Risk of De Novo Barrett's Esophagus Post Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies with Long-Term Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: 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 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 (standard deviation, 11.1) and follow-up ranged from 2 to 11.4 years. The pooled rate of de novo BE post-SG was 5.6% (confidence interval, 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 proton pump inhibitor use (RR, 3.65) were found among patients post-SG. GER/GERD symptoms post-SG positively influenced the pooled BE rates, whereas age, sex, body mass index, post-SG EE, and HH did not. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that SG results in a significantly increased risk of de novo BE and higher rates of EE, proton pump inhibitor 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 gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy across different etiologies of gastroparesis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) is an emerging treatment for refractory gastroparesis. Although its efficacy and safety have been analyzed in previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, no studies have compared its effectiveness based on etiology. Our study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of G-POEM by etiologies of gastroparesis. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search in major databases until October 2023, focusing on the efficacy and safety of G-POEM by etiology. Our primary outcome was clinical success based on etiology, with an additional subgroup analysis on Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) scores before and after G-POEM based on etiology using standard meta-analysis methods and the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. RESULTS: In our analysis of 15 studies (7 retrospective, 8 prospective) involving 982 patients (mean patient age, 50.81 years; mean follow-up, 21 months), postsurgical conditions were the most common etiology in G-POEM (290 cases), followed by idiopathic factors (287 cases) and diabetes (286 cases). Subgroup analysis revealed pooled clinical success rates of 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51-77; I2 = 46%) for diabetes, 70% (95% CI, 46-86; I2 = 73%) for postsurgical conditions, and 60% (95% CI, 41-77; I2 = 68%) for idiopathic etiologies. Our research also indicated that G-POEM significantly improved GCSI scores: 1.7 (95% CI, -.01 to 3.5; P = .052) for diabetes, 1.34 (95% CI, -.07 to 2.62; P = .038) for postsurgical conditions, and 1.5 (95% CI, .36-2.75; P = .01) for idiopathic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this meta-analysis, G-POEM is effective and safe for treating refractory gastroparesis irrespective of the etiology, with significant improvements in clinical success rates and GCSI scores.

Meta-analysis of underwater vs conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Effect of underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection (UESD) on clinical outcomes as compared with conventional ESD (CESD) remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies comparing UESD to CESD for colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were en bloc resection, R0 resection, procedure time (min), dissection speed (mm2/min), and adverse events. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD), along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies with 1,401 patients (n=452 UESD, n=949 CESD) were included. The mean age was 69 years and 57% patients were males. UESD had both lesser procedure time (SMD -1.33, 95% CI -2.34 to -0.32, p = 0.010) and greater dissection speed (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.68, p = 0.003) when compared with CESD. No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to en bloc resection (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.41), R0 resection (OR 2.36, 95% CI 0.79 to 7.05), delayed bleeding (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.74), perforation (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.00) and post resection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.42). DISCUSSION: UESD was faster in patients with colorectal lesions, but had comparable rates of en bloc resection, R0 resection and adverse events when compared with CESD.

Effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on endoscopy outcomes: A systematic review & meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are known to cause delayed gastric emptying, however the effect on clinical outcomes during upper endoscopy/colonoscopy remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to reconcile the data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies evaluating GLP-1RAs vs control group (no GLP-1RAs) in patients undergoing endoscopy. The outcomes of interest were rate of retained gastric contents (RGC), aborted procedures, aspiration events and subjective bowel preparation quality. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies with 77,271 patients (4,449 in the GLP-1 RA arm and 72,703 in the control arm) were included. The mean age ranged from 47.6 to 72 years and 58.4% were females. As compared to the control group, the GLP-1 RA group had higher odds of RGC (OR 15.39, 95% CI 4.65-50.99, p < 0.01) and aborted procedures (OR 13.86, 95% CI 4.42-43.43, p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of aspiration events (OR 21.06, 95% CI 0.13-3379.01, p=0.24) and subjective bowel preparation quality (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.67-1.31, p=0.83). CONCLUSION: While statistical significance was reached in terms of visible RGC and early termination of endoscopies in patients on GLP-1RAs, these events were overall rare. GLP-1RAs do not appear to pose significant risk, as the odds of developing aspiration were comparable in the two groups.

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 EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) or gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) 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 LAMSs (Axios [Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA] or Spaxus [Taewoong Medical Co, Gimpo, Korea]) 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 were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 18 observational studies were included: 11 for the Axios stent (433 patients; mean age, 72 years; 54% male) and 7 for the Spaxus stent (242 patients; mean age, 74 years; 50% male). The respective pooled outcomes for the Axios stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) 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 the Spaxus stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) 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%. CONCLUSIONS: Axios and Spaxus stents demonstrate similar pooled technical and clinical success rates. Adverse events occurred in 23.6% of patients (Axios stent) and 9.5% of patients (Spaxus stent) during EUS-GB.

Prevalence of endoscopy-related injuries and their impact on clinical practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries (ERIs) are commonly reported but their exact prevalence and clinical impact remain obscure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature aiming to answer these questions. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases were searched for studies evaluating ERIs in gastroenterologists and surgeons. The co-primary outcome was the prevalence of ERIs (i.e. carpal tunnel syndrome, de Quervain's tenosynovitis, and hand numbness). The second co-primary outcome was the prevalence of endoscopy-related pain syndromes. RESULTS: 12 studies, including 4563 respondents, were included. The majority of respondents were men (n = 3321; 72.8%) and most were right-handed (86.2%). The career prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome (pooled from 10 studies) was 5.3% (95%CI 1.5%-8.9%; I 2 = 97.1%), while the prevalence of de Quervain's tenosynovitis (five studies) was 8.5% (95%CI 0.1%-17.0%). The pooled prevalences of thumb pain, neck pain, and back pain were 25.4%, 23.1%, and 19.7%, respectively, but the prevalence varied according to the type of questionnaire used. Only 341/864 respondents (39.5%) had received prior training in ergonomics, while 623/889 respondents (70.1%) expressed a desire for further training in ergonomics. Overall, there is a moderate risk of bias in the present literature. CONCLUSION: ERIs, including carpal tunnel syndrome, de Quervain's tenosynovitis, and endoscopy-related pain, are very common. These injuries can be severe, requiring surgery, and lead to loss of productivity. Most gastroenterologists report an unmet need for training in the proper ergonomics of endoscopy.

Comparative diagnostic yield of different endoscopic techniques for tissue sampling of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue sampling techniques for subepithelial lesions. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of bite-on-bite biopsy, mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95%CI. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were identified. EUS-FNB was significantly superior to EUS-FNA in terms of sample adequacy (RR 1.20 [95%CI 1.05-1.45]), whereas none of the other techniques significantly outperformed EUS-FNA. Additionally, bite-on-bite biopsy was significantly inferior to EUS-FNB (RR 0.55 [95%CI 0.33-0.98]). Overall, EUS-FNB appeared to be the best technique (surface under cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score 0.90) followed by MIAB (SUCRA 0.83), whereas bite-on-bite biopsy showed the poorest performance. When considering lesions <20 mm, MIAB, but not EUS-FNB, showed significantly higher accuracy rates compared with EUS-FNA (RR 1.68 [95%CI 1.02-2.88]). Overall, MIAB ranked as the best intervention for lesions <20 mm (SUCRA score 0.86 for adequacy and 0.91 for accuracy), with EUS-FNB only slightly superior to EUS-FNA. When rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) was available, no difference between EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA, and MIAB was observed. CONCLUSION: EUS-FNB and MIAB appeared to provide better performance, whereas bite-on-bite sampling was significantly inferior to the other techniques. MIAB seemed to be the best option for smaller lesions, whereas EUS-FNA remained competitive when ROSE was available.

Efficacy of Rituximab in Autoimmune-Mediated IgG4 Pancreaticobiliary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: IgG4 pancreaticobilliary disease (IgG4-PBD) typically shows a rapid improvement with glucocorticoid treatment, yet most patients experience a recurrence. Rituximab (RTX) has emerged as a hopeful approach to prevent relapses in IgG4-PBD. Nevertheless, there is a lack of data on the efficacy and safety of RTX in IgG4-PBD. In this study, we aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the pooled efficacy of RTX in this patient population. METHODS: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Embase, were searched (in March 2024) using specific terms for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of RTX in IgG4 pancreatic biliary disease. Outcomes of interest were relapse, remission, partial remission rates, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the study (257 patients). The pooled rate of complete remission was 68% (54% to 80%), I2 =53%, respectively. The pooled relapse rate was 23% (13% to 36%), I2=64%. The pooled rate of total adverse events was 21% (12% to 35%), I2=52%. The pooled partial remission rate is 16% (7% to 32%), I2=25%. The pooled rate of complete and partial remission was 81% (66% to 90%), I2=75%. The pooled infusion reaction and infection were 12% (7% to 18%), I2=0% and 14% (8% to 22%), I2=16%, respectively. CONCLUSION: RTX therapy appears effective in inducing and maintaining remission of pancreaticobiliary disease with a low rate of side effects. RTX presents as a promising treatment option for patients grappling with recurrent or unresponsive IgG4-related ailments. In addition, RTX emerges as an attractive alternative for individuals intolerant to steroids or experiencing IgG4-related disease relapses. Future studies comparing RTX with other immunomodulators will offer deeper insights into relapse factors and elucidate the appropriateness of utilizing this maintenance treatment following the initial flare.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Therapy in Symptomatic Pancreatic Divisum: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital malformation of the pancreas and is implicated as a cause of pancreatitis. The role of endotherapy has been variable in symptomatic PD indicated by recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), or chronic pancreatic-type abdominal pain (PP). The aim of this study was to analyze the pooled data to determine the success of endoscopic intervention for pancreas divisum. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2023) to identify studies reporting on the use of endoscopic therapy in symptomatic pancreatic divisum. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2% values were used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were retrieved that reported endoscopic intervention in pancreatic divisum. The calculated pooled rate of technical success was 92% (95% CI: 87-95; I2=63%). The calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 65% (95% CI: 60-70; I2=60%). The rate of clinical success by PD subtypes was highest in RAP at 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). Available studies had significant heterogeneity in defining clinical success. The rate of adverse events was 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). CONCLUSIONS: The role of endoscopic therapy in pancreatic divisum is variable with the highest success rate in recurrent acute pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is associated with a higher-than-usual rate of adverse events, including post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Safety and Effectiveness of Vedolizumab in Elderly Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on Vedolizumab utilization in elderly patients. Our study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of Vedolizumab in this subset population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Databases including Cochrane Central, Embase, Medline (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science were searched in August 2022 to identify studies that assessed Vedolizumab therapy in elderly patients. Pooled proportion and risk ratios (RR) were calculated. RESULTS: Total 11 studies with 3546 IBD patients (1314 elderly and 2232 young) were included in the final analysis. Pooled rate of overall and serious infections in the elderly cohort was 8.45% (95% CI=6.27-11.29; I 2 23%) and 2.59% (95% CI=0.78-8.29; I 2 76%), respectively. However, there was no difference in overall infection rates between elderly and young patients. Pooled rate of endoscopic, clinical, and steroid-free remission for elderly IBD patients was 38.45% (95% CI=20.74-59.56; I 2 93%), 37.95% (95% CI=33.08-43.06; I 2 13%), and 38.8% (95% CI=31.6-46.4; I 2 77%), respectively. Elderly patients had lower steroid-free remission rates [RR 0.85, 95% CI=0.74-0.99; I 2 0%, P =0.03]; however, there was no difference in rates of clinical (RR 0.86, 95% CI=0.72-1.03; I 2 0%, P =0.10) or endoscopic remission (RR 1.06, 95% CI=0.83-1.35; I 2 0%, P =0.63) compared with younger patients. Pooled rate of IBD-related surgery and IBD-related hospitalizations was 9.76% (95% CI=5.81-15.92; I 2 78%) and 10.54% (95% CI=8.37-13.2; I 2 0%), respectively for the elderly cohort. There was no statistical difference in IBD-related surgeries between elderly and young IBD patients, RR 1.20 (95% CI=0.79-1.84; I 2 16%), P =0.4. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab is equally safe and effective for clinical and endoscopic remission in elderly and younger populations.

Cold Snare Polypectomy in Small (<10 mm) Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10 mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10 mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement. RESULTS: Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5 mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.

Conventional Versus Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for colorectal lesions, the traction method (T-ESD) allows the lesion to be stabilized with easier dissection. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results on the clinical outcomes of T-ESD as compared with C-ESD. We conducted a meta-analysis to compile the data. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for RCTs evaluating C-ESD versus T-ESD for colorectal tumors. The end points of interest were procedure time (min), resection speed (mm²/min), R0 resection, en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Six RCTs with a total of 566 patients (C-ESD n=284, T-ESD n=282) were included. The mean age was 67±10 y and 60% were men. As compared with the T-ESD technique, the C-ESD group was associated with longer procedure time (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23, P<0.00001) and lesser resection speed (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.06, P=0.04). No significant difference was found in the 2 groups with respect to R0 resection rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, P=0.87), en bloc resection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, P=0.35), delayed bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.59, P=0.55) and perforation (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 6.27, P=0.16). DISCUSSION: On meta-analysis, pooled procedure time was significantly faster with T-ESD compared with C-ESD. The clinical outcomes, however, were comparable.

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.

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.

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.

Trainee Involvement and ERCP Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic endoscopy and gastroenterology fellows often participate in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during their training period. However, it is generally feared that trainee involvement may increase ERCP-related complications, mainly because of the side-viewing nature of the endoscope and the higher risk of pancreatic duct cannulation. There is no concrete evidence to support this notion. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the resultsof trainee participation on adverse events related to ERCP. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 31 May 2023 for studies evaluating the ERCP outcomes defined as success rates, procedure time, failed attempts, and adverse events with and without trainee participation. A random effect model was used to perform the meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the final analysis, including 17,088 ERCPs. The pooled odds ratio (pOR) of success rate, incomplete/failed attempts in the trainee and no trainee groups were 0.466 (95% CI 0.13 to 1.66, I2 = 97.8%, p = 0.239) and 3.2 (95% CI 0.70 to 14.55), I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.134), respectively. The pOR of post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding in the trainee vs. no trainee groups was 0.97 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.23, I2 = 0%, p = 0.78) and 1.3 (95% CI 0.59 to 2.83, I2 = 49%, p = 0.54). The pOR of all adverse events in both groups was 1.028 (95% CI 0.917 to 1.152, I2 = 0%, p = 0.636). Surprisingly, the pooled std mean difference for the procedure time was 0.217 (95% - 0.093 to 0.05, I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis comprising of 17,088 ERCPs in seven studies demonstrated comparable ERCP outcomes related to trainee participation regarding success rates, procedure time, and adverse events. Trainees' involvement in ERCP within a proper teaching setting appears safe and does not compromise the overall procedure's success.

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.

Device-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection in colorectum: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is emerging as an effective modality for mucosal and submucosal lesions in the colorectum. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to analyze the success and safety of device-assisted EFTR in the colon and rectum. METHODS: A literature search was performed in the Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies evaluating device-assisted EFTR between inception to October 2022. The primary outcome of the study was clinical success (R0 resection) with EFTR. Secondary outcomes included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. RESULTS: In all, 29 studies with 3467 patients (59% male patients, 3492 lesions) were included in the analysis. The lesions were located in right colon (47.5%), left colon (28.6%), and rectum (24.3%). EFTR was performed for subepithelial lesions in 7.2% patients. The pooled mean size of the lesions was 16.6 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.9-18.2, I2 98%). Technical success was achieved in 87.1% (95% CI 85.1-88.9%, I2 39%) procedures. The pooled rate of en bloc resection was 88.1% (95% CI 86-90%, I2 47%) and R0 resection was 81.8% (95% CI 79-84.3%, I2 56%). In subepithelial lesions, the pooled rate of R0 resection was 94.3% (95% CI 89.7-96.9%, I2 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events was 11.9% (95% CI 10.2-13.9%, I2 43%) and major adverse events requiring surgery was 2.5% (95% CI 2.0-3.1%, I2 0%). CONCLUSION: Device-assisted EFTR is a safe and effective treatment modality in cases with adenomatous and subepithelial colorectal lesions. Comparative studies are required with conventional resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.

Pediatric combined living donor liver and kidney transplantation for primary hyperoxaluria type 2.

We report the case of a 12-year-old boy with primary hyperoxaluria type 2 (PH2) presenting with end-stage renal disease and systemic oxalosis who underwent a combined living donor liver and kidney transplant from 3 donors, 1 of whom was a heterozygous carrier of the mutation. Plasma oxalate and creatinine levels normalized immediately following the transplant and remain normal after 18 months. We recommend combined liver and kidney transplantation as the preferred therapeutic option for children with primary hyperoxaluria type 2 with early-onset end-stage renal disease.

Prevalence of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma With and Without Gastroesophageal Reflux: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms are an essential criterion for Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening in most gastroenterology society guidelines, a significant proportion of BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) cases do not endorse them. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the prevalence of BE/EAC in those with and without GERD. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted through 5 major databases for studies reporting prevalence of BE/EAC in patients with and without GERD. Pooled proportions and odds ratios (ORs) of BE, long-segment BE, short-segment BE, dysplasia, and EAC in patients with and without GERD were synthesized. RESULTS: Forty-three articles (12,883 patients with GERD; 51,350 patients without GERD) were included in the final analysis. BE prevalence was 7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8%-8.5%) and 2.2% (95% CI, 1.6%-3%) among individuals with and without GERD, respectively. EAC prevalence was 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-1%) and 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.2%) in those with and without GERD, respectively. The overall risks for BE (OR, 2.91; 95% CI, 2.06-4.11) and long-segment BE (OR,4.17; 95% CI, 1.78-9.77) were higher in patients with GERD, but the risk for short-segment BE (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.89-3.52) did not differ between the two groups. In 9 population-based high-quality studies (2244 patients with GERD; 3724 patients without GERD), BE prevalence in patients without GERD was 4.9% (95% CI, 2.6%-9%). BE prevalence was highest in North American studies (10.6% [GERD] and 4.8% [non-GERD]). CONCLUSIONS: BE prevalence in those without GERD is substantial, particularly in large high-quality population-based studies. These data are important to factor in future BE/EAC early detection guidelines.