Efficacy and safety of endoscopic gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis: Is it better than percutaneous gallbladder drainage?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The efficacy and safety of endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) performed via endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)-based transpapillary stenting or EUS-based transmural stenting are unknown. We aimed to conduct a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of these procedures and to compare them with percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD). METHODS: We searched several databases from inception through December 10, 2015 to identify studies (with 10 or more patients) reporting technical success and postprocedure adverse events of EGBD. Weighted pooled rates (WPRs) for technical and clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis were calculated for both methods of EGBD. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were also calculated to compare the technical success and postprocedure adverse events in patients undergoing EGBD versus PGBD. RESULTS: The WPRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of technical success, clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis for ERC-based transpapillary drainage were 83% (95% CI, 78%-87%; I2 = 38%), 93% (95% CI, 89%-96%; I2 = 39%), 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%; I2 = 27%), and 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%; I2 = 0%), respectively. The WPRs for EUS-based drainage for technical success, clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis were 93% (95% CI, 87%-96%; I2 = 0%), 97% (95% CI, 93%-99%; I2 = 0%), 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%; I2 = 0%), and 4% (95% CI, 2%-9%; I2 = 0%), respectively. On proportionate difference, EUS-based drainage had better technical (10%) and clinical success (4%) in comparison with ERC-based drainage. The pooled OR for technical success of EGBD versus PGBD was .51 (95% CI, .09-2.88; I2 = 23%) and for postprocedure adverse events was .33 (95% CI, .14-.80; I2 = 16%) in favor of EGBD. CONCLUSIONS: EGBD is an efficacious and safe therapeutic modality for treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis who cannot undergo surgery. EGBD shows a similar technical success as PGBD but appears to be safer than PGBD.

Efficacy of self-expandable metal stents in management of benign biliary strictures and comparison with multiple plastic stents: a meta-analysis.

Background and study aims There is burgeoning interest in the utilization of covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs) for managing benign biliary stricture (BBS). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated cumulative stricture resolution and recurrence rates using CSEMSs and compared performance of CSEMSs and multiple plastic stents (MPS) in BBS management. Method Searches in several databases identified studies including ≥ 10 patients that utilized CSEMSs for BBS treatment. Weighted pooled rates were calculated for stricture resolution and recurrence. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) comparing CSEMSs with MPS were calculated for stricture resolution, stricture recurrence, and adverse events. Pooled difference in means was calculated to compare number of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCPs) in each group.  Results The meta-analysis included 22 studies with 1298 patients. Weighted pooled rate for BBS resolution with CSEMS was 83 % (95 % confidence limits [95 %CLs] 78 %, 87 %; I2 = 72 %). On meta-regression analysis, resolution in chronic pancreatitis patients and post-orthotopic liver transplant patients were significant predictors of heterogeneity. Weighted pooled rate for stricture recurrence with CSEMSs was 16 % (11 %, 22 %). Overall rate of adverse events requiring intervention and/or hospitalization was 15 %. Four randomized controlled trials with 213 patients compared CSEMSs with MPS: the pooled RRs for stricture resolution, recurrence, and adverse events were 1.07 (0.97, 1.18), 0.88 (0.48, 1.63), and 1.16 (0.71, 1.88), respectively with no heterogeneity. Pooled difference in means for number of ERCPs was - 1.71 ( - 2.33, - 1.09) in favor of CSEMS. Conclusions CSEMSs appear to have excellent efficacy in BBS management. They are as effective as MPS but require fewer ERCPs to achieve clinical success.

Surgical informed consent in children: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the article was to analyze current literature on surgeon and parents' understanding and role in the informed consent process for children undergoing surgery. METHODS: A systematic database search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and EBM Reviews) was performed to identify articles concerning any aspect of the surgical informed consent for children undergoing an invasive procedure. Articles analyzing informed consent in research studies, non-English-language articles, review articles, case reports and/or series, letters-commentaries, and dentistry and/or nursing-related articles were excluded. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were analyzed to identify common themes related to the process of informed consent. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight articles were identified on primary search, after removing duplicates and screening titles for relevance, 83 abstracts were reviewed. Thirty-two additional abstracts were identified by secondary search. Twelve of 115 articles met inclusion criteria. Analysis identified five different study themes. Information delivered during consent (Content) was studied in five articles (42%), three (25%) studied the mechanics or delivery of the information (Delivery), three (25%) studied parent participation and discussion (Interchange), six articles (50%) discussed surgeons' perceptions or the parents' ability to understand or recall the information (Comprehension), and five articles (42%) evaluated surgeon or parent satisfaction or anxiety (Satisfaction). None of the articles studied all five categories. CONCLUSIONS: Studies of the surgical informed consent process in children are scarce. Prospective studies evaluating surgeon and parent perception regarding the Content, Delivery, and Interchange of information as well as Comprehension and Satisfaction are needed to understand barriers to the surgeon-patient relationship and to optimize the informed consent process in children undergoing surgery.

Is POEM the Answer for Management of Spastic Esophageal Disorders? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Spastic esophageal disorders (SEDs) include spastic achalasia (type III), diffuse esophageal spasm (DES), and nutcracker/jackhammer esophagus (JH). Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of achalasia. Recently, POEM has been indicated for the treatment of SEDs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the clinical success and safety of POEM in SEDs. METHODS: We searched several databases from 01/01/2007 to 01/10/2016 to identify studies (with five or more patients) on POEM for the treatment of SEDs. Weighted pooled rates (WPRs) for clinical success and adverse events (AEs) were calculated for all SEDs. Clinical success was defined as Eckardt scores of ≤3 and/or improvement in severity of dysphagia based on achalasia disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaire. The WPRs for clinical success and AEs were analyzed using fixed- or random-effects model based on heterogeneity. The proportionate difference in clinical success and post-procedure adverse event rates among individual types of SEDs was also calculated. RESULTS: A total of eight observational studies with 179 patients were included in the final analysis. Two studies were of good quality and six were of fair quality based on the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool. The WPR with 95% confidence interval (CI) for cumulative clinical success of POEM in all SEDs was 87% (78, 93%), I 2 = 37%. The total number of patients for individual disorders, i.e., type III achalasia, JH, and DES, was 116, 37, and 18, respectively. The WPRs for clinical success of POEM for type III achalasia, DES, and JH were 92, 88, and 72%, respectively. Proportion difference of WPR for clinical success was significantly higher for type III achalasia in comparison with JH (20%, P = 0.01). The WPR with 95% CI for AEs of POEM in all SEDs was 14% (9, 20%), I 2 = 0%. The WPRs for post-procedure adverse events for type III achalasia, DES, and JH were 11, 14, and 16%, respectively. There was no difference in safety of POEM among individual SEDs. CONCLUSION: POEM is an effective and safe therapeutic modality for the treatment of spastic esophageal disorders.

Does Urgent Colonoscopy Improve Outcomes in the Management of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

Colonoscopy continues to be an essential diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Studies that have evaluated the role of urgent colonoscopy for treating LGIB have reached conflicting conclusions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of urgent colonoscopy in several outcomes in patients with LGIB. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases from inception to July 10, 2016 for comparative studies evaluating the role of urgent versus elective colonoscopy in the management of LGIB. We evaluated mortality, rate of rebleeding, length of stay in hospital, identification of bleeding source, stigmata of recent hemorrhage and need for surgery. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated for dichotomous variables whereas standard mean differences were calculated for continuous variables. We assessed quality using the Cochrane tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale for randomized controlled trials and observational studies, respectively. We used the GRADE framework to interpret our findings. A total of 6 studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies) with 23,419 patients (9,498 urgent colonoscopy and 13,921 elective colonoscopy) were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled ORs with 95% CI for mortality, rebleeding and identification of bleeding source were 0.84 (0.46-1.53), 1.18 (0.64-2.16) and 1.49 (0.86-2.59), respectively. Stigmata of recent hemorrhage were more readily identified with urgent colonoscopy OR 2.85 (1.90-4.28). There were no differences in requirement for surgery, length of hospital stay or rate of endoscopic intervention. However, these effect sizes were limited by considerable heterogeneity, which was probably due to studies being conducted in different countries having different criteria for discharge and on variations in the type of endoscopic therapy for stigmata of recent hemorrhage. In conclusion, among patients with acute LGIB, there is no evidence that urgent colonoscopy reduces mortality, rebleeding or requirement for surgery or that it improves the rate of identification of the bleeding source. However, urgent colonoscopy does increase the rate of detection of stigmata of recent hemorrhage.

A meta-analysis of endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration compared to endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle biopsy: diagnostic yield and the value of onsite cytopathological assessment.

Background The diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is variable, and partly dependent upon rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) by a cytopathologist. Second generation fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles are being increasingly used to obtain core histological tissue samples. Aims Studies comparing the diagnostic yield of EUS guided FNA versus FNB have reached conflicting conclusions. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic yield of FNA with FNB, and specifically evaluating the diagnostic value of ROSE while comparing the two types of needles. Methods We searched several databases from inception to 10 April 2016 to identify studies comparing diagnostic yield of second generation FNB needles with standard FNA needles. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for categorical outcomes of interest (diagnostic adequacy, diagnostic accuracy, and optimal quality histological cores obtained). Standard mean difference (SMD) was calculated for continuous variables (number of passes required for diagnosis). These were pooled using random effects model of meta-analysis to account for heterogeneity. Meta-regression was conducted to evaluate the effect of ROSE on various outcomes of interest. Results Fifteen studies with a total of 1024 patients were included in the analysis. We found no significant difference in diagnostic adequacy [RR 0.98 (0.91, 1.06), (I2 = 51 %)]. Although not statistically significant (P = 0.06), by meta-regression, in the absence of ROSE, FNB showed a relatively better diagnostic adequacy. For solid pancreatic lesions only, there was no difference in diagnostic adequacy [RR 0.96 (0.86, 1.09), (I2 = 66 %)]. By meta-regression, in the absence of ROSE, FNB was associated with better diagnostic adequacy (P = 0.02). There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy [RR 0.99 (0.95, 1.03), (I2 = 27 %)] or optimal quality core histological sample procurement [RR 0.97 (0.89, 1.05), (I2 = 9.6 %)]. However, FNB established diagnosis with fewer passes [SMD 0.93 (0.45, 1.42), (I2 = 84 %)]. The absence of ROSE was associated with a higher SMD, i. e., in the presence of an onsite pathologist, FNA required relatively fewer passes to establish the diagnosis than in the absence of an onsite pathologist. Conclusions There is no significant difference in the diagnostic yield between FNA and FNB, when FNA is accompanied by ROSE. However, in the absence of ROSE, FNB is associated with a relatively better diagnostic adequacy in solid pancreatic lesions. Also, FNB requires fewer passes to establish the diagnosis.

Web tutorials: bibliographic instruction in a new medium.

Libraries are adding electronic resources of all kinds at an increasing pace to provide service to users outside the library and around the world. To meet this new demand, libraries are turning more and more to the use of online tutorials as a valuable means of providing instruction on how to access and use important resources. This article describes the Health Sciences Library and Biocommunications Center's work and experiences while creating tutorials, the ideas used, and ways the work was evaluated.