RESUMEN
Introduction: Dynamic changes in liver function tests have been proposed to correctly reclassify the risk of choledocholithiasis; however, information is scarce and insufficient to recommend its use. Methods: Retrospective cohort of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) due to moderate and high risk of choledocholithiasis according to the 2019 American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. We evaluated whether significant changes in liver function tests (bilirubin, transaminases, or alkaline phosphatase), defined as an increase or a reduction ⩾30 or ⩾50% between two measurements taken with a difference of 24-72 h can correctly reclassify the risk of choledocholithiasis beyond the ASGE guidelines. The net reclassification index (NRI) was calculated for patients with and without choledocholithiasis. Results: Among 1175 patients who underwent ERCP, 170 patients were included in the analysis (59.4% women, median 59.5 years). Among patients without a diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, the number of patients correctly reclassified by transaminases was slightly higher than those incorrectly reclassified (NRI = 0.24 for aspartate amino transaminase and 0.20 for alanine amino transaminase). However, among patients with a diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, it led to incorrect reclassification in a greater number of cases (NRI = -0.21 and -0.14, respectively). The benefits of reclassification were minimal for bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase, or for value changes >50%. A subgroup analysis showed similar findings in patients without a history of cholecystectomy and in those with normal bile duct. Conclusion: Dynamic changes in liver function tests do not improve choledocholithiasis risk classification beyond the 2019 ASGE criteria. New criteria should continue to be sought to optimize risk stratification.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend insulin alone for in-hospital management of diabetes, but growing information suggests that new oral or injectable agents may be as effective and safe. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis with evidence from randomized (RCT) and non-randomized (NRS) studies in PubMed, EMBASE and LILACS databases up to February 10, 2022, for studies including hospitalized type 2 diabetes patients, comparing dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i), sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1Ra) with insulin alone for glycemic control and safety outcomes. FINDINGS: 7 RCT and 3 NRTs were included. There were no differences in mean blood glucose, measurements within range or rate of hypoglycemia between DPP4i and insulin. We found a lower mean glucose for GLP1Ra plus insulin subgroup (-16.36 mg/dL, 95 % CI -27.31, -5.41; I2 = 0 %) with lower incidence of hypoglycemia < 70 mg/dL with GLP1Ra (RR 0.31, CI 95 % 0.14-0.70, I2 = 0 %). SGLT2i data was limited. Adverse events rates were similar between treatments. CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that inpatient management in the general ward with DPP4i and GLP1Ra is as effective and safe as management with insulin. More randomized studies are required to support these findings before they could be recommended as usual practice.