RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic resection is the preferred approach to treat early Barrett's neoplasia, reducing the need for surgical interventions. However, the best choice between endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains unclear. The study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EMR vs. ESD for early Barrett's neoplasia. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Central Cochrane, EMBASE, and LILACS until November 2023. Studies comparing ESD vs. EMR in the treatment of patients with early Barrett's neoplasia were included. This study was performed according to the Preferred Report Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The ROBIN-I tool was used to analyze the risk of bias and GRADE to measure the quality of the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 9352 patients from 15 observational studies were included. Patients undergoing ESD had significantly higher rates of en-bloc (odds ratio [OR] 25.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 13.82, 48.74; I2 = 52%; P < 0.00001) and R0 (OR 5.10, 95% CI 3.29, 7.91; I2 = 73%; P < 0.00001) with a higher risk of adverse events, including bleeding, stricture formation, and perforation. In a subgroup analysis of patients who did not receive radiofrequency ablation, ESD had a lower recurrence rate than EMR (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05, 0.94; I2 = 88%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic submucosal dissection is more effective than EMR in treating early Barrett's neoplasia at the expense of higher adverse events rates.
RESUMO
Background: Successful Crohn's disease (CD) therapy relies on timely and precise management strategies. Endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) has been applied as a first-line treatment for symptomatic CD-associated strictures due to its minimally invasive nature and the possibility of preserving intestinal length. Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine patient-related predictive factors associated with the need for surgery for CD-associated ileocolic strictures after technically successful EBD. Methods: All original studies published before December 2023 that reported the outcomes of patients treated with EBD for ileocolic strictures secondary to CD and described follow-up for at least 1 year were included. The difference in risk of needing surgery was calculated for 8 different patient characteristics (Sex, smoking habit, previous surgery, biologic therapy, steroids, immunosuppressors, nature of the stricture, and endoscopic disease activity). Results: There were significant differences in the risk of needing surgery after EBD among patients who underwent surgery and patients without a history of surgery (RD: -0.20 [-0.31, -0.08]), patients with endoscopic mucosal activity and patients in remission at the time of EBD (RD: 0.19 [0.04, 0.34]), patients using biologics at the time of EBD and patients not using biologics (RD: -0.09 [-0.16, -0.03]), and patients using steroids and those not using steroids at the time of EBD (RD: 0.16 [0.07, 0.26]). Conclusions: The use of biologics and endoscopic disease remission at the time of EBD were protective factors against the need for surgery. No previous surgery or use of steroids at the time of EBD was associated with the need for surgery during follow-up.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Carbon dioxide is increasingly used in insufflation during colonoscopy in adult patients; however, air insufflation remains the primary practice among pediatric gastroenterologists. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate insufflation using CO2 versus air in colonoscopies in pediatric patients. METHODS: Individualized search strategies were performed using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and LILACS databases following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Cochrane working methodology. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were selected for the present meta-analysis. Pooled proportions were calculated for outcomes including procedure time and abdominal pain immediately and 24 hours post-procedure. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 644 records, of which five RCTs with a total of 358 patients (CO2: n=178 versus air: n=180) were included in the final analysis. The procedure time was not different between the CO2 and air insufflation groups (mean difference, 10.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.55 to 24.22; p=0.11). Abdominal pain immediately post-procedure was significantly lower in the CO2 group (risk difference [RD], -0.15; 95% CI; -0.26 to -0.03; p=0.01) while abdominal pain at 24 hours post-procedure was similar (RD, -0.05; 95% CI; -0.11 to 0.01; p=0.11). CONCLUSION: Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT data, CO2 insufflation reduced abdominal pain immediately following the procedure, while pain was similar at 24 hours post-procedure. These results suggest that CO2 is a preferred insufflation technique when performing colonoscopy in pediatric patients.