RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The combination of rectally administered indomethacin and placement of a prophylactic pancreatic stent is recommended to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients. Preliminary evidence suggests that the use of indomethacin might eliminate or substantially reduce the need for stent placement, a technically complex, costly, and potentially harmful intervention. METHODS: In this randomised, non-inferiority trial conducted at 20 referral centres in the USA and Canada, patients (aged ≥18 years) at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive rectal indomethacin alone or the combination of indomethacin plus a prophylactic pancreatic stent. Patients, treating clinicians, and outcomes assessors were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis. To declare non-inferiority, the upper bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis (indomethacin alone minus indomethacin plus stent) would have to be less than 5% (non-inferiority margin) in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02476279), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2015, and Jan 25, 2023, a total of 1950 patients were randomly assigned. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 145 (14·9%) of 975 patients in the indomethacin alone group and in 110 (11·3%) of 975 in the indomethacin plus stent group (risk difference 3·6%; 95% CI 0·6-6·6; p=0·18 for non-inferiority). A post-hoc intention-to-treat analysis of the risk difference between groups showed that indomethacin alone was inferior to the combination of indomethacin plus prophylactic stent (p=0·011). The relative benefit of stent placement was generally consistent across study subgroups but appeared more prominent among patients at highest risk for pancreatitis. Safety outcomes (serious adverse events, intensive care unit admission, and hospital length of stay) did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: For preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients, a strategy of indomethacin alone was not as effective as a strategy of indomethacin plus prophylactic pancreatic stent placement. These results support prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in addition to rectal indomethacin administration in high-risk patients, in accordance with clinical practice guidelines. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.
Asunto(s)
Indometacina , Pancreatitis , Adolescente , Adulto , Humanos , Administración Rectal , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/uso terapéutico , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efectos adversos , Indometacina/uso terapéutico , Pancreatitis/epidemiología , Pancreatitis/etiología , Pancreatitis/prevención & control , Factores de Riesgo , StentsRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Early aggressive hydration is widely recommended for the management of acute pancreatitis, but evidence for this practice is limited. METHODS: At 18 centers, we randomly assigned patients who presented with acute pancreatitis to receive goal-directed aggressive or moderate resuscitation with lactated Ringer's solution. Aggressive fluid resuscitation consisted of a bolus of 20 ml per kilogram of body weight, followed by 3 ml per kilogram per hour. Moderate fluid resuscitation consisted of a bolus of 10 ml per kilogram in patients with hypovolemia or no bolus in patients with normovolemia, followed by 1.5 ml per kilogram per hour in all patients in this group. Patients were assessed at 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours, and fluid resuscitation was adjusted according to the patient's clinical status. The primary outcome was the development of moderately severe or severe pancreatitis during the hospitalization. The main safety outcome was fluid overload. The planned sample size was 744, with a first planned interim analysis after the enrollment of 248 patients. RESULTS: A total of 249 patients were included in the interim analysis. The trial was halted owing to between-group differences in the safety outcomes without a significant difference in the incidence of moderately severe or severe pancreatitis (22.1% in the aggressive-resuscitation group and 17.3% in the moderate-resuscitation group; adjusted relative risk, 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 2.18; P = 0.32). Fluid overload developed in 20.5% of the patients who received aggressive resuscitation and in 6.3% of those who received moderate resuscitation (adjusted relative risk, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.36 to 5.94, P = 0.004). The median duration of hospitalization was 6 days (interquartile range, 4 to 8) in the aggressive-resuscitation group and 5 days (interquartile range, 3 to 7) in the moderate-resuscitation group. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial involving patients with acute pancreatitis, early aggressive fluid resuscitation resulted in a higher incidence of fluid overload without improvement in clinical outcomes. (Funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III and others; WATERFALL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381169.).
Asunto(s)
Desequilibrio Ácido-Base , Fluidoterapia , Pancreatitis , Desequilibrio Hidroelectrolítico , Desequilibrio Ácido-Base/etiología , Desequilibrio Ácido-Base/terapia , Enfermedad Aguda , Fluidoterapia/efectos adversos , Fluidoterapia/métodos , Humanos , Pancreatitis/complicaciones , Pancreatitis/terapia , Resucitación/métodos , Lactato de Ringer/administración & dosificación , Lactato de Ringer/uso terapéutico , Desequilibrio Hidroelectrolítico/etiología , Desequilibrio Hidroelectrolítico/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) causes an abdominal pain syndrome associated with poor quality of life. We conducted a clinical trial to further investigate the efficacy and safety of camostat, an oral serine protease inhibitor that has been used to alleviate pain in CP. METHODS: This was a double-blind randomized controlled trial that enrolled adults with CP with a baseline average daily worst pain score ≥4 on a numeric rating system. Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive camostat at 100, 200, or 300 mg 3 times daily or placebo. The primary end point was a 4-week change from baseline in the mean daily worst pain intensity score (0-10 on a numeric rating system) using a mixed model repeated measure analysis. Secondary end points included changes in alternate pain end points, quality of life, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 264 participants with CP were randomized. Changes in pain from baseline were similar between the camostat groups and placebo, with differences of least squares means of -0.11 (95% CI, -0.90 to 0.68), -0.04 (95% CI, -0.85 to 0.78), and -0.11 (95% CI, -0.94 to 0.73) for the 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg groups, respectively. Multiple subgroup analyses were similar for the primary end point, and no differences were observed in any of the secondary end points. Treatment-emergent adverse events attributed to the study drug were identified in 42 participants (16.0%). CONCLUSION: We were not able to reject the null hypothesis of no difference in improvements in pain or quality of life outcomes in participants with painful CP who received camostat compared with placebo. Studies are needed to further define mechanisms of pain in CP to guide future clinical trials, including minimizing placebo responses and selecting targeted therapies. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT02693093.
Asunto(s)
Ésteres , Guanidinas , Pancreatitis Crónica , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Humanos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Dolor Abdominal/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Abdominal/etiología , Pancreatitis Crónica/complicaciones , Pancreatitis Crónica/diagnóstico , Pancreatitis Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Método Doble CiegoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Stomach cancer incidence presents significant racial/ethnic disparities among racial/ethnic minority groups in the United States, particularly among Asian and Hispanic immigrant populations. However, population-based evaluation of disparities by nativity has been scarce because of the lack of nativity-specific population denominators, especially for disaggregated Asian subgroups. Population-based stomach cancer incidence and tumor characteristics by detailed race/ethnicity and nativity were examined. METHODS: Annual age-adjusted incidence rates were calculated by race/ethnicity, sex, and nativity and tumor characteristics, such as stage and anatomic subsite, were evaluated using the 2011-2015 California Cancer Registry data. For Hispanic and Asian populations, nativity-specific population counts were estimated using the US Census and the American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample data. RESULTS: During 2011-2015 in California, 14,198 patients were diagnosed with stomach cancer. Annual age-adjusted incidence rates were higher among foreign-born individuals than their US-born counterparts. The difference was modest among Hispanics (â¼1.3-fold) but larger (â¼2- to 3-fold) among Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans. The highest incidence was observed for foreign-born Korean and Japanese Americans (33 and 33 per 100,000 for men; 15 and 12 per 100,000 for women, respectively). The proportion of localized stage disease was highest among foreign-born Korean Americans (44%); a similar proportion was observed among US-born Korean Americans, although numbers were limited. For other Asians and Hispanics, the localized stage proportion was generally lower among foreign-born than US-born individuals and lowest among foreign-born Japanese Americans (23%). CONCLUSIONS: Nativity-specific investigation with disaggregated racial/ethnic groups identified substantial stomach cancer disparities among foreign-born immigrant populations.
Asunto(s)
Asiático , Neoplasias Gástricas , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Etnicidad , Neoplasias Gástricas/epidemiología , Grupos Minoritarios , Hispánicos o Latinos , California/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of balanced multielectrolyte solutions(BMES) versus normal saline(NS) for intravenous fluid on chloride levels and clinical outcomes.in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis (pSAP). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Isotonic crystalloids are recommended for initial fluid therapy in acute pancreatitis, but whether the use of BMES in preference to NS confers clinical benefits is unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial, we enrolled patients with pSAP (APACHE II score ≥8 and C-reactive protein >150 mg/L) admitted within 72 hours of the advent of symptoms. The study sites were randomly assigned to staggered start dates for one-way crossover from the NS phase (NS for intravenous fluid) to the BMES phase(Sterofudin for intravenous fluid). The primary endpoint was the serum chloride concentration on trial day3. Secondary endpoints included a composite of clinical and laboratory measures. RESULTS: Overall, 259 patients were enrolled from eleven sites to receive NS(n=147) or BMES(n=112). On trial day3, the mean chloride level was significantly lower in patients who received BMES(101.8 mmol/L(SD4.8) versus 105.8 mmol/L(SD5.9), difference -4.3 mmol/L [95%CI -5.6 to -3.0 mmol/L];P<0.001). For secondary endpoints, patients who received BMES had less systemic inflammatory response syndrome(19/112,17.0% versus 43/147,29.3%, P=0.024) and increased organ failure-free days (3.9 d(SD2.7) versus 3.5days(SD2.7), P<0.001) by trial day7. They also spent more time alive and out of ICU(26.4 d(SD5.2) versus 25.0days(SD6.4), P=0.009) and hospital(19.8 d(SD6.1) versus16.3days(SD7.2), P<0.001) by trial day30. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with pSAP, using BMES in preference to NS resulted in a significantly more physiological serum chloride level, which was associated with multiple clinical benefits(Trial registration number: ChiCTR2100044432).
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Large language models including Chat Generative Pretrained Transformers version 4 (ChatGPT4) improve access to artificial intelligence, but their impact on the clinical practice of gastroenterology is undefined. This study compared the accuracy, concordance, and reliability of ChatGPT4 colonoscopy recommendations for colorectal cancer rescreening and surveillance with contemporary guidelines and real-world gastroenterology practice. METHODS: History of present illness, colonoscopy data, and pathology reports from patients undergoing procedures at 2 large academic centers were entered into ChatGPT4 and it was queried for the next recommended colonoscopy follow-up interval. Using the McNemar test and inter-rater reliability, we compared the recommendations made by ChatGPT4 with the actual surveillance interval provided in the endoscopist's procedure report (gastroenterology practice) and the appropriate US Multisociety Task Force (USMSTF) guidance. The latter was generated for each case by an expert panel using the clinical information and guideline documents as reference. RESULTS: Text input of de-identified data into ChatGPT4 from 505 consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy between January 1 and April 30, 2023, elicited a successful follow-up recommendation in 99.2% of the queries. ChatGPT4 recommendations were in closer agreement with the USMSTF Panel (85.7%) than gastroenterology practice recommendations with the USMSTF Panel (75.4%) (P < .001). Of the 14.3% discordant recommendations between ChatGPT4 and the USMSTF Panel, recommendations were for later screening in 26 (5.1%) and for earlier screening in 44 (8.7%) cases. The inter-rater reliability was good for ChatGPT4 vs USMSTF Panel (Fleiss κ, 0.786; 95% CI, 0.734-0.838; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial real-world results suggest that ChatGPT4 can define routine colonoscopy screening intervals accurately based on verbatim input of clinical data. Large language models have potential for clinical applications, but further training is needed for broad use.
Asunto(s)
Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Humanos , Colonoscopía/métodos , Colonoscopía/normas , Femenino , Masculino , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Inteligencia ArtificialRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) is effective for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk cases, but the optimal technical approach to this intervention remains uncertain. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of 787 clinical trial patients who underwent successful stent placement, we studied the impact of (i) whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP or naturally during the conduct of the case, (ii) the amount of effort expended on PSP, (iii) stent length, (iv) stent diameter, and (v) guidewire caliber. We used logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between each technical factor and post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). RESULTS: Ninety-one of the 787 patients experienced PEP. There was no clear association between PEP and whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP (vs occurring naturally; odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-1.84), whether substantial effort expended on stent placement (vs nonsubstantial effort; OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73-3.45), stent length (>5 vs ≤5 cm; OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63-1.61), stent diameter (≥5 vs <5 Fr; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.96), or guidewire caliber (0.035 vs 0.025 in; 0.83, 95% CI 0.49-1.41). DISCUSSION: The 5 modifiable technical factors studied in this secondary analysis of large-scale randomized trial data did not appear to have a strong impact on the benefit of prophylactic PSP in preventing PEP after high-risk ERCP. Within the limitations of post hoc subgroup analysis, these findings may have important implications in procedural decision making and suggest that the benefit of PSP is robust to variations in technical approach.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A robust model of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) risk is not currently available. We aimed to develop a machine learning-based tool for PEP risk prediction to aid in clinical decision making related to periprocedural prophylaxis selection and postprocedural monitoring. METHODS: Feature selection, model training, and validation were performed using patient-level data from 12 randomized controlled trials. A gradient-boosted machine (GBM) model was trained to estimate PEP risk, and the performance of the resulting model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) with 5-fold cross-validation. A web-based clinical decision-making tool was created, and a prospective pilot study was performed using data from ERCPs performed at the Johns Hopkins Hospital over a 1-month period. RESULTS: A total of 7389 patients were included in the GBM with an 8.6% rate of PEP. The model was trained on 20 PEP risk factors and 5 prophylactic interventions (rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], aggressive hydration, combined rectal NSAIDs and aggressive hydration, pancreatic duct stenting, and combined rectal NSAIDs and pancreatic duct stenting). The resulting GBM model had an AUC of 0.70 (65% specificity, 65% sensitivity, 95% negative predictive value, and 15% positive predictive value). A total of 135 patients were included in the prospective pilot study, resulting in an AUC of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and utility of a novel machine learning-based PEP risk estimation tool with high negative predictive value to aid in prophylaxis selection and identify patients at low risk who may not require extended postprocedure monitoring.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Difficult biliary cannulation (DBC) is a known risk factor for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). To better understand how DBC increases PEP risk, we examined the interplay between technical aspects of DBC and known PEP risk factors. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing rectal indomethacin alone with the combination of rectal indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement for PEP prophylaxis in high-risk patients. Participants were categorized into 3 groups: 1) DBC with high pre-procedure risk for PEP, 2) DBC without high pre-procedure risk, and 3) non-DBC at high pre-procedure risk. RESULTS: In all, 1601 (84.1%) participants experienced DBC, which required a mean of 12 (SD 10) cannulation attempts and mean duration of 14.7 minutes (SD 14.9). PEP rate was highest (20.7%) in DBC with high pre-procedure risk, followed by non-DBC with high pre-procedure risk (13.5%) and then DBC without high pre-procedure risk (8.8%). Increasing number of PD-wire passages (aOR:1.97, 95% CI:1.25-3.1) was associated with PEP in DBC, but PD injection, pancreatic sphincterotomy and number of cannulation attempts were not associated with PEP. Combining indomethacin with PD stenting lowered PEP risk (aOR:0.61, 95% CI:0.44-0.84) in DBCs. This protective effect was evident in up to at least 4 PD wire passages. CONCLUSIONS: DBC confers higher PEP risk in additive fashion to pre-procedural risk factors. PD wire passages appear to add the greatest PEP risk in DBCs, but combining indomethacin with PD stenting reduces this risk, even with increasing PD wire passages.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrated limited accuracy of existing guidelines for predicting choledocholithiasis, leading to overutilization of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). More accurate stratification may improve patient selection for ERCP and allow use of lower-risk modalities. METHODS: A machine learning model was developed using patient information from two published cohort studies that evaluated performance of guidelines in predicting choledocholithiasis. Prediction models were developed using the gradient boosting model (GBM) machine learning method. GBM performance was evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Important predictors of choledocholithiasis were identified based on relative importance in the GBM. RESULTS: 1378 patients (mean age 43.3 years; 61.2% female) were included in the GBM and 59.4% had choledocholithiasis. Eight variables were identified as predictors of choledocholithiasis. The GBM had accuracy of 71.5% (SD 2.5%) (AUC 0.79 [SD 0.06]) and performed better than the 2019 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines (accuracy 62.4% [SD 2.6%]; AUC 0.63 [SD 0.03]) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines (accuracy 62.8% [SD 2.6%]; AUC 0.67 [SD 0.02]). The GBM correctly categorized 22% of patients directed to unnecessary ERCP by ASGE guidelines, and appropriately recommended as the next management step 48% of ERCPs incorrectly rejected by ESGE guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning-based tool was created, providing real-time, personalized, objective probability of choledocholithiasis and ERCP recommendations. This more accurately directed ERCP use than existing ASGE and ESGE guidelines, and has the potential to reduce morbidity associated with ERCP or missed choledocholithiasis.
Asunto(s)
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Coledocolitiasis , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Adulto , Masculino , Coledocolitiasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Coledocolitiasis/cirugía , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal , Toma de Decisiones , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The role of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains controversial despite its effectiveness in the general population. We aimed to characterize outcomes of EMR for IBD-associated LSLs compared with controls without IBD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with IBD who underwent EMR and endoscopic follow-up for LSLs, compared with a control group without IBD. The primary outcome was histologic recurrence. Secondary outcomes included en bloc resection and adverse events. Factors associated with recurrence were identified using multivariate mixed effects logistic regression. RESULTS: 210 premalignant lesions in 155 patients were included. By histology, 91.0% were adenoma/low grade dysplasia or sessile serrated lesions. Median (IQR) lesion size was 25 (12-30) mm in the IBD group and 20 (12-30) mm in the control group. Recurrence was detected in 30.4% of IBD-associated lesions (7/23) compared with 20.9% of controls (39/187; odds ratio [OR] 2.51, 95%CI 0.59-10.71). En bloc resection was less common in the IBD group (2/23 [8.7%], 95%CI 1.1-28.0) versus controls (106/187 [56.7%], 95%CI 50.4-65.2). After adjusting for lesion size and histology, recurrence appeared more common in patients with IBD compared with controls (OR 3.08, 95%CI 1.04-9.13). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence of LSLs after EMR appeared to be more frequent in patients with IBD. Given the added complexity, EMR in patients with IBD should be performed in expert centers with close endoscopic surveillance.
RESUMEN
GOALS: This study aims to investigate associated mortality with inpatient endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with and without resistant infections. The co-primary objective compares frequencies of inpatient ERCP with resistant infections to overall hospitalizations with resistant infections. BACKGROUND: The risks of inpatient antibiotic-resistant organisms are known, but the associated mortality for inpatient ERCP is unknown. We aim to use a national database of hospitalizations and procedures to understand trends and mortality for patients with antibiotic-resistant infections during inpatient ERCP. STUDY: The largest publicly available all-payer inpatient database in the United States (National Inpatient Sample) was used to identify hospitalizations associated with ERCPs and antibiotic-resistant infections for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and MDRO. National estimates were generated, frequencies were compared across years, and multivariate regression for mortality was performed. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2020, national weighted estimates of 835,540 inpatient ERCPs were generated, and 11,440 ERCPs had coincident resistant infections. Overall resistant infection, MRSA, VRE, and MDRO identified at the same hospitalization of inpatient ERCPs were associated with higher mortality (OR CI(95%): Overall: 2.2(1.77-2.88), MRSA: 1.90 (1.34-2.69), VRE: 3.53 (2.16-5.76), and MDRO: 2.52 (1.39-4.55)). While overall hospitalizations with resistant infections have been decreasing annually, there has been a yearly increase in admissions requiring ERCPs with simultaneous resistant infections ( P =0.001-0.013), as well as infections with VRE, ESBL, and MDRO ( P =0.001-0.016). Required Research Practices for Studies Using the NIS scoring was 0, or the most optimal. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient ERCPs have increasing coincident resistant infections and are associated with higher mortality. These rising infections during ERCP highlight the importance of endoscopy suite protocols and endoscopic infection control devices.
Asunto(s)
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Pacientes Internos , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efectos adversos , Estudios Transversales , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is routinely used for fiducial marker placement (FMP) to guide stereotactic radiation of pancreatic tumors, but EUS-FMP explicitly to guide surgery has not been studied in a prospective, controlled manner. Multipurpose EUS systems have been developed that facilitate simultaneous EUS-FMP at the time of biopsy. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of EUS-FMP to guide pancreatic resection. METHODS: In this prospective trial, we enrolled patients with resectable pancreas masses undergoing tissue sampling and placed preloaded fiducials immediately after biopsy. Intraprocedure confirmation of carcinoma, neuroendocrine, and nonlymphomatous neoplasia by rapid on-site evaluation and lesion size <4 cm was required. The main outcomes were the feasibility and ease of preoperative placement and intraoperative detection of the markers using predefined Likert scales. RESULTS: In 20 patients, EUS-FMP was successful before planned surgery and placement was technically straightforward (Likert Scale: 9.1 ± 1.3; range: 1, most challenging to 10, most facile). Intraoperative detection was feasible and improved when compared with a pre-established comparator of 5 representing an equivalent lesion without a marker (Likert Scale: 7.8 ± 2.2; range: 1, most difficult to 10, most facile; P = 0.011). The mean tumor size on EUS was 1.7 ± 0.9 (range: 0.5 to 3.6) cm. CONCLUSION: EUS-FMP is feasible and safe for resectable pancreatic tumors before surgery and may assist in perioperative detection. Preloaded fiducials may be considered for placement at the time of initial referral for EUS-fine needle biopsy.
Asunto(s)
Endosonografía , Estudios de Factibilidad , Marcadores Fiduciales , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Estudios Prospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Endosonografía/métodos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Adulto , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/métodos , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Páncreas/cirugía , Páncreas/patología , Páncreas/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Recent pilot trials in acute pancreatitis (AP) found that lactated ringers (LR) usage may result in decreased risk of moderately severe/severe AP compared with normal saline, but their small sample sizes limit statistical power. We investigated whether LR usage is associated with improved outcomes in AP in an international multicenter prospective study. METHODS: Patients directly admitted with the diagnosis of AP were prospectively enrolled at 22 international sites between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, fluid administration, and AP severity data were collected in a standardized prospective manner to examine the association between LR and AP severity outcomes. Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the direction and magnitude of the relationship between the type of fluid administered during the first 24 hours and the development of moderately severe/severe AP. RESULTS: Data from 999 patients were analyzed (mean age 51 years, female 52%, moderately severe/severe AP 24%). Usage of LR during the first 24 hours was associated with reduced odds of moderately severe/severe AP (adjusted odds ratio 0.52; P = 0.014) compared with normal saline after adjusting for region of enrollment, etiology, body mass index, and fluid volume and accounting for the variation across centers. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses eliminating the effects of admission organ failure, etiology, and excessive total fluid volume. DISCUSSION: LR administration in the first 24 hours of hospitalization was associated with improved AP severity. A large-scale randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Pancreatitis , Desequilibrio Hidroelectrolítico , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pancreatitis/complicaciones , Estudios Prospectivos , Solución Salina , Enfermedad Aguda , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Alcohol consumption is increasing in women, who more frequently report abdominal symptoms compared to men. We aimed to examine differences in presentation of acute pancreatitis [AP] in male and female patients hospitalized with alcohol-associated AP. METHODS: We analyzed 138 patients enrolled in an ongoing case-crossover study of alcohol-associated AP conducted across 5 medical centers in the U.S. Patients meeting the Revised Atlanta Classification of AP and who scored 3 or higher on the AUDIT-C instrument were invited to participate in the study and were interviewed while hospitalized with AP. Sex differences in the timing and type of pancreas-associated pain, alcohol consumption, clinical presentation, and quality of life were examined by Chi-squared tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests and t-tests. RESULTS: Female patients reported significantly longer interval from onset of pain to deciding to seek medical attention (median 40 h, interquartile range [IQR] 14, 74) as compared to males (14 h, IQR 4, 50; p = 0.005). While male patients were more likely to have been admitted to the intensive care unit [ICU] (21%) as compared to female patients (7%; p = 0.04), the incidence of SIRS or severe AP did not differ by sex. Quality of life measures as reported through the PROMIS-29 instrument were equally suboptimal in both sexes. Anxiety disorders were diagnosed more frequently among females (61%) than in males (41%, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: In a large case series of alcohol-associated AP, we found that female patients delayed seeking medical care compared to males. However, there were no differences in the type, location and intensity of abdominal pain.
Asunto(s)
Pancreatitis , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Pancreatitis/epidemiología , Pancreatitis/etiología , Pancreatitis/terapia , Enfermedad Aguda , Calidad de Vida , Estudios Cruzados , Dolor Abdominal/etiología , Dolor Abdominal/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach to strategies to prevent endoscopy-related injury (ERI) in GI endoscopists. It is accompanied by the article subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline estimates the rates, sites, and predictors of ERI. Additionally, it addresses the role of ergonomics training, microbreaks and macrobreaks, monitor and table positions, antifatigue mats, and use of ancillary devices in decreasing the risk of ERI. We recommend formal ergonomics education and neutral posture during the performance of endoscopy, achieved through adjustable monitor and optimal procedure table position, to reduce the risk of ERI. We suggest taking microbreaks and scheduled macrobreaks and using antifatigue mats during procedures to prevent ERI. We suggest the use of ancillary devices in those with risk factors predisposing them to ERI.
Asunto(s)
Endoscopía Gastrointestinal , Ergonomía , Humanos , Postura , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Resección Endoscópica de la Mucosa , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Resección Endoscópica de la Mucosa/métodos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/métodos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. It is accompanied by the document subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well- or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, we suggest surgical evaluation over endoscopic approaches.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Resección Endoscópica de la Mucosa , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Resección Endoscópica de la Mucosa/métodos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal , Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the role of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures. In the endoscopic workup of these patients, we suggest the use of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling in addition to brush cytology over brush cytology alone, especially for hilar strictures. We suggest the use of cholangioscopic and EUS-guided biopsy sampling especially for patients who undergo nondiagnostic sampling, cholangioscopic biopsy sampling for nondistal strictures and EUS-guided biopsy sampling distal strictures or those with suspected spread to surrounding lymph nodes and other structures.
RESUMEN
Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, whereas the accompanying article subtitled "Summary and Recommendations" contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.