Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage After Failed ERCP: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may fail to achieve biliary drainage in 5% to 10% of cases. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are alternative therapeutic options in such cases. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and PTBD for biliary decompression after failed ERCP. METHODS: A comprehensive search of literature from inception to September 2022 was done of 3 databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and PTBD for biliary drainage after failed ERCP. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated for all the dichotomous outcomes. Continuous variables were analyzed using mean difference (MD). RESULTS: A total of 24 studies were included in the final analysis. Technical success was comparable between EUS-BD and PTBD (OR=1.12, 0.67-1.88). EUS-BD was associated with a higher clinical success rate (OR=2.55, 1.63-4.56) and lower odds of adverse events (OR=0.41, 0.29-0.59) compared with PTBD. The incidence of major adverse events (OR=0.66, 0.31-1.42) and procedure-related mortality (OR=0.43, 0.17-1.11) were similar between the groups. EUS-BD was associated with lower odds of reintervention with an OR of 0.20 (0.10-0.38). The duration of hospitalization (MD: -4.89, -7.73 to -2.05) and total treatment cost (MD: -1355.46, -2029.75 to -681.17) were significantly lower with EUS-BD. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-BD may be preferred over PTBD in patients with biliary obstruction after failed ERCP where appropriate expertise is available. Further trials are required to validate the findings of the study.

Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) versus macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: a paired comparative analysis using newer-generation fine needle biopsy needles.

Background: Rapid on-site examination (ROSE) during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has been a subject of debate. We compared the yield of EUS-FNB with adequacy assessed using macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE), and smear cytology with adequacy confirmed by ROSE, acquired using the same needle. Methods: Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) who underwent EUS-FNB of pancreatic solid lesions between January 2021 and July 2022 were included. Demographic details, site and size of lesion, number of passes, and the diagnosis by cytology and histopathology of core tissue were noted. The first pass was used for ROSE adequacy assessment and was subsequently sent for cytological assessment. Additional passes were taken subsequently to acquire core tissue. Adequacy was confirmed by MOSE (whitish core of more than 4 mm). Final cytology and histopathology (HPE) were compared for diagnostic accuracy. Results: One hundred fifty-five patients were included in the analysis during the study period (mean age 55.1+12.9 years; 60% male; 77% in pancreatic head; median size 3.7 cm). The final diagnosis was malignancy in 129, while 26 were negative for malignancy. Sensitivity and specificity for ROSE with cytology in detecting malignant SPLs were 96.9% and 100%, respectively. HPE with MOSE had sensitivity and specificity of 96.1% and 100%, respectively. A comparison of diagnostic accuracy showed no significant difference (P>0.99) between HPE with MOSE and ROSE with cytology, using an FNB needle. Conclusion: MOSE is as good as ROSE in terms of diagnostic yield for solid pancreatic lesions sampled using newer-generation EUS biopsy needles.

Short and long outcomes of endoscopic bilateral metal stent placement for malignant hilar biliary obstruction: Tertiary care oncology centre experience.

INTRODUCTION: Placement of biliary self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has been effective for palliation of unresectable hilar malignant biliary obstruction. Optimal drainage in hilar obstruction may require placement of multiple stents. Data on multiple SEMS placement in hilar obstruction from India is sparse. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with unresectable malignant hilar obstruction who underwent endoscopic bilateral SEMS insertion from 2017 to 2021 was done. Demographic details, technical success and functional success (decrease in the bilirubin value below 3 mg/dL at four weeks), immediate complications with 30-days mortality, requirement of re-intervention, stent patency and overall survival were studied. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included (mean age 54.9 years, 51.2% females). Thirty-six patients (83.7%) had carcinoma gallbladder as primary malignancy. Twenty-six patients (60.5%) were metastatic at presentation. Cholangitis was seen in 4/43 (9.3%). On cholangiogram, 26 (60.4%) had Bismuth type II block, 12 (27.8%) had type IIIA/B, 5 (11.6%) had type IV block. Technical success was achieved in 41/43 (95.3%) patients (38, side-by-side SEMS placement; 3, SEMS-within-SEMS in Y fashion). Functional success was achieved in 39 patients (95.1%). No moderate-severe complications were reported. Median post-procedure hospitalization was five days. Median stent patency was 137 days (interquartile range [IQR] 80-214 days). Re-intervention was required in four patients (9.3%) after mean 295.7 days. Median overall survival was 153 days (IQR 108-234 days). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic bilateral SEMS in complex malignant hilar obstruction has good outcomes in the form of technical success, functional success and stent patency. Survival is dismal despite optimal biliary drainage.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of endoscopic and radiological interventions for gastric varices: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Aim of the study: There is a paradigm shift in the management of gastric varices with the availability of endoscopic ultrasound and radiologic interventions. The optimal choice of intervention remains a dilemma for most treating physicians. Material and methods: We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ScienceDirect for studies comparing endoscopic glue injection, endoscopic thrombin injection (THB), variceal band ligation, EUS-guided coiling, EUS-guided glue injection, EUS-guided coiling with glue (EUS-C+G), balloon occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO), and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for gastric varices in adults. The data on four outcomes - obliteration of varices, rebleeding, adverse effects, and mortality - were pooled using a random-effects model. Treatment estimates were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) along with their 95% confidence interval (CI). The relative ranking of interventions for various outcomes was calculated as their surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: We identified 34 studies (10 randomized controlled trials, 24 non-randomized trials) with 2783 patients. Based on SUCRA plots, BRTO (SUCRA 95.1) had the highest rate of variceal obliteration followed by EUS-C+G (SUCRA 80.9). The risk of rebleeding was lowest with BRTO (SUCRA 85.1) followed by EUS-C+G (SUCRA 78.8). Moderate-severe adverse effects were least likely with THB (SUCRA 92.5) and highest with TIPS (SUCRA 3.7). In terms of mortality, EUS-C+G (73.5) had the lowest probability of overall mortality followed by TIPS (69.1). Conclusions: In this network meta-analysis, we found BRTO and EUS-guided therapies to be superior to endoscopic glue injection. However, the level of evidence remains low.

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile colorectal polyps: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (uEMR) without submucosal injection for sessile colorectal polyps was introduced as a new replacement for conventional EMR (cEMR). However, the optimal resection strategy remains a topic of debate. Hence, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of uEMR and cEMR in patients with sessile colorectal polyps. Methods: a comprehensive search of the literature from 2000 till January 2022 was performed from Medline, CENTRAL and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cEMR vs uEMR for colorectal polyps. The evaluated outcomes included en bloc resection, R0 resection, procedure time, overall bleeding and recurrence. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence interval were calculated using a random effect model. Results: six studies were included, out of which four were full-text articles and two were conference abstracts. En bloc resection (RR 1.26, 95 % CI: 1.00-1.60), R0 resection (RR 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.96-1.26), overall bleeding (RR 0.85, 95 % CI: 0.54-1.34) and recurrence rate (RR 0.75, 95 % CI: 0.45-1.27) were comparable between uEMR and cEMR. However, uEMR was associated with a shorter procedure time (mean difference [MD] -1.55 minutes, 95 % CI: -2.71 to -0.39). According to the subgroup analysis, uEMR led to a higher rate of en bloc resection (RR 1.41, 95 % CI: 1.07-1.86) and R0 resection (RR 1.19, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.41) for polyps ≥ 10 mm in size. Conclusion: both uEMR and cEMR have a comparable safety and efficacy. For polyps larger than 10 mm, uEMR may have an advantage over cEMR and should be the topic for future studies (AU)

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile colorectal polyps: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (uEMR) without submucosal injection for sessile colorectal polyps was introduced as a new replacement for conventional EMR (cEMR). However, the optimal resection strategy remains a topic of debate. Hence, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of uEMR and cEMR in patients with sessile colorectal polyps. METHODS: a comprehensive search of the literature from 2000 till January 2022 was performed from Medline, CENTRAL and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cEMR vs uEMR for colorectal polyps. The evaluated outcomes included en bloc resection, R0 resection, procedure time, overall bleeding and recurrence. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence interval were calculated using a random effect model. RESULTS: six studies were included, out of which four were full-text articles and two were conference abstracts. En bloc resection (RR 1.26, 95 % CI: 1.00-1.60), R0 resection (RR 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.96-1.26), overall bleeding (RR 0.85, 95 % CI: 0.54-1.34) and recurrence rate (RR 0.75, 95 % CI: 0.45-1.27) were comparable between uEMR and cEMR. However, uEMR was associated with a shorter procedure time (mean difference [MD] -1.55 minutes, 95 % CI: -2.71 to -0.39). According to the subgroup analysis, uEMR led to a higher rate of en bloc resection (RR 1.41, 95 % CI: 1.07-1.86) and R0 resection (RR 1.19, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.41) for polyps ≥ 10 mm in size. CONCLUSION: both uEMR and cEMR have a comparable safety and efficacy. For polyps larger than 10 mm, uEMR may have an advantage over cEMR and should be the topic for future studies.

Corrigendum to "Correlation of Clinicopathological Profile, Prognostic Factors, and Survival Outcomes with Baseline Alfa-Fetoprotein Levels in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Biomarker that is Bruised but Not Broken" [J Clin Exp Hepatol 12 (2022) 841-852].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.jceh.2021.11.006.].

Correlation of Clinicopathological Profile, Prognostic Factors, and Survival Outcomes with Baseline Alfa-Fetoprotein Levels in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Biomarker that is Bruised but Not Broken.

Background and aims: The role of Alfa-fetoprotein (AFP) in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still debated, with differences in recommendations between international guidelines. We analyzed the relationship of the clinicopathological profile, prognostic features, and survival outcomes with baseline serum AFP levels in patients with HCC. Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively accrued dataset of consecutive HCC patients was done. Results: 508 treatment naive patients were included in the analysis. AFP at presentation was normal (<10 ng/ml) in 18% patients. Patients with very high AFP (>400 ng/ml) had poor hepatic reserves (higher mean serum bilirubin, AST, ALT, INR, and lower mean albumin) and advanced disease at presentation (higher incidence of extrahepatic metastasis, and less proportion of patients with well-differentiated tumors). AFP >400 ng/ml was an independent predictor for presence of portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) (OR, 4.08; 95% CI, 2.34-7.12; P < 0.001), higher tumor size (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.36-3.54, P = 0.001) and advanced BCLC stage (OR, 4.19; 95% CI, 2.51-7.03; P < 0.001). Two-third of patients with small HCC (MTD <3 cm) and more than half with early-stage HCC (BCLC stage 0/A) had elevated AFP levels. No significant relationship was seen between overall survival (OS) and baseline AFP in patients who underwent surgery, but median OS in patients subjected to nonsurgical therapies was 19.4,10.5 and 5.7 months in patients having AFP <10 ng/ml, 10-400 ng/ml and >400 ng/ml respectively (P = 0.003). AFP >400 ng/ml was an independent predictor of survival in patients receiving any form of therapy (HR = 2.23; 95% CI = 1.19-4.18, P = 0.012). Conclusion: AFP as a biomarker still has a significant role to play in the management of HCC patients and is here to stay till the search for an ideal biomarker in HCC is over.

Cone beam computed tomography: third eye in diagnosis and treatment planning.

Orthodontic treatment of adult patients with complex dental problems is done in interdisciplinary teams where different specialists of dental medicine have to manage a vast quantity of data. In such complicated cases good diagnostic tools and easy communication are essential Computer science has an increasing impact in almost every aspect of the orthodontic practice, research and education. Within the past decade, technology termed "cone beam computed tomography" (CBCT) has evolved that allows 3-D visualization of the oral and maxillofacial complex from any plane. With the development of Cone Beam Computed Tomography, there has been a drastic reduction in radiation exposure to the patient, which allows its use for safely obtaining three dimensional images of the craniofacial structures. This should allow the clinician to visualize the hard and soft tissues of the craniofacial region from multiple perspectives, which could have far-reaching implications for treatment planning in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. This paper shall discuss in detail the principles of the cone beam computed tomography and its applications in the field of orthodontics.