Endohepatology in clinical practice: EUS-guided portal pressure measurement combined with EUS-guided liver biopsy and variceal screening and treatment in outpatients.

Background and Objectives: EUS-guided portal pressure gradient (PPG) is a novel technique that permits a true, direct measure of portal vein pressure and hepatic vein pressure. This article details our experience and lessons learned from 20 consecutive outpatient EUS-PPG procedures performed at a single center, along with simultaneous EUS-guided liver biopsy, variceal screening, and variceal banding. Methods: Data on the first 20 patients who underwent EUS-PPG at a single center were retrospectively viewed and analyzed. The effects of various liver diseases or other patient-related factors on the clinical and technical success of EUS-PPG measurements, as well as EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB), were evaluated. During the procedure, if esophageal varices were encountered, they were assessed, and if felt to be clinically indicated, endoscopic variceal ligation was performed. Results: The 20 patients included 10 male and 10 female patients. All procedures were technically successful. In all patients, the portal vein and hepatic veins could be easily identified. One adverse event of bleeding occurred during the EUS-PPG measuring procedure. All 20 EUS-LBs were technically successful and yielded adequate samples for histological evaluations, with an average of 25 complete portal tracts per sample. Among patients with esophageal varices, 40% of patients underwent banding. The mean EUS-PPG among 5 patients with esophageal varices was 11.6 mm Hg, compared with 3.2 mm Hg among 15 patients without esophageal varices. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that EUS-PPG is a novel, safe, reproducible, and effective technique. Also, the fact that EUS-PPG, EUS-LB, variceal screening, and variceal banding could be performed in 1 session and on an outpatient basis speaks to the growing relevance and impact of the nascent field of endohepatology.

Association between acute peripancreatic fluid collections and early readmission in acute pancreatitis: A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) frequently experience hospital readmissions, posing a significant burden to healthcare systems. Acute peripancreatic fluid collection (APFC) may negatively impact the clinical course of AP. It could worsen symptoms and potentially lead to additional complications. However, clinical evidence regarding the specific association between APFC and early readmission in AP remains scarce. Understanding the link between APFC and readmission may help improve clinical care for AP patients and reduce healthcare costs. AIM: To evaluate the association between APFC and 30-day readmission in patients with AP. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study is based on the Nationwide Readmission Database for 2016-2019. Patients with a primary diagnosis of AP were identified. Participants were categorized into those with and without APFC. A 1:1 propensity score matching for age, gender, and Elixhauser comorbidities was performed. The primary outcome was early readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of inpatient complications and healthcare utilization. Unadjusted analyses used Mann-Whitney U and χ 2 tests, while Cox regression models assessed 30-day readmission risks and reported them as adjusted hazard ratios (aHR). Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests verified readmission risks. RESULTS: A total of 673059 patients with the principal diagnosis of AP were included. Of these, 5.1% had APFC on initial admission. After propensity score matching, each cohort consisted of 33914 patients. Those with APFC showed a higher incidence of inpatient complications, including septic shock (3.1% vs 1.3%, P < 0.001), portal venous thrombosis (4.4% vs 0.8%, P < 0.001), and mechanical ventilation (1.8% vs 0.9%, P < 0.001). The length of stay (LOS) was longer for APFC patients [4 (3-7) vs 3 (2-5) days, P < 0.001], as were hospital charges ($29451 vs $24418, P < 0.001). For 30-day readmissions, APFC patients had a higher rate (15.7% vs 6.5%, P < 0.001) and a longer median readmission LOS (4 vs 3 days, P < 0.001). The APFC group also had higher readmission charges ($28282 vs $22865, P < 0.001). The presence of APFC increased the risk of readmission twofold (aHR 2.52, 95% confidence interval: 2.40-2.65, P < 0.001). The independent risk factors for 30-day readmission included female gender, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index ≥ 3, chronic pulmonary diseases, chronic renal disease, protein-calorie malnutrition, substance use disorder, depression, portal and splenic venous thrombosis, and certain endoscopic procedures. CONCLUSION: Developing APFC during index hospitalization for AP is linked to higher readmission rates, more inpatient complications, longer LOS, and increased healthcare costs. Knowing predictors of readmission can help target high-risk patients, reducing healthcare burdens.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Through-the-Scope Suture System for Gastrointestinal Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Recently, a through-the-scope suturing (TTSS) system has received FDA approval and has been evaluated for closing mucosal defects postintervention. We hereby performed a systematic review and pooled meta-analysis of available studies to assess the safety and efficacy of this intervention. METHODS: We queried the following databases through April 26, 2023: Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection. Endoscopists utilizing TTSS for the following reasons were included: endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, peroral endoscopic myotomy, perforation, fistula closure, and/or stent fixation. The outcomes assessed were technical success, primary clinical success (closure of defect without additional intervention), and overall clinical success (closure of defect with/without additional intervention). Random effects model with the DerSimonian Laird approach was used to report event rates expressed as proportions with a 95% CI. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies with 512 patients (mean age of 61.5 ± 18.4 y, 54.6% females) were included. The technical success rate was 96.0% (CI: 94.3%-97.7%). The primary clinical success rate was 74.8% (CI: 65.5%-84.1%). The overall clinical success rate was 95.4% (CI: 92.6-98.2%). Only 1 mortality case unrelated to intervention was reported. CONCLUSION: The TTSS appears safe and effective for closing mucosal defects after therapeutic endoscopic interventions. Further cost-effective studies should be performed comparing with endoclips for use in clinical settings.

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.

RISK OF DE NOVO BARRETT'S ESOPHAGUS POST SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF STUDIES WITH LONG TERM FOLLOW UP.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a major concern in patients undergoing SG and is a risk factor for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of and analyze predictive factors for post-SG BE. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in April 2024, for studies reporting on incidence of BE, erosive esophagitis (EE) and hiatal hernia (HH) post SG. Primary outcomes were post SG pooled rates of de novo BE, EE, GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and HH. Meta-regression analysis was performed to assess if patient and post SG factors influenced the rates of post SG BE. RESULTS: Nineteen studies with 2046 patients (79% females) were included. Mean age was 42.2 years (SD 11.1) and follow up ranged from 2 to 11.4 years. The pooled rate of de novo BE post SG was 5.6% (CI 3.5-8.8). Significantly higher pooled rates of EE [Risk Ratio (RR) 3.37], HH [RR 2.09], GER/GERD symptoms [RR 3.32] and PPI use [RR 3.65], were found among patients post SG. GER/GERD symptoms post SG positively influenced the pooled BE rates, while age, sex, BMI, post SG EE and HH did not. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that SG results in a significantly increased risk of de novo BE and higher rates of EE, PPI use and HH. Our findings suggest that clinicians should routinely screen patients with SG for BE and future surveillance intervals should be followed as per societal guidelines.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The altered anatomy in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) makes conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) a technically challenging procedure. EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) are alternative modalities used with comparable efficacy and adverse events in such patients. We conducted a meta-analysis comparing EDGE and LA-ERCP to assess the efficacy and safety in patients with RYGB. We conducted a comprehensive literature search from inception to July 7, 2022, on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases using the core concepts of EDGE and LA-ERCP. We excluded case reports, case series (<10 patients), and review articles. Relative risk (RR) was calculated when comparing dichotomous variables, whereas mean difference was calculated for continuous outcomes. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and P values (<0.05 considered significant) were also generated. The search strategy yielded a total of 55 articles. We finalized 4 studies with total 192 patients (75 EDGE and 117 LA-ERCP). The rates of technical success were not significantly different for LA-ERCP and EDGE (RR, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.939-1.051; P = 0.830, I 2 = 0%) Similarly, no difference in adverse events was noted between the 2 groups (RR, 1.216; 95% CI, 0.561-2.634; P = 0.620, I 2 = 10.67%). Shorter procedure time was noted for EDGE compared with the LA-ERCP group (mean difference, 91.53 min; 95% CI, 69.911-113.157 min; P < 0.001, I 2 = 8.32%). EDGE and LA-ERCP are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety. In addition, EDGE has overall lower procedural time. Our study suggests that EDGE should be considered as a first-line therapy if expertise available.

EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation of solid pancreatic lesions: An updated review.

Recent years have brought to light newly developed therapeutic modalities for the treatment of premalignant and malignant pancreatic lesions. The role of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) as a treatment modality for malignant pancreatic lesions is still under evaluation. Several animal studies and human studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of EUS-RFA in the management of premalignant and malignant pancreatic lesions. EUS-RFA therapy can potentially ablate these lesions safely and with minimally invasive techniques. In this article, we provide an updated review of the application of EUS-RFA of pancreatic lesions. We also review the clinical efficacy and safety of this technique and future directions.

Budesonide Versus Mesalamine in Microscopic Colitis: A Comparative Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Microscopic colitis (MC) is an inflammatory bowel disease of autoimmune origin that causes chronic watery diarrhea. Medications, including budesonide, mesalamine, loperamide, cholestyramine, and bismuth subsalicylate, are first-line therapies. Meanwhile, azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, and methotrexate are indicated for refractory MC. OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of budesonide compared with mesalamine for induction of remission in MC patients. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed for relevant clinical trials comparing either mesalamine or budesonide with a control group. We included the following outcomes: clinical remission (3 or fewer stools/day), daily stool weight, daily stool frequency, number of patients with clinical response <50% in the disease activity, and daily stool consistency. Safety end points included: any adverse event, serious adverse events, any adverse event-related discontinuation, abdominal discomfort, constipation, flatulence, nausea, dizziness, headache, bronchitis, nasopharyngitis, and depression. We conducted a meta-analysis model using the generic inverse variance method and performed a subgroup analysis based on the intervention administered. RESULTS: Nineteen randomized clinical trials were included. We found that after 6 weeks of follow-up, budesonide is associated with increased clinical remission rates compared with mesalamine [RR=2.46 (2.27, 2.67), and RR=2.24 (1.95, 2.57), respectively]. However, the test of subgroup difference revealed that the difference is not significant (P=0.25). After 8 weeks of follow-up, budesonide showed significantly higher clinical remission rates than mesalamine RR=2.29 (2.14, 2.45), and RR=1.7 (1.41, 2.05), respectively (P=0.003). Regarding the daily stool weight, patients in the budesonide group showed nonsignificant less stool weight [MD=-351.62 (-534.25, -168.99)] compared with mesalamine [MD=-104.3 (-372.34, 163.74)], P=0.14. However, daily stool frequency was significantly less in the budesonide group compared with mesalamine (P<0.001). Budesonide is associated with a significantly lower incidence of adverse events compared with mesalamine (P=0.002). Analysis of other safety endpoints was not significant between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide was found to be better than mesalamine in MC patients in terms of clinical remission rate, especially after 8 weeks of follow-up. Budesonide also showed less incidence of adverse events. There is an urgent need for randomized, double-blinded clinical trials to provide direct and reliable evidence.

Gastroparesis treatment options metoclopramide and prucalopride: analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the common adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of metoclopramide, FDA-approved for treating many gastrointestinal conditions including gastroparesis, and prucalopride, FDA-approved for treating chronic idiopathic constipation but used off-label for other gastrointestinal conditions including gastroparesis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) was analyzed from January 2013 to December 2023. ADR reports regarding use of only metoclopramide or prucalopride were analyzed following exclusion of reports indicating use for treatment of non-gastrointestinal conditions. RESULTS: Analysis of 1,085 reports on metoclopramide revealed tardive dyskinesia (n = 393, 36.2%) and dystonia (n = 170, 15.7%) among the most reported ADRs in addition to QTc prolongation (n = 16, 1.5%) with progression to Torsade de pointes (n = 5, 0.5%) and triggering of pheochromocytoma crisis (n = 24, 2.2%). Analysis of 865 reports on prucalopride revealed headache (n = 120, 13.9%), diarrhea (n = 116, 13.4%), and abdominal pain (n = 100, 11.6%) as the most common ADRs with 22 reports (2.5%) of dystonia with the use of prucalopride. CONCLUSIONS: This FAERS database analysis shows post-marketing reports of ADRs from metoclopramide most frequently include tardive dyskinesia, dystonia, and tremor in addition to potentially fatal arrhythmias such as Torsade de pointes. Consumers of prucalopride may also be at risk of dystonia and other ADRs.

Indirect comparison of various lumen apposing metal stents for EUS-guided biliary and gallbladder drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies assessing endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) or gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) using lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) have shown variable results based on the type of LAMS. We performed a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Multiple online databases were searched for studies using LAMS (AXIOS or SPAXUS) for EUS-BD and EUS-GB. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success and adverse events. Pooled proportions along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 18 observational studies were included: 11 for AXIOS stent (433 patients with mean age 72 years and 54% males) and 7 for SPAXUS stent (242 patients with mean age 74 years and 50% males). The respective pooled outcomes for AXIOS stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB) were: technical success (96.2% and 96.2%), clinical success (92.8% and 92.7%), total adverse events (10.1% and 23.6%), and bleeding (3.7% and 4.8%). The respective pooled outcomes for SPAXUS stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB) were: technical success (93.8% and 95.9%), clinical success (90.1% and 94.2%), total adverse events (12.6% and 9.5%), and bleeding (3.1% and 1.8%). CONCLUSION: AXIOS and SPAXUS stents demonstrate similar pooled technical and clinical success rates. Adverse events occurred in 23.6% patients (AXIOS stent) and 9.5% patients (SPAXUS stent) during EUS-GB.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Stent Types for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is required in select cases including infected or symptomatic collections. In this network meta-analysis, we have compared lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS), and double-pigtail stents (DPS) to identify the most useful stent type in the management of PFCs. METHODS: We reviewed several databases to identify studies that compared DPS or FCSEMS with LAMS and the ones which compared DPS with FCSEMS for the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were clinical success, adverse events, technical success, recurrence of PFCs, and procedure duration. Random effects model and frequentist approach were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We included 28 studies with 2974 patients. Rate of clinical success was significantly lower with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.32, 0.59). Rate of recurrence was higher with DPS compared to LAMS, OR (95% CI): 2.06 (1.19, 3.57). We found no significant difference in rate of adverse events between groups. Rate of technical success was higher for FCSEMS compared to LAMS. Procedure duration was significantly shorter for LAMS compared to DPS and FCSEMS. Based on frequentist approach, LAMS was found to be superior to DPS and FCSEMS in achieving higher clinical success, lower rate of adverse events and recurrence, and shorter procedure time. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis demonstrates the superiority of LAMS over DPS and FCSEMS in the management of PFCs in achieving a higher clinical success, shorter procedure time, and lower rate of recurrence. Some of the analyses are not adequately powered to make firm conclusions, and future large multicenter RCTs are required to further evaluate this issue.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement (EUS-PPG) is a new modality where the portal pressure is measured by directly introducing a needle into the hepatic vein and portal vein. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-PPG. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify pertinent studies. The primary outcomes assessed were the technical and clinical success of EUS-PPG. Technical success was defined as successful introduction of the needle into the desired vessel, while clinical success was defined as the correlation of the stage of fibrosis on the liver biopsy to EUS-PPG, or concordance of HVPG and EUS-PPG. The secondary outcomes were pooled rates for total and individual adverse events related to EUS-PPG. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Eight cohort studies with a total of 178 patients were included in our analysis. The calculated pooled rates of technical success and clinical success were 94.6% (95%CI 88.5-97.6%; P=<0.001; I2=0) and 85.4% (95%CI 51.5-97.0%; P=0.042; I2=70), respectively. The rate of total adverse events was 10.9% (95%CI 6.5-17.7%; P=<0.001; I2=4), and 93.7% of them were mild, as defined by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Abdominal pain (11%) was the most common adverse event, followed by bleeding (3.6%). There were no cases of perforation or death reported in our study. Conclusions: EUS-PPG is a safe and effective modality for diagnosing portal hypertension. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Safety of Endoscopic Procedures in Thrombocytopenia and Neutropenia: Embracing Assurance.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the post-endoscopic adverse events in patients with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Current guidelines do not provide clear direction on this topic. AIM: We explore the pooled rates of safety and adverse effects of endoscopic interventions in thrombocytopenia and neutropenia patients via a systematic review & meta-analysis. METHODS: Databases, including Medline, Scopus, and Embase, were searched (in May 2023) using specific terms for studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of endoscopy in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: Six studies and four studies evaluated endoscopic outcomes in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia respectively with mean age was 56 years. The pooled rate of total post-biopsy bleeding and total post-polypectomy bleeding among patients with thrombocytopenia was 4% (95% CI 1-11), I2 = 84%, and 12% (95% CI 3-36) I2 = 43%. The total rate of post procedure-related bleeding in thrombocytopenia was 5% (95% CI 1-14) I2 = 95%. The pooled rate of post-endoscopic infection (fever from any cause, bacteremia) in neutropenia was 10% (95% CI 3-28%) I2 = 96%. On sub analysis, the pooled rate of bacteremia and 30 days all-cause mortality in neutropenia was 4% (95% CI 3-5%) I2 = 0% and 13% (95% CI 4-34%) I2 = 95% respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data supports the notion that endoscopic procedures are safe for neutropenic, thrombocytopenic patients with suitable indications and reasonable functional status and have an acceptable risk/benefit ratio.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Heller's myotomy versus pneumatic dilatation for achalasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Achalasia has several treatment modalities. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) with those of pneumatic dilatation (PD) in adult patients suffering from achalasia. METHODS: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Embase for related clinical trials about patients suffering from achalasia. The quality appraisal and assessment of risk of bias were conducted with GRADE and Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Homogeneous and heterogeneous data was analyzed under fixed and random-effects models, respectively. RESULTS: The pooled analysis of 10 studies showed that PD was associated with a higher rate of remission at three months, one year, three years and five years (RR = 1.25 [1.09, 1.42] (p = 0.001); RR = 1.13 [1.05, 1.20] (p = 0.0004); RR = 1.48 [1.19, 1.82] (p = 0.0003); RR = 1.49 [1.18, 1.89] (p = 0.001)), respectively. LHM was associated with lower number of cases suffering from adverse events, dysphagia and relapses (RR = 0.50 [0.25, 0.98] (p = 0.04); RR = 0.33 [0.16, 0.71] (p = 0.004); RR = 0.38 [0.15, 0.97] (p = 0.04)), respectively. There is no significant difference between both groups regarding the lower esophageal pressure, perforations, remission rate at two years, Eckardt score after one year and reflux. CONCLUSION: PD had higher remission rates than LHM at three months, one year and three years, but not at two years or five years. More research is needed to determine whether PD has a significant advantage over LHM in terms of long-term remission rates.

Predicting the risk of early intensive care unit admission for patients hospitalized with acute pancreatitis using supervised machine learning.

Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a complex and life-threatening disease. Early recognition of factors predicting morbidity and mortality is crucial. We aimed to develop and validate a pragmatic model to predict the individualized risk of early intensive care unit (ICU) admission for patients with AP. Methods: The 2019 Nationwide Readmission Database was used to identify patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of AP without ICU admission. A matched comparison cohort of AP patients with ICU admission within 7 days of hospitalization was identified from the National Inpatient Sample after 1:N propensity score matching. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was used to select predictors and develop an ICU acute pancreatitis risk (IAPR) score validated by 10-fold cross-validation. Results: A total of 1513 patients hospitalized for AP were included. The median age was 50.0 years (interquartile range: 39.0-63.0). The three predictors that were selected included hypoxia (area under the curve [AUC] 0.78), acute kidney injury (AUC 0.72), and cardiac arrhythmia (AUC 0.61). These variables were used to develop a nomogram that displayed excellent discrimination (AUC 0.874) (bootstrap bias-corrected 95% confidence interval 0.824-0.876). There was no evidence of miscalibration (test statistic = 2.88; P = 0.09). For high-risk patients (total score >6 points), the sensitivity was 68.94% and the specificity was 92.66%. Conclusions: This supervised machine learning-based model can help recognize high-risk AP hospitalizations. Clinicians may use the IAPR score to identify patients with AP at high risk of ICU admission within the first week of hospitalization.

Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Complex Colorectal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for complex colorectal lesions have shown variable results. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies comparing EFTR versus ESD for complex colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were resection rates, procedure time (min), and complications. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) along with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4 studies with 530 patients (n=215 EFTR, n=315 ESD) were included. The mean follow-up duration was 5 months. The mean age of the patients was 68 years and 64% were men. The EFTR and ESD groups had similar rates of en bloc resection (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 0.60-4.97, P=0.31) and R0 resection (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 0.55-4.14, P=0.42). The EFTR group had significantly reduced procedure time (SMD -1.87, 95% CI: -3.13 to -0.61, P=0.004), total complications (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13-0.44, P<0.00001), perforation (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.39, P=0.0005) and postresection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.48, P=0.008). Delayed bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.12, P=0.66). Residual/recurrent lesions were significantly higher in the EFTR group (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 1.39-15.66, P=0.01). DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis of small studies with high heterogeneity showed that EFTR and ESD have comparable resection rates for complex colorectal lesions. EFTR is faster and has fewer complications, but it increases residual or recurrent lesions.

Adverse Events and Device Failures Associated with Pancreatic Stents: A Comprehensive Analysis Using the FDA's MAUDE Database.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic duct stents (PDS) are widely used for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the adverse events associated with PDS placement. This study aims to investigate the reported adverse events and device failures related to PDS, utilizing the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database maintained by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). METHODS: Post-marketing surveillance data from January 2013 to December 8, 2023, were extracted from the FDA's MAUDE database to analyze the reports pertaining to the use of commonly used PDS. The primary outcomes of interest were device issues and patient-related adverse events. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel 2010, with the calculation of pooled numbers and percentages for each device and patient adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 579 device issues and 194 patient-related adverse events were identified. Device issues were primarily attributed to stent deformation (n = 72; 12.4%), followed by migration of the device into the pancreatic duct or expulsion out of the duct (n = 60; 10.4%), and stent fracture/breakage (n = 55; 9.4%). Among the patient-reported adverse events, inflammation was the most common (n = 26; 13.4%), followed by reports of stents becoming embedded in tissue (n = 21; 10.8%) and stent occlusion/obstruction (n = 16; 8.2%). The most prevalent device failures associated with Advanix stents were material deformation, with perforation (n = 3, 30%) being the most frequently reported adverse event. Concerning Geenen stents, migration or expulsion of the device (n = 34, 16.9%) constituted the most common device-related adverse events, while inflammation (n = 20, 16.7%) was the most frequently reported patient-related issue. For Zimmon stents, migration or expulsion of the device (n = 22, 8.8%) were the most frequently reported device-related problems, whereas perforation (n = 7, 10.9%) and bleeding (n = 7, 10.9%) were the most frequent patient-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight important device and patient adverse events that endoscopists and referring providers should be aware of before considering pancreatic stent placement.

Safety and efficacy of thalidomide in treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to angioectasias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thalidomide has been used for angioectasia-associated refractory gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), with studies showing variable efficacy and side effects profile. We conducted a meta-analysis to reconcile the data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies evaluating thalidomide in patients with refractory/recurrent GIB due to angioectasias. The outcomes of interest were cessation of bleeding, rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, hospitalization and adverse events. Pooled proportions for incidence, and odds ratios (OR) for comparison with control were calculated along with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of seven studies with 346 patients (n = 269 thalidomide, n = 77 control) were included. Thalidomide dose was usually started at 50-100mg/day. The mean age was 65 years, 45% patients were men, and mean follow-up was 1.8 years. The pooled clinical outcomes with thalidomide were: cessation of bleeding 42.2% (95% CI 36.02 to 48.41), rebleeding 30%, need for blood transfusion 20.1%, hospitalization 40% and adverse events 55.9%. When compared with the control group in 2 studies, patients on thalidomide had significantly higher odds of cessation of bleeding (OR 21.40, 95% CI 5.78 to 79.29, p < 0.00001) and adverse events, with lower need for blood transfusion and hospitalization. DISCUSSION: In patients with angioectasias-related refractory/recurrent GIB, the use of thalidomide results in significantly decreased bleeding risk and may play a role in the management of such patients.