BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Increasing evidence support endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a potential alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) in the primary treatment of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of both techniques as the initial approach for MBO. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing both techniques and reporting at least one of the outcomes of interest. The pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model and I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity. RESULTS: We included six RCTs (577 patients). There were no significant differences between groups in stent patency (MD 8.18 days; 95% CI -22.55, 38.91), procedure time (MD -6.31 minutes; 95% CI -12.68, 0.06), and survival (MD 4.59 days; 95% CI -34.23, 43.40). Technical success (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.96, 1.13), clinical success (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96, 1.08), overall adverse events (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.24, 1.43), and cholangitis (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.39, 3.61) were also similar between groups. However, hospital stay was significantly shorter (MD -1.03 days; 95% CI -1.53, -0.53), and risk of reintervention (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.37, 0.88), post-procedure pancreatitis (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03, 0.66), and tumor in/overgrowth (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11, 0.70) were significantly lower with EUS-BD. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-BD and ERCP-BD had similar efficacy and safety as the initial approach for MBO. However, EUS-BD had a significantly lower risk of reintervention, post-procedure pancreatitis, tumor in/overgrowth, and reduced hospital stay.
BACKGROUND: Propofol has a favourable efficacy profile in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, however adverse events remain frequent. Emerging evidence supports remimazolam use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares remimazolam and propofol, both combined with a short-acting opioid, for sedation of adults in gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials comparing efficacy-, safety-, and satisfaction-related outcomes between remimazolam and propofol, both combined with short-acting opioids, for sedation of adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. We performed sensitivity analyses, subgroup assessments by type of short-acting opioid used and age range, and meta-regression analysis using mean patient age as a covariate. We used R statistical software for statistical analyses. RESULTS: We included 15 trials (4516 subjects). Remimazolam was associated with a significantly lower sedation success rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.991; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.984-0.998; high-quality evidence) and a slightly longer induction time (mean difference [MD] 9 s; 95% CI 4-13; moderate-quality evidence), whereas there was no significant difference between the sedatives in other time-related outcomes. Remimazolam was associated with significantly lower rates of respiratory depression (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30-0.56; high-quality evidence), hypotension (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.35-0.51; moderate-quality evidence), hypotension requiring treatment (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.12-0.52; high-quality evidence), and bradycardia (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.30-0.58; high-quality evidence). There was no difference in patient (MD 0.41; 95% CI -0.07 to 0.89; moderate-quality evidence) and endoscopist satisfaction (MD -0.31; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.04; high-quality evidence) between both drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam has clinically similar efficacy and greater safety when compared with propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopies.
Benzodiazepines , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Propofol , Humans , Benzodiazepines/administration & dosage , Benzodiazepines/adverse effects , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Hypnotics and Sedatives/administration & dosage , Propofol/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
BACKGROUND: Cold resection of colorectal lesions is widely performed because of its safety and effectiveness; however, it remains uncertain whether adding submucosal injection could improve the efficacy and safety. We aimed to compare cold endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) versus cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal lesions. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The primary outcome was complete resection. Secondary outcomes were procedure time, en bloc resection, and adverse events (AEs). Prespecified subgroup analyses based on the size and morphology of the polyps were performed. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference, with corresponding 95%CIs, for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I 2 statistics. RESULTS: 7 RCTs were included, comprising 1556 patients, with 2287 polyps analyzed. C-EMR and CSP had similar risk ratios for complete resection (RR 1.02, 95%CI 0.98-1.07), en bloc resection (RR 1.08, 95%CI 0.82-1.41), and AEs (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.41-1.32). C-EMR had a longer procedure time (mean difference 42.1 seconds, 95%CI 14.5-69.7 seconds). In stratified subgroup analyses, the risk was not statistically different between C-EMR and CSP for complete resection in polyps<10 mm or ≥10 mm, or for complete resection, en bloc resection, and AEs in the two groups among nonpedunculated polyps. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that C-EMR has similar efficacy and safety to CSP, but significantly increases the procedure time. PROSPERO: CRD42023439605.
INTRODUCTION: despite being extremely effective in some cases, up to 70% of patients with melanoma do not respond to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 (primary resistance) and many of the responders eventually progress (secondary resistance). Extensive efforts are being made to overcome this resistance through new strategies, especially aimed at modulating the intestinal microbiota. OBJECTIVE: to assess whether fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), associated with immunotherapy, is beneficial in the clinical course of patients with refractory melanoma. METHODS: this is a scope review, based on studies collected on the MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, The Cochrane Library, Embase and BMJ Journals; using the terms: "Antibodies, Monoclonal"; "Drug Resistance, Neoplasm"; "Fecal Microbiota Transplantation"; "Host Microbial Interactions"; "Immunotherapy"; "Melanoma"; and "Microbiota". Clinical trials, in English, with relevant data on the subject and fully available were included. A cut-off period was not determined, due to the limited amount of evidence on the topic. RESULTS: crossing the descriptors allowed the identification of 342 publications and, after applying the eligibility criteria, allowed the selection of 4 studies. From the analyses, it was observed that a considerable part of those studied overcame resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors after FMT, with better response to treatment, less tumor growth and increased beneficial immune response. CONCLUSION: it is noted that FMT favors the response of melanoma to immunotherapy, translated into significant clinical benefit. However, further studies are necessary for the complete elucidation of the bacteria and the mechanisms involved, as well as for the translation of new evidence to oncological care practice.
Melanoma , Humans , Fecal Microbiota Transplantation
ABSTRACT Introduction: despite being extremely effective in some cases, up to 70% of patients with melanoma do not respond to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 (primary resistance) and many of the responders eventually progress (secondary resistance). Extensive efforts are being made to overcome this resistance through new strategies, especially aimed at modulating the intestinal microbiota. Objective: to assess whether fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), associated with immunotherapy, is beneficial in the clinical course of patients with refractory melanoma. Methods: this is a scope review, based on studies collected on the MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, The Cochrane Library, Embase and BMJ Journals; using the terms: "Antibodies, Monoclonal"; "Drug Resistance, Neoplasm"; "Fecal Microbiota Transplantation"; "Host Microbial Interactions"; "Immunotherapy"; "Melanoma"; and "Microbiota". Clinical trials, in English, with relevant data on the subject and fully available were included. A cut-off period was not determined, due to the limited amount of evidence on the topic. Results: crossing the descriptors allowed the identification of 342 publications and, after applying the eligibility criteria, allowed the selection of 4 studies. From the analyses, it was observed that a considerable part of those studied overcame resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors after FMT, with better response to treatment, less tumor growth and increased beneficial immune response. Conclusion: it is noted that FMT favors the response of melanoma to immunotherapy, translated into significant clinical benefit. However, further studies are necessary for the complete elucidation of the bacteria and the mechanisms involved, as well as for the translation of new evidence to oncological care practice.
RESUMO Introdução: apesar de extremamente eficaz em alguns casos, até 70% dos pacientes com melanoma não respondem aos anti-PD-1/PD-L1 (resistência primária) e muitos dos respondedores, eventualmente, acabam progredindo (resistência secundária). Extensos esforços estão sendo realizados para superar esta resistência através de novas estratégias, sobretudo, visando a modulação da microbiota intestinal. Objetivo: avaliar se o transplante de microbiota fecal (TMF), associado à imunoterapia, é benéfico no curso clínico do paciente com melanoma refratário. Métodos: trata-se de uma revisão de escopo, baseada em estudos coletados nas plataformas MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, The Cochrane Library, Embase e BMJ Journals; utilizando os descritores: "Antibodies, Monoclonal"; "Drug Resistance, Neoplasm"; "Fecal Microbiota Transplantation"; "Host Microbial Interactions"; "Immunotherapy"; "Melanoma"; e "Microbiota". Foram incluídos ensaios clínicos, na língua inglesa, com dados relevantes sobre a temática e disponíveis integralmente. Não foi determinado um período de corte temporal, devido à quantidade limitada de evidências sobre o tema. Resultados: o cruzamento dos descritores permitiu a identificação de 342 publicações e, após a aplicação dos critérios de elegibilidade, permitiu a seleção de 4 estudos. A partir das análises, observou-se que grande parte dos estudados superaram a resistência aos inibidores do checkpoint imunológico pós-TMF, com melhor resposta ao tratamento, menor crescimento tumoral e aumento da resposta imunológica benéfica. Conclusão: nota-se que o TMF favorece a resposta do melanoma à imunoterapia, traduzido por benefício clínico significativo. Entretanto, novos estudos são necessários para a completa elucidação das bactérias e mecanismos envolvidos, bem como para que haja a translação das novas evidências para a prática assistencial oncológica.
