT, the incidence was 0.2% (CI 0.1-0.3); I2 = 24.6%, and in patients with a positive FIT, it was 0.4% (CI 0.2-0.7); I2 = 48.89%. The overall pooled incidence of perforation, bleeding, and death was 0.13% (CI 0.09-0.21); I2 = 22.84%, 0.3% (CI 0.2-0.4); I2 = 35.58%, and 0.01% (CI 0.00-0.01); I2 = 33.21%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Our analysis shows that in colonoscopies performed after abnormal stool-based testing, the overall risk of severe adverse events, perforation, bleeding, and death is minimal.

Postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) remain on the front line of the battle against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and are among the highest groups at risk of infection during this raging pandemic. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated HCWs. We searched multiple databases from inception through August 2021 to identify studies that reported on the incidence of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions of COVID-19 infection in partially/fully vaccinated as well as unvaccinated individuals. Eighteen studies with 228 873 HCWs were included in the final analysis. The total number of partially vaccinated, fully vaccinated, and unvaccinated HCWs were 132 922, 155 673, and 17 505, respectively. Overall pooled proportion of COVID-19 infections among partially/fully vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.5). Among partially vaccinated, fully vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs, pooled proportion of COVID-19 infections was 2.3% (CI 1.2-4.4), 1.3% (95% CI 0.6-2.9), and 10.1% (95% CI 4.5-19.5), respectively. Our analysis shows the risk of COVID-19 infection in both partially and fully vaccinated HCWs remains exceedingly low when compared to unvaccinated individuals. There remains an urgent need for all frontline HCWs to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Pooled rates of adenoma detection by colonoscopy in asymptomatic average-risk individuals with positive fecal immunochemical test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks for colonoscopy in individuals positive for a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are ≥45% in men and ≥35% in women. These are based on weak, low-quality evidence. We performed a meta-analysis to ascertain the pooled ADR in FIT-positive colonoscopy. METHODS: Major databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched in October 2021 for studies reporting on ADR of colonoscopy in a FIT-positive population. Meta-analysis was performed by standard methodology using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 and 95% prediction interval statistics. RESULTS: Thirty-four high-quality studies that included more than 6 million asymptomatic average-risk individuals were analyzed; 2,655,345 individuals completed a screening FIT test. The pooled FIT screening rate was 69.8% (95% CI, 62.8-76.1), the pooled FIT positivity rate was 5.4% (95% CI, 4.3-6.9), and the colonoscopy completion rate was 85% (95% CI, 82.8-86.9). The pooled ADR was 47.8% (95% CI, 44.1-51.6), pooled advanced ADR was 25.3% (95% CI, 22-29), and the pooled colorectal cancer detection rate was 5.1% (95% CI, 4.4-5.9). The pooled ADR in men was 58.3% (95% CI, 52.8-63.6) and in women was 41.9% (95% CI, 36.4-47.6). The pooled ADR with qualitative FIT assessment was 67.7% (95% CI, 50.7-81), with 1-stool sample FIT was 52.8% (95% CI, 48.8-56.8), and at a cutoff threshold of 100 ng hemoglobin/mL was 52.1% (95% CI, 47-57.1). Based on time-period cumulative analysis, the ADR improved over time from 30.5% (95% CI, 24.6-37.2) to 47.8% (95% CI, 44.1-51.6). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports the current ADR benchmarks for colonoscopy in FIT-positive individuals. Excellent pooled ADR parameters were demonstrated with qualitative assessment of 1 stool sample at a test cutoff value of 100 ng hemoglobin/mL, and ADR per endoscopist improved over time.

Hydrogen peroxide-assisted endoscopic necrosectomy of pancreatic walled-off necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Use of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) has been reported in direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). The aim of this meta-analysis was to study the pooled clinical outcomes of H2O2-assisted DEN of pancreatic WON. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2021) to identify studies reporting on the use of H2O2 in DEN of WON. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled rates and I2 values, and 95% prediction intervals were used to assess heterogeneity. The outcomes studied were technical success, clinical success, and adverse events in H2O2-assisted DEN of pancreatic WON. RESULTS: In 7 analyzed studies, 186 patients underwent H2O2-assisted DEN of WON. The pooled rate of technical success was 95.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.5-98.5), clinical success was 91.6% (95% CI, 86.1-95), and cumulative rate of overall adverse events was 19.3% (95% CI, 7.6-41). The pooled rate of bleeding was 7.9% (95% CI, 2.4-22.7), stent migration was 11.3% (95% CI, 4.9-23.9), perforation 5.4% (95% CI, 1.7-15.7), infection 5.7% (95% CI, 2-15.1), and pulmonary adverse event 2.9% (95% CI, 1.3-6.1). Mean treatment sessions ranged from 2 to 5. CONCLUSIONS: H2O2-assisted DEN of WON demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes, with minimal heterogeneity. No adverse events attributable to H2O2 were reported. Future controlled studies are warranted comparing the clinical outcomes with and without H2O2 before H2O2 use can be established in DEN of pancreatic WON.

Comparative efficacy of different methods for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several methods with variable efficacy have been proposed for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP. We assessed the comparative efficacy of different strategies for difficult biliary cannulation through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons. METHODS: We identified 17 randomized controlled trials (2015 patients) that compared the efficacy of different adjunctive methods for difficult biliary cannulation (needle-knife techniques, pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, pancreatic-assisted technique, and transpancreatic sphincterotomy) either with each other or with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. The success rate of biliary cannulation and the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were the outcomes of interest. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria to appraise quality of evidence. RESULTS: Low-quality evidence supported the use of transpancreatic sphincterotomy over persistence with standard cannulation techniques (risk ratio [RR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.59) and over any other adjunctive intervention (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.44] vs pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.01-1.43] vs early needle-knife techniques, RR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.03-2.10] vs pancreatic stent-assisted technique) for increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. No other significant results were observed in any other comparisons. Based on the network model, transpancreatic sphincterotomy (P-score, .97) followed by early needle-knife techniques (P-score, .62) were ranked highest in terms of increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. Early needle-knife techniques outperformed persistence with standard cannulation techniques in terms of decreasing PEP rate (RR, .61; 95% CI, .37-1.00), whereas both early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy led to lower PEP rates as compared with pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique (RR, .49 [95% CI, .23-.99] and .53 [95% CI, .30-.92], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Transpancreatic sphincterotomy increases the success rate of biliary cannulation as compared with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. Early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy are superior to other interventions in decreasing PEP rates and should be considered in patients with difficult cannulation.

Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling by macroscopic on-site evaluation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Assessment of EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) is gathering attention. Studies report good diagnostic parameters with MOSE; however, the overall data are limited. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to report on the pooled diagnostic assessment parameters of EUS-guided tissue acquisition by MOSE using fine-needle biopsy sampling (FNB). METHODS: Multiple databases were searched (from inception to December 2021), and studies that reported on the diagnostic assessment of EUS-guided tissue acquisition by MOSE were selected. Pooled diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated by standard meta-analysis methods following the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistics. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the analysis, and 1508 lesions were biopsy sampled in 1489 patients undergoing EUS-guided tissue acquisition. MOSE definition included a visible core of tissue with opacity and "wormlike" features of adequate size and length (≥4 mm). The pooled accuracy of FNA and/or FNB specimens in yielding a pathologic diagnosis by MOSE was 91.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.6-93.3; I2 = 66%), pooled sensitivity was 91.5% (95% CI, 88.6-93.6; I2 = 66%), pooled specificity was 98.9% (95% CI, 96.6-99.7; I2 = 80%), pooled positive predictive value was 98.8% (95% CI, 97.4-99.5; I2 = 33%), and pooled negative predictive value was 55.5% (95% CI, 46.9-63.9; I2 = 95%). Subgroup analyses by newer-generation FNB needles demonstrated similar pooled rates, with minimal adverse events (2.5%; 95% CI, 1.5-3.9; I2 = 21%). CONCLUSIONS: Excellent pooled diagnostic accuracy parameters were demonstrated in EUS-guided tissue acquisition by FNB using the MOSE method.

Gastrointestinal Symptoms Predict the Outcomes From COVID-19 Infection.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has taken hundreds of thousands of lives globally. Besides the respiratory tract, the virus can affect the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Data regarding the significance of GI symptoms in the COVID-19 course are limited. In this largest US study to date, the authors reviewed electronic encounters of 1003 consecutive patients who were tested positive for the virus between March 12 and April 3, 2020. Initial GI symptoms were present in up to 22.4% of patients and were associated with worse outcomes after adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and other clinical symptoms. COVID-19 with GI involvement may define a more severe phenotype.

Intracystic Glucose Levels in Differentiating Mucinous From Nonmucinous Pancreatic Cysts: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mucinous pancreatic cysts are well reported to transform into pancreatic adenocarcinoma, whereas nonmucinous cysts are mostly benign with low risk for malignant transformation. Nonsurgical methods of differentiating mucinous and nonmucinous pancreatic cysts are challenging and entail a multi investigational approach. Low intracystic glucose levels have been evaluated in multiple studies for its accuracy in differentiating mucinous from nonmucinous cysts of the pancreas. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched and studies that reported on the utility of intracystic glucose levels in diagnosing mucinous pancreatic cysts were analyzed. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model, heterogeneity was assessed by I2%, and pooled diagnostic test accuracy values were calculated. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the analysis from an initial total of 375 citations. The pooled sensitivity of low glucose in differentiating mucinous pancreatic cyst was 90.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.1-92.5; I2=0%] and the pooled specificity was 88% (95% CI: 80.8-92.7; I2=79%). The sensitivity at a glucose cut-off of 50 was 90.1% (95% CI: 87.2-92.5; I2=0%) and the specificity was 85.3% (95% CI: 76.8-91.1; I2=76%). The sensitivity of glucose levels in pancreatic cyst fluid taken by endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration was 90.8% (95% CI: 87.9-93.1; I2=0%) and the specificity was 90.5% (95% CI: 81.7-95.3; I2=83%). The sensitivity of point-of-care glucometers was 89.5% (95% CI: 87.9-93.1; I2=0%) and specificity was 83.9% (95% CI: 68.5-92.6; I2=43%). CONCLUSIONS: Low glucose level at a cut-off of 50 mg/dL on fluid samples collected by endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration and analyzed by point-of-care glucometer achieves excellent diagnostic accuracy in differentiating mucinous pancreatic cysts.

Photodynamic Therapy (PDT), Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) With Biliary Stents in Palliative Treatment of Unresectable Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Extrahepatic unresectable cholangiocarcinoma carries a dismal prognosis. In addition to biliary drainage by stent placement; photodynamic therapy (PDT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been tried to prolong survival. In this meta-analysis, we appraise the current known data on the use of PDT, RFA in the palliative treatment of extrahepatic unresectable cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2020 to identify studies that reported on PDT and RFA. Pooled rates of survival, stent patency, 30-, 90-day mortality, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I2% and 95% prediction interval. RESULTS: A total of 55 studies (2146 patients) were included. A total of 1149 patients underwent treatment with PDT (33 studies), 545 with RFA (22 studies), and 452 patients with stent-only strategy. The pooled survival rate with PDT, RFA, and stent-only groups was 11.9 [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-13.1] months, 8.1 (95% CI: 6.4-9.9) months, and 6.7 (95% CI: 4.9-8.4) months, respectively. The pooled time of stent patency with PDT, RFA, and stent-only groups was 6.1 (95% CI: 4.2-8) months, 5.5 (95% CI: 4.2-6.7) months, and 4.7 (95% CI: 2.6-6.7) months, respectively. The pooled rate of 30-day mortality with PDT was 3.3% (95% CI: 1.6%-6.7%), with RFA was 7% (95% CI: 4.1%-11.7%) and with stent-only was 4.9% (95% CI: 1.7%-13.1%). The pooled rate of 90-day mortality with PDT was 10.4% (95% CI: 5.4%-19.2%) and with RFA was 16.3% (95% CI: 8.7%-28.6%). CONCLUSION: PDT seemed to demonstrate better overall survival and 30-day mortality rates than RFA and/or stent-only palliation.

Advanced Endoscopic Resection Techniques in Cirrhosis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: While safety and effectiveness of advanced endoscopic resection techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been well established in general population, data regarding their utility in patients with cirrhosis is limited. METHODS: We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2021 to identify studies that reported on outcomes of EMR and/or ESD in patients with cirrhosis. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled rates of immediate and delayed bleeding, perforation, death as well as rates of successful en bloc and R0 resection. Pooled relative risk (RR) was calculated for each outcome between patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: Ten studies with a total of 3244 patients were included in the final analysis. Pooled rates of immediate & delayed bleeding, perforation, and death during EMR and/or ESD in patients with cirrhosis were 9.5% (CI 4.0-21.1), 6.6% (CI 4.2-10.3), 2.1% (CI 1.1-3.9) and 0.6% (CI 0.2-1.7), respectively. Pooled rates of successful en bloc and R0 resection were 93% (CI 85.9-96.7) and 90.8% (CI 86.5-93.8), respectively. While incidence of immediate bleeding was higher in patients with cirrhosis, there was no statistically significant difference in any of the other outcomes between the patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that performing EMR and ESD for gastrointestinal lesions in patients with cirrhosis is both safe and effective. The risks of procedural complications parallel those reported in general population.

Endoscopic resection of colon dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a well-known risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC). Current guidelines propose complete endoscopic resection of dysplasia in IBD patients with close endoscopic follow-up. Current data on the risk of neoplasia after endoscopic resection of dysplasia in IBD patients are limited. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched from inception through August 2019 to identify studies that reported on incidence and/or recurrence of neoplasia after resection of dysplasia in patients with IBD. Outcomes from the included studies were pooled to estimate the risk of neoplasia after dysplasia resection in IBD patients. RESULTS: From 18 studies, 1037 IBD patients underwent endoscopic resection for a total of 1428 colonic lesions. After lesion resection, the pooled risk (rate per 1000 person-years of follow-up) of CRC was 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-3), the pooled risk of high-grade dysplasia was 2 (95% CI, 1-3), and the pooled risk of any lesion was 43 (95% CI, 30-57). Meta-regression analysis based on lesion location (right, left), lesion size (mean and/or median size in mm), lesion type (Paris type I, Paris type II), endoscopic resection technique (EMR, endoscopic submucosal dissection, or polypectomy), and lesion histology (low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia) did not influence the reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of CRC after dysplasia resection in IBD patients appears to be low, supporting the current strategy of resection and surveillance.

Efficacy and histologic accuracy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large (>20 mm) colorectal polyps: a comparative review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Major limitations with conventional EMR (C-EMR) include high rates of polyp recurrence and low en-bloc resection rates, especially for lesions >20 mm in size. Underwater EMR (U-EMR) has emerged as an alternate technique for en-bloc resection of larger lesions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of the 2 techniques. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through June 2020 for studies that compared outcomes of U-EMR and C-EMR for colorectal lesions. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds ratios (ORs) of successful R0, en-bloc, and piecemeal resection of colorectal lesions. We compared the rates of polyp recurrence at follow-up, diagnostic accuracy for colorectal cancer, and adverse events with the 2 techniques. RESULTS: Eleven studies, including 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1851 patients were included in the final analysis. A total of 1071 lesions were removed using U-EMR, and 1049 lesions were removed using C-EMR. Although U-EMR had an overall superior en-bloc resection rate compared with C-EMR (OR, 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-3.5; P = .04), both techniques were comparable in terms of polyps >20 mm in size (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.3-2.1; P = .75), R0 resection (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 0.74-12.6; P = .14), piecemeal resection (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 0.74-12.6; P = .13), and diagnostic accuracy for colorectal cancer (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-1.8; P = .82). There were lower rates of polyp recurrence (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8; P = .01) and incomplete resection (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5; P = .001) with U-EMR. Both techniques have comparable resection times and safety profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of U-EMR over C-EMR for successful resection of colorectal lesions. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of U-EMR for resecting polyps >20 mm in size.

Adenoma and polyp detection rates during insertion versus withdrawal phase of colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonoscopy is the preferred modality for colorectal cancer screening because it has both diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Current consensus states that colonoscopy should be performed with initial rapid passage of the instrument to the cecum, followed by thorough evaluation for and removal of all polyps during a deliberate slow withdrawal. Reports have suggested that polyps that are seen but not removed during insertion are sometimes quite difficult to find during withdrawal. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of several major databases (from inception to March 2020) to identify randomized controlled trials comparing inspection and polypectomy during the insertion phase as opposed to the traditional practice of inspection and polypectomy performed entirely during the withdrawal phase. We examined differences in terms of adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyps detected per patient (PDPP), cecal intubation time (CIT), withdrawal time, and total procedure time. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials, including 3834 patients, were included in our final analysis. The insertion/withdrawal cohort had 1951 patients and the withdrawal-only cohort 1883 patients. Pooled odds of adenoma detection in the insertion/withdrawal cohort was .99 (P = .8). ADR was 47.2% in the insertion/withdrawal cohort and 48.6% in the withdrawal-only cohort. Although total procedure and withdrawal times were shorter in the insertion/withdrawal cohort, PDPP in both cohorts were not statistically significant (1.4 vs 1.5, P = .7). CONCLUSIONS: Additional inspection and polypectomy during the insertion and withdrawal phases of colonoscopy offer no additional benefit in terms of ADR or PDPP.

High pooled performance of convolutional neural networks in computer-aided diagnosis of GI ulcers and/or hemorrhage on wireless capsule endoscopy images: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Diagnosis of GI ulcers and/or hemorrhage by wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) is limited by the physician-dependent, tedious, time-consuming process of image and/ or video classification. Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) by convolutional neural network (CNN)-based machine learning may help reduce this burden. Our aim was to conduct a meta-analysis and appraise the reported data. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched (from inception to November 2019), and studies that reported on the performance of CNN in the diagnosis of GI ulcerations and/or hemorrhage on WCE were selected. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates. In cases where multiple 2 × 2 contingency tables were provided for different thresholds, we assumed the data tables were independent from each other. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2% and 95% prediction intervals. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in our final analysis that evaluated the performance of CNN-based CAD of GI ulcers and/or hemorrhage by WCE. The pooled accuracy was 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.3-96.3), sensitivity was 95.5% (95% CI, 94-96.5), specificity was 95.8% (95% CI, 94.7-96.6), positive predictive value was 95.8% (95% CI, 90.5-98.2), and negative predictive value was 96.8% (95% CI, 94.9-98.1). I2% heterogeneity was negligible except for the pooled positive predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our meta-analysis, CNN-based CAD of GI ulcerations and/or hemorrhage on WCE achieves a high-level performance. The quality of the evidence is robust, and therefore CNN-based CAD has the potential to become the first choice of machine learning to optimize WCE image/video reading.

Drug Eluting Versus Covered Metal Stents in Malignant Biliary Strictures-Is There a Clinical Benefit?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

GOALS/BACKGROUND: Patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) often require transpapillary stenting for symptomatic relief and biliary decompression. Plastic stents and uncovered metal stents are now replaced by covered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). However, stent occlusion from tumor overgrowth and chronic inflammation continues to be an issue. Drug-eluting stents (DES), through an antitumor paclitaxel membrane, have been used to combat this problem. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing DES to SEMS in MBO. STUDY: Multiple databases were searched to identify studies that compared the clinical outcomes of SEMS and DES in patients with MBO. Random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio and the pooled individual outcomes. Our primary goals were to assess the stent patency and overall survival in days. Secondary outcomes assessed the individual reported adverse events and/or complications. RESULTS: Five studies including 348 patients (175 males and 173 females) were included. The pooled odds ratio of stent patency was 1.03 (95% confidence interval: 0.68-1.54, P=0.9) and overall survival was 1.16 (95% confidence interval: 0.63-2.11, P=0.6). The pooled rate of stent patency was 168.3 (95% 140.7-196.4) days for DES and 149.4 (117.6-181.2) days for SEMS. The pooled rate of overall survival was 267.2 (206.2-328.2) days for DES and 218.2 (148.5-287.8) days for SEMS. CONCLUSION: On the basis of this meta-analysis, DES and SEMS seem to demonstrate comparable clinical outcomes in patients with malignant biliary strictures. Reported adverse events and/or complications were comparable as well.

Safety and Efficacy of Biological Therapy in Chronic Antibiotic Refractory Pouchitis: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pouchitis is the most common long-term complication after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with ulcerative colitis. Those with ≥3 episodes of pouchitis/year and symptoms despite antibiotics are considered to have chronic antibiotic refractory pouchitis (CARP). While several agents including probiotics, steroids and immunomodulators have been used, treatment of CARP remains challenging. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the safety and efficacy of various biological agents in treatment of CARP. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through June 2020 for studies that reported the efficacy and safety of biological therapy including antitumor necrosis factor-alpha agents [infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA)], vedolizumab (VDZ), and ustekinumab in CARP. We excluded studies on Crohn's like and/or other inflammatory complications of the pouch. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled rates of clinical as well as endoscopic improvement and remission. RESULTS: We included 15 studies with 311 patients in our final analysis. Ninety-two patients were treated with IFX, 42 with ADA, 144 with VDZ and 33 with ustekinumab. Pooled rate of clinical improvement was 71.4%, 58.2%, 47.9% and clinical remission was 65.7%, 31%, 47.4% with IFX, ADA, and VDZ, respectively. Pooled rate of endoscopic improvement was achieved in 61.2% patients treated with VDZ while endoscopic remission was achieved in 70.3% patients treated with IFX. Adverse events were reported in 3.9% patients. CONCLUSION: Biologic therapy is safe and effective in the treatment of CARP.

Influence of the Elipse Intragastric Balloon on Obesity and Metabolic Profile: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intragastric balloons (IGBs) have been used to bridge the obesity treatment gap with the benefits of being minimally invasive but still required endoscopy. The Elipse IGB is a swallowable balloon that is spontaneously excreted at ∼16 weeks. However, studies are limited by small sample sizes. The authors aim to assess clinically relevant endpoints, namely weight loss outcomes, metabolic profile, balloon tolerability, and adverse events. METHODS: A literature search was performed from several databases from inception to July 2020. The pooled means and proportions of our data were analyzed using a random effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies involving 2152 patients met our eligibility criteria and were included. The mean baseline body mass index ranged from 32.1 to 38.6. The pooled mean difference (MD) in body mass index was 0.88 [confidence interval (CI): 0.58-1.18, I2=98%]. Total body weight loss was 12% (CI: 10.1-14.3, I2=94%) and excess body weight loss was 49.1% (CI: 30.6-67.5, I2=97%). The MD in waist circumference was 0.89 (CI: 0.72-1.05, I2=53%). MD in triglyceride level was 0.66 (CI: 0.21-1.1, I2=96%). Pooled early deflation rate was 1.8% (CI: 0.6-5.1, I2=74%). Our study also showed that the Elipse balloon was associated with less adverse events when compared with other IGBs. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that the Elipse intragastric balloon is a safe, effective, and tolerable device for weight loss and obesity with a minimal side effect profile.