RESUMEN
Background and study aims There is limited consensus on the optimal method for measuring disease severity in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). We aimed to systematically review the operating properties of existing endoscopic severity indices for FAP. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that utilized endoscopic outcomes or studies that evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic disease severity indices in FAP. Results A total of 134 studies were included. We evaluated scoring indices and component items of scoring indices, such as polyp count, polyp size, and histology. Partial validation was observed for polyp count and size. The most commonly reported scoring index was the Spigelman classification system, which was used for assessing the severity of duodenal involvement. A single study reported almost perfect interobserver and intra-observer agreement for this system. The InSIGHT polyposis staging system, which was used for assessing colorectal polyp burden, has been partially validated. It showed substantial interobserver reliability; however, the intra-observer reliability was not assessed. Novel criteria for high-risk gastric polyps have been developed and assessed for interobserver reliability. However, these criteria showed a poor level of agreement. Other scoring indices assessing the anal transition zone, duodenal, and colorectal polyps have not undergone validation. Conclusions There are no fully validated endoscopic disease severity indices for FAP. Development and validation of a reliable and responsive endoscopic disease severity instrument will be informative for clinical care and RCTs of pharmacological therapies for FAP.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is indicated for prolonged enteral nutrition. This study aimed to analyze the outcome and to identify potential risk factors for complications in PEG procedures. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of the performed PEG procedures during the period January 2010 till January 2020. RESULTS: A PEG placement procedure was performed in 854 patients (64.1% male) and was successful in 833 (97.5%). In total, 513 push (61.6%) and 320 pull (38.6%) PEGs were placed. The mean age was 60.7 years, and the median follow-up was 267 days. The push PEG was associated with peri-procedural bleeding (P = 0.002) and tube dislodgements (P < 0.001), while the pull PEG was significantly associated with buried bumpers (P < 0.001), infected placement sites (P = 0.019), and granulation tissue formation (P = 0.044). The PEG-related mortality rate was 0.2%, but the overall 30-day mortality was 4.0%. CONCLUSION: The current study showed that the push and pull PEG placements are both safe and feasible procedures, with a low PEG-related mortality. Buried bumpers, infected placement sites, and granulation tissue formation are more often seen in the pull PEG, while the push PEG is associated with periprocedural bleeding and tube dislodgements. These complications should be taken into account and there is a need for a prospective trial to identify superiority between the PEG methods.