NSAIDs do not reduce severity among post-ERCP pancreatitis patients.

OBJECTIVE: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most studied chemoprophylaxis for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). While previous systematic reviews have shown NSAIDs reduce PEP, their impact on moderate to severe PEP (MSPEP) is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to understand the impact of NSAIDs on MSPEP among patients who developed PEP. We later surveyed physicians' understanding of that impact. DESIGN: A systematic search for randomized trials using NSAIDs for PEP prevention was conducted. Pooled-prevalence and Odds-ratio of PEP, MSPEP were compared between treated vs. control groups. Analysis was performed using R software. Random-effects model was used for all variables. Physicians were surveyed via email before and after reviewing our results. RESULTS: 7688 patients in 25 trials were included. PEP was significantly reduced to 0.598 (95%CI, 0.47-0.76) in the NSAIDs group. Overall burden of MSPEP was reduced among all patients undergoing ERCP: OR 0.59 (95%CI, 0.42-0.83). However, NSAIDs didn't affect the proportion of MSPEP among those who developed PEP (p = 0.658). Rectal Indomethacin and diclofenac reduced PEP but not MSPEP. Efficacy didn't vary by risk, timing of administration, or bias-risk. Survey revealed a change in the impression of the effect of NSAIDs on MSPEP after reviewing our results. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal diclofenac or indomethacin before or after ERCP reduce the overall burden of MSPEP by reducing the pool of PEP from which it can arise. However, the proportion of MSPEP among patients who developed PEP is unaffected. Therefore, NSAIDs prevent initiation of PEP, but do not affect severity among those that develop PEP. Alternative modalities are needed to reduce MSPEP among patients who develop PEP.

Surgical Outcomes in Patients With Preoperative Anemia Undergoing Colectomy for Colon Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative anemia is relatively common in colon cancer patients; however, its impact on short-term surgical outcomes is not well established. The aim of our study was to evaluate short-term surgical outcomes in colon cancer patients with preoperative anemia undergoing colectomy. METHODS: We performed a 4-year analysis of the ACS-NSQIP and included all adult patients who underwent colectomy for colon cancer. Patients were stratified into two groups based on preoperative anemia (Preop Anemia, No Preop Anemia). Our outcome measures were 30-day complications, 30-day unplanned readmissions, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 35,243 colon cancer patients who underwent colectomy were included in the analysis, of whom 50.4% had preoperative anemia. The mean age was 65 ± 13 years and the mean hemoglobin level was 12 ± 2 g/dL. Patients in the anemia group were more likely to be African American, have higher ASA class ≥3, and were more likely to receive at least 1 unit of packed red blood cells preoperatively (7.1% versus 0.3%, P < 0.01). Patients in the anemia group had higher rates of 30-day complications (34.5% versus 16.6%, P < 0.01), 30-day readmission related to the principal procedure (11.7% versus 8.7%, P < 0.01), and 30-day mortality (3.1% versus 1%, P < 0.01). On regression analysis, preoperative anemia was independently associated with higher odds of 30-day complications (P < 0.01), but not 30-day readmission, or 30-day mortality (P = 0.464 and P = 0.362 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative anemia appears to be associated with postoperative complications. Preoperatively optimizing hemoglobin levels may lead to improved outcomes.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Treatment of Superficial Pharyngeal Cancers: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies evaluating the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of superficial pharyngeal cancers have reported promising results. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of ESD in the management of superficial pharyngeal cancers. METHODS: We reviewed several databases from inception to September 03, 2020, to identify studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of ESD in the management of superficial pharyngeal cancers. Our outcomes of interest were en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, adverse events, and rates of local recurrence. Pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes were calculated using random-effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistic. We assessed publication bias by using funnel plots and Egger's test. We conducted meta-regression analysis to explore heterogeneity in analyses. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in analyses. All studies were from Asia. Pooled rates (95% CI) for en bloc resection and complete resection were 94% (87%, 97%) and 72% (62%, 80%), respectively. The pooled rates (95% CI) for adverse events and local recurrence were 10% (5%, 17%) and 1.9% (0.9%, 4%), respectively. Most of the analyses were limited by substantial heterogeneity. On meta-regression analysis, the heterogeneity was explained by size of tumor and histology. Funnel plots and Egger's test showed no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis including studies from Asian countries demonstrated that ESD is an efficacious and safe option in the management of superficial pharyngeal cancers. More studies and studies from Western countries are needed to further validate these findings.

Role of routine second-look endoscopy in patients with acute peptic ulcer bleeding: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies evaluating the role of routine second-look endoscopy in patients with acute upper GI bleed because of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) have reported conflicting results. This meta-analysis evaluates the usefulness of routine second-look endoscopy in these patients. METHODS: We reviewed several databases from inception to September 15, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared routine second-look endoscopy with no planned second-look endoscopy in patients with acute upper GI bleed because of PUD. Our outcomes of interest were recurrent bleeding, mortality, need for surgery, and mean number of units of blood transfused. For categorical variables, we calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); for continuous variables, we calculated standardized mean difference with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed using a random effects model. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to ascertain the quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included 9 RTCs comprising 1452 patients; 726 patients underwent planned/routine second-look endoscopy and 726 did not. We found no significant difference in recurrent bleeding (RR, .79; 95% CI, .51-1.23), need for surgery (RR, .58; 95% CI, .29-1.15), mortality (RR, .69; 95% CI, .33-1.45), or mean number of units of blood transfused (standardized mean difference, -.06; 95% CI, -.19 to .07). Quality of evidence ranged from low to moderate based on the GRADE framework. CONCLUSIONS: Single endoscopy with complete endoscopic hemostasis is not inferior to routine second-look endoscopy in reducing the risk of recurrent bleeding, mortality, or need for surgery in patients with acute upper GI bleed because of PUD.

Efficacy and safety of supplemental intravenous lidocaine for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Some studies have shown that intravenous (IV) lidocaine reduces the dose requirement of propofol in GI endoscopic procedures. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of IV lidocaine and propofol compared with propofol alone in GI endoscopic procedures. METHODS: We reviewed several databases from inception to October 13, 2020, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the role of IV propofol and lidocaine with IV propofol plus placebo for sedation in endoscopic procedures. Our outcomes of interest were the differences in total dose of propofol administered, procedure time, and intraoperative adverse events. For categorical variables, we calculated pooled risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI); for continuous variables, we calculated standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI. Data were analyzed using a random effect model. We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework to ascertain the quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included 5 randomized controlled trials with 318 patients. We found that the total dose of propofol administered was significantly lower in the lidocaine group than the control group (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.09 to -0.42). We found no significant difference in procedure time (SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.57) or adverse events (risk ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.35-1.03) between the groups. There was moderate to substantial heterogeneity in the data. Quality of evidence based on the GRADE framework ranged from low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate quality of evidence suggests that IV lidocaine decreases the dose of propofol administered for GI endoscopic procedures.

Association of anticoagulation dose and survival in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A retrospective propensity score-weighted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypercoagulability may contribute to COVID-19 pathogenicity. The role of anticoagulation (AC) at therapeutic (tAC) or prophylactic doses (pAC) is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact on survival of different AC doses in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Retrospective, multi-center cohort study of consecutive COVID-19 patients hospitalized between March 13 and May 5, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 3480 patients were included (mean age, 64.5 years [17.0]; 51.5% female; 52.1% black and 40.6% white). 18.5% (n = 642) required intensive care unit (ICU) stay. 60.9% received pAC (n = 2121), 28.7% received ≥3 days of tAC (n = 998), and 10.4% (n = 361) received no AC. Propensity score (PS) weighted Kaplan-Meier plot demonstrated different 25-day survival probability in the tAC and pAC groups (57.5% vs 50.7%). In a PS-weighted multivariate proportional hazards model, AC was associated with reduced risk of death at prophylactic (hazard ratio [HR] 0.35 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.22-0.54]) and therapeutic doses (HR 0.14 [95% CI 0.05-0.23]) compared to no AC. Major bleeding occurred more frequently in tAC patients (81 [8.1%]) compared to no AC (20 [5.5%]) or pAC (46 [2.2%]) subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Higher doses of AC were associated with lower mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Prospective evaluation of efficacy and risk of AC in COVID-19 is warranted.

A Comprehensive Review of Endoscopic Management of Sleeve Gastrectomy Leaks.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery leaks result in significant morbidity and mortality. Experts report variable therapeutic approaches, without uniform guidelines or consensus. OBJECTIVE: To review the pathogenesis, risk factors, prevention, and treatment of gastric sleeve leaks, with a focus on endoscopic approaches. In addition, the efficacy and success rates of different treatment modalities are assessed. DESIGN: A comprehensive review was conducted using a thorough literature search of 5 online electronic databases (PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science) from the time of their inception through March 2020. Studies evaluating gastric sleeve leaks were included. MeSH terms related to "endoscopic," "leak," "sleeve," "gastrectomy," "anastomotic," and "bariatric" were applied to a highly sensitive search strategy. The main outcomes were epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 2418 studies of which 438 were incorporated into the review. Shock and peritonitis necessitate early surgical intervention for leaks. Endoscopic therapies in acute and early leaks involve modalities with a focus on one of: (i) defect closure, (ii) wall diversion, or (iii) wall exclusion. Surgical revision is required if endoscopic therapies fail to control leaks after 6 months. Chronic leaks require one or more endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical approaches for fluid collection drainage to facilitate adequate healing. Success rates depend on provider and center expertise. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic management of leaks post sleeve gastrectomy is a minimally invasive and effective alternative to surgery. Their effect may vary based on clinical presentation, timing or leak morphology, and should be tailored to the appropriate endoscopic modality of treatment.

Efficacy of empiric esophageal dilation in patients with non-obstructive dysphagia: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Empiric esophageal dilation is frequently performed for non-obstructive dysphagia. Studies evaluating its efficacy have reported conflicting results. In this meta-analysis, we have evaluated the efficacy of esophageal dilation in the management of non-obstructive dysphagia. METHODS: We reviewed several databases from inception to 26 May 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the role of empiric esophageal dilation for non-obstructive dysphagia. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success (improvement in dysphagia after dilation) and difference in post-operative dysphagia score between groups. For categorical variables, we calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI); for continuous variables, we calculated standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI. Data were analyzed using a random effects model. We used GRADE framework to ascertain the quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included 4 studies (3 RCTs and one observational) with 243 patients; there were 133 treated with empiric dilation and 110 controls. We found no significant difference in clinical success (OR (95% CI) 1.91 (0.89, 4.08)) or post-procedure dysphagia score between groups (SMD (95% CI) 0.38 (-0.37, 1.14)). Our findings remained consistent on subgroup analysis including RCTs only. Quality of evidence ranged from low to very low based on GRADE framework. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis does not support the use of empiric esophageal dilation in patients with non-obstructive dysphagia. More studies are required to confirm these findings.

Viral-Attributed Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review.

Infectious etiologies are rare cause of acute pancreatitis (AP). We sought to investigate the frequency of viral-attributed AP (VIAP) and describe its natural course and clinical features. Comprehensive review of PubMed and EMBASE in English until December 31, 2019, was performed. AP diagnosis and severity were defined per the Revised Atlanta Classification. Viral infections were diagnosed by serology and/or histology. A diagnosis of viral infection, with a concurrent AP diagnosis, a temporal resolution of both entities, and the attempt to exclude the most common etiologies of AP defined VIAP. Two independent reviewers reviewed eligible publications. Bias risk was assessed with the Murad tool. A total of 209 cases identified in 128 publications met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 38.9 ± 1.28 years. Male-to-female ratio was 2.2:1, and 28% of patients were immunocompromised. Viral hepatitis (A, B, C, D and E) was the most common virus and accounted for 34.4% of cases, followed by coxsackie and echoviruses (14.8%), hemorrhagic fever viruses (12.4%), CMV (12.0%), VZV (10.5%), mumps and measles (3.8%), primary HIV infection (3.8%), HSV (1.9%), EBV (1.9%), and the remainder of cases (2.9%) attributed to adenovirus, influenza H1N1, and multiple viruses. Severity of AP was: 43.1% mild, 11.7% moderately severe, 32.4% severe. Death occurred in 42 (20.1%) patients. A significant portion of VIAP patients were immunocompromised (28.0%) and accounted for 71.4% of mortality cases. Mortality was higher than that reported for AP from other etiologies in the literature.

Infectious causes of acute pancreatitis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Infectious etiologies of acute pancreatitis (AP) are rare and include viruses, bacteria, mycobacteria, parasites, and fungi. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive review on infectious etiologies of AP analyzing the frequency, clinical features, and outcomes of individuals presenting with this condition. METHODS: Eligible articles reporting on AP attributed to infectious etiologies were included. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed from time of inception and until September 6,2019 was performed using all relevant MeSH (medical subject heading) keywords. Articles were assessed for eligibility and independently reviewed by two reviewers for clinical features of AP, local complications, and mortality. Methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Murad tool. RESULTS: A total of 212 articles were included, of which 168 (79.2%) were at high risk of bias. 320 cases of AP were identified. Viruses were the leading etiology of infection attributed AP (65.3%) followed by helminths (19.1%), and bacteria (12.5%). Protozoa, mycobacteria, and fungi accounted for the remaining 3.1% of cases. Mean age was 40.5 ± 18.4 years and M:F ratio was 1.94:1. Mortality occurred in 50 patients. Mortality rate was higher in the virus attributed AP patients than AP from other infectious etiologies (21.8% vs. 7.0%, p < 0.0005). INTERPRETATION: Literature quality on infection attributed AP is limited. Virus attributed AP appears to carry a higher mortality than other etiologies of infection attributed AP.

Efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating the role of tranexamic acid in acute upper GI bleeding (UGIB) have reported conflicting results. In this systematic review, we have evaluated the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in UGIB. METHODS: We searched several databases from inception to June 6, 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared tranexamic acid and placebo in UGIB. Our outcomes of interest were mortality, rebleeding, all thromboembolic events, venous thromboembolic events, need for transfusion, endoscopic intervention and surgery. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using fixed effect model. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs comprising 14,100 patients. We found no significant difference in mortality, pooled RR (95% CI) 0.87 (0.74-1.01), rebleeding, pooled RR (95% CI) 0.90 (0.79-1.02), need for surgery, pooled RR (95% CI) 0.86 (0.73-1.02), need for transfusion, pooled RR (95% CI) 1.00 (0.99-1.01) or thromboembolic events, RR (95% CI) 1.16 (0.87-1.56) between treatments. We found an increased risk of venous thromboembolic events with tranexamic acid, pooled RR (95% CI) 1.94 (1.23-3.05). Certainty of evidence based on the GRADE framework for the different outcomes ranged from low to very low. CONCLUSIONS: Tranexamic acid does not improve outcomes in UGIB and may increase the risk of venous thromboembolic events.

Increased average number of medical publications per interviewee from 2009 to 2018: a study of 100 interviewees to an academic gastroenterology fellowship program.

BACKGROUND: Gastroenterology fellowship candidates may strive to improve their qualifications for this extremely competitive fellowship. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether extreme competitiveness of gastroenterology fellowship positions has affected fellowship interview selection by statistically analyzing 13 parameters of interviewees to identify statistically significant time changes during last 10 years. METHODS: Retrospective time-trend-analyses (performed 2018) on thirteen prospectively-obtained-parameters of 47 interviewees (2009-2011) vs. 53 interviewees (2016-2018) for gastroenterology fellowship. SETTING: William-Beaumont-Hospital, Royal-Oak: academic fully-accredited gastroenterology fellowship, teaching hospital of Oakland-University-William-Beaumont-School-of-Medicine, tertiary-care hospital, GI fellowship since 1973. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases occurred from 2009 to 2011 vs. 2016-2018 in number of publications, including mean number of: abstracts (1.69 ± 0.37 vs. 7.54 ± 1.16, p < 0.0001); peer-reviewed articles (1.48 ± 0.30 vs. 6.13 ± 1.29, p < 0.0001); and total publications (3.17 ± 0.48 vs. 12.76 ± 1.99, p < 0.0001). Increased publications were associated with graduating from foreign medical schools (correlation coefficient = 0.26, p = .03), and were, surprisingly, correlated with lower letters-of-recommendation-scores (Kruskal-Wallis-statistic = 5.82, p = .002). USMLE-Step-1 scores significantly increased from 2009 to 2011 to 2016-2018 (235 ± 14.1 vs. 244.9 ± 13.5, p = 0.001) (previously reported finding). Nine other parameters did not significantly change with time. CONCLUSIONS: Current report of >four-fold-increase in publications by gastroenterology fellowship interviewees at one academic-medical-center is novel. Increased focus on scholarship by applicants may be explained by their having only three parameters to improve their credentials during residency: publications, letters-of-recommendation, and honors awarded during residency (other parameters determined before residency and immutable). Current findings may benefit medical residents/medical-residency-program-directors by focusing more on publications for applications. Association between research productivity and medical promotions likely strongly motivates medical research of residents and may motivate academic faculty. Increased exposure to research/publications may improve the clinical acumen of GI fellowship applicants by enhancing their skills in critically reading the medical literature.

Correction to: Increased average number of medical publications per interviewee from 2009 to 2018: a study of 100 interviewees to an academic gastroenterology fellowship program.

Following publication of the original article [1], due to miscommunication during proofing, the author notified us the bellow corrections. In this Correction, correct and incorrect versions are shown.

Outcomes of total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increased use of total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT), systematic evidence of its outcomes remains limited. AIM: To evaluate the outcomes of TPIAT. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception through March 2019 for studies on TPIAT outcomes. Data were extracted and analyzed using comprehensive meta-analysis software. The random-effects model was used for all variables. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 measure and Cochrane Q-statistic. Publication bias was assessed using Egger's test. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies published between 1980 and 2017 examining 1011 patients were included. Eighteen studies were of adults, while three studied pediatric populations. Narcotic independence was achieved in 53.5% [95% Confidence Interval (CI): 45-62, P < 0.05, I2 = 81%] of adults compared to 51.9% (95%CI: 17-85, P < 0.05, I2 = 84%) of children. Insulin-independence post-procedure was achieved in 31.8% (95%CI: 26-38, P < 0.05, I2 = 64%) of adults with considerable heterogeneity compared to 47.7% (95%CI: 20-77, P < 0.05, I2 = 82%) in children. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) 12 mo post-surgery was reported in four studies with a pooled value of 6.76% (P = 0.27). Neither stratification by age of the studied population nor meta-regression analysis considering both the study publication date and the islet-cell-equivalent/kg weight explained the marked heterogeneity between studies. CONCLUSION: These results indicate acceptable success for TPIAT. Future studies should evaluate the discussed measures before and after surgery for comparison.

Effect of radiofrequency ablation in addition to biliary stent on overall survival and stent patency in malignant biliary obstruction: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is used in addition to stent placement to manage extrahepatic malignant biliary obstruction. We aimed to study the effect of RFA on overall survival (OS) and stent patency in malignant biliary obstruction. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed from inception to May 2022 for all studies measuring the effect of RFA plus stents compared to stents placement only on OS and stent patency in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. We measured differences in OS, stent patency, and odds of adverse events. A random effect model was used to pool data for stent patency, OS, and adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies (14 observational and 3 RCT) containing 1766 patients were included in the analysis. The weighted pooled mean survival difference was 58.5 days [95% confidence interval (CI): 32.6-84.4, I2 = 71%] in favor of the RFA treatment group. The weighted mean difference in stent patency was better in the RFA plus stent group by 45.3 days (95% CI: 30.1-60.5, I2 = 16.4%) compared to stent only group. The pooled odds of adverse events were the same in both groups [odds ratio (OR) 1.52, 95% CI: 0.96-2.43, I2 = 59%], and no serious adverse event was seen in either group, or no death reported secondary to RFA procedure. No difference in stent patency based on procedure type, including percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (P = 0.06), and an underline cause of bile duct obstruction was found (P = 0.261). CONCLUSION: RFA treatment, in addition to stent placement in malignant biliary obstruction, potentially improves OS and stent patency duration.

Metal versus plastic stents in the management of benign biliary strictures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Benign biliary strictures (BBS) are usually treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of multiple plastic stents (MPS) or a covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS). In this meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy and safety of MPS and CSEMS in the management of BBS. We reviewed several databases from inception to 28 April 2021 to identify RCTs that compared MPS with CSEMS in the management of BBS. Our outcomes of interest were stricture resolution, stricture recurrence, adverse events, stent migration and mean number of ERCPs to achieve stricture resolution. Data were analyzed using a random-effects model. We included eight RCTs with 524 patients. We found no significant difference in the rate of stricture resolution (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.10), stricture recurrence (risk ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 0.72-3.88) or adverse events (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.73-1.87) between groups. Mean number of ERCPs was significantly lower in the CSEMS group (SMD, -1.99; 95% CI, -3.35 to -0.64). The rate of stent migration was significantly higher in the CSEMS group. CSEMS are comparable in efficacy and safety to MPS in the management of BBS but require fewer ERCPs to achieve stricture resolution.

Second exam of right colon improves adenoma detection rate: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background and study aims A second examination of the right colon, either as a second forward view (SFV) or as retroflexion (RF) in the cecum, can increase adenoma detection rate (ADR) in the right colon. In this meta-analysis, we have evaluated the role of a second examination of the right colon in improving ADR. Methods We reviewed several databases to identify randomized controlled trials that compared right colon SFV with no SFV, and RCTs that compared SFV with RF in the right colon, and reported data on ADR. Our outcomes of interest were ADR and polyp detection rate (PDR) with SFV vs no SFV, right colon and total withdrawal times, and additional ADR and PDR with SFV vs RF. For categorical variables, we calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs); for continuous variables, we calculated standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95 % CI. Data were analyzed using random effects model. Results We included six studies with 3901 patients. Comparing SFV with no SFV, right colon ADR and PDR were significantly higher in the SFV group: ADR (RR [95 % CI] 1.39 [1.22,1.58]) and PDR (RR [95 % CI] 1.47 [1.30, 1.65]). We found no significant difference in right colon withdrawal time (SMD [95 % CI] 1.54 [-0.20,3.28]) or total withdrawal time (SMD (95 % CI) 0.37 [-0.39,1.13]) with and without SFV. We found no significant difference in additional ADR between SFV and RF. Conclusions SFV of the right colon significantly increases right-sided and overall ADR.