Safety and efficacy of EsoFLIP dilation in patients with esophageal dysmotility: a systematic review.

Esophageal manometry is utilized for the evaluation and classification of esophageal motility disorders. EndoFlip has been introduced as an adjunctive test to evaluate esophagogastric junction (EGJ) distensibility. Treatment options for achalasia and EGJ outflow obstruction (EGJOO) include pneumatic dilation, myotomy, and botulinum toxin. Recently, a therapeutic 30 mm hydrostatic balloon dilator (EsoFLIP, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) has been introduced, which uses impedance planimetry technology like EndoFlip. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EsoFLIP in the management of esophageal motility disorders. A systematic literature search was performed with Medline, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane library databases from inception to November 2022 to identify studies utilizing EsoFLIP for management of esophageal motility disorders. Our primary outcome was clinical success, and secondary outcomes were adverse events. Eight observational studies including 222 patients met inclusion criteria. Diagnoses included achalasia (158), EGJOO (48), post-reflux surgery dysphagia (8), and achalasia-like disorder (8). All studies used 30 mm maximum balloon dilation except one which used 25 mm. The clinical success rate was 68.7%. Follow-up duration ranged from 1 week to a mean of 5.7 months. Perforation or tear occurred in four patients. EsoFLIP is a new therapeutic option for the management of achalasia and EGJOO and appears to be effective and safe. Future comparative studies with other therapeutic modalities are needed to understand its role in the management of esophageal motility disorders.

Sarcopenia is a risk factor for post-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt hepatic encephalopathy and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a commonly performed procedure in patients with liver cirrhosis to treat portal hypertension-related conditions, including variceal bleeding and refractory ascites. However, while the increased risk of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) after TIPS is important to consider when determining whether a patient is a good candidate for TIPS, currently there is no widely used method to predict the development of post-TIPS HE, although the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score is used to predict post-TIPS mortality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate sarcopenia as a risk factor for HE and mortality in patients undergoing TIPS. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify reports of post-TIPS HE and mortality in sarcopenia vs. non-sarcopenia patients with liver cirrhosis who received TIPS in March 2023. Open Meta Analyst was used to compute the results. RESULTS: Twelve studies with 2056 patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. Sarcopenia was associated with a significantly higher post-TIPS HE rate than non-sarcopenia (risk ratio [RR]: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.48-1.92, p < 0.00001, I2 = 65%), as well as a significantly higher post-TIPS mortality rate (RR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.14-2.64, p < 0.00001, I2 = 87%). CONCLUSION: Patients with sarcopenia have a significantly increased risk of post-TIPS HE and mortality. Presence of sarcopenia should be considered when weighing the risks and benefits of performing TIPS in patients with cirrhosis. Further studies are needed to determine the clinical utility of important risk factors such as sarcopenia on post-TIPS outcomes.

Outcomes and Complications of Radiological Gastrostomy vs. Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Enteral Feeding: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are commonly utilized to establish access to enteral nutrition. However, data comparing the outcomes of PEG vs. PRG are conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an updated systemic review and meta-analysis comparing PRG and PEG outcomes. Methods: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched until February 24, 2023. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality, tube leakage, tube dislodgement, perforation, and peritonitis. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, infectious complications, and aspiration pneumonia. All analyses were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software. Results: The initial search revealed 872 studies. Of these, 43 of these studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. Of 471,208 total patients, 194,399 received PRG and 276,809 received PEG. PRG was associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality when compared to PEG (odds ratio (OR): 1.205, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.015 - 1.430, I2 = 55%). In addition, tube leakage and tube dislodgement were higher in the PRG group than in PEG (OR: 2.231, 95% CI: 1.184 - 4.2 and OR: 2.602, 95% CI: 1.911 - 3.541, respectively). Perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, and infectious complications were higher with PRG than PEG. Conclusion: PEG is associated with lower 30-day mortality, tube leakage, and tube dislodgement rates than PRG.

Comparative Efficacy of Treatment Options for the Prevention of Post-TIPS Hepatic Encephalopathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is often used in patients with cirrhosis to manage portal hypertension-related complications. Unfortunately, 35-50% of patients develop overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE) after TIPS. However, data on lactulose and rifaximin to prevent post-TIPS HE is limited. Therefore, we aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of multiple pharmacological regimens in the prevention of post-TIPS HE. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy to identify reports of studies of rifaximin use on post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy was constructed using truncated keywords, phrases, and subject headings developed in Embase. This strategy was translated to MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Web of Science Core Collection, with all searches performed on 10 February 2022. No publication date or language limits were used. RESULTS: The initial search identified 72 studies, and 56 studies were screened after removing duplicates. Five studies, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three retrospective studies, met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. A total of 840 patients were included, with 65% male. Our meta- analysis did not find a statistically significant difference between lactulose vs placebo/no prophylaxis, nor rifaximin vs placebo/no prophylaxis, nor rifaximin plus lactulose vs placebo/no prophylaxis in the reduction of post-TIPS HE. CONCLUSIONS: Rifaximin alone, lactulose alone, and rifaximin plus lactulose did not significantly reduce the development of post-TIPS HE. Based on the P-scores of the three treatment groups, the combination of rifaximin plus lactulose showed the most promising trend towards preventing post-TIPS HE. More studies, especially large RCTs, are warranted.

Role of rifaximin in the management of alcohol-associated hepatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Alcohol-associated hepatitis (AAH) is an acute, inflammatory liver disease with severe short-term and long-term morbidity and mortality. AAH can lead to severe complications including hepatic failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, sepsis, and the development or decompensation of cirrhosis. Rifaximin is an antibiotic that reduces bacterial overgrowth and gut translocation, and it may have a role in decreasing systemic inflammation and infection in patients with AAH. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of rifaximin in the management of AAH. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify studies that met our inclusion criteria in Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar. Outcomes of interest included rates of infection, 90-day mortality, and overall mortality between the rifaximin versus non-rifaximin group. Open Meta Analyst software was used to compute the results. RESULTS: Three studies with a total of 162 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. Of the three studies, two were randomized control trials (RCTs), and one was a case-control study. There was a significantly lower rate of infection in the rifaximin group versus the non-rifaximin group (RR: 0.331, 95% CI: 0.159-0.689, I2  = 0%, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in 90-day mortality in the rifaximin versus non-rifaximin group (RR: 0.743, 95% CI: 0.298-1.850, I2  = 24%, P = 0.523), nor was there a significant difference in overall mortality (RR: 0.624, 95% 95% CI: 0.299-1.3, I2  = 7.1%, P = 0.208). CONCLUSIONS: The use of rifaximin in AAH is associated with a lower rate of infection rate than the non-rifaximin group. Additional research is needed to determine whether this effect is more pronounced in patients concurrently being treated with prednisolone. Differences in 90-day or overall mortality did not reach statistical significance. Further studies, particularly large randomized controlled trials, are needed to establish the role of rifaximin in AAH, especially as an adjunct therapy with prednisolone.

Cap-Assisted Endoscopic Esophageal Foreign Body Removal Is Safe and Efficacious Compared to Conventional Methods.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal foreign body impaction (FBI) is a commonly encountered gastrointestinal emergency requiring immediate intervention. Foreign bodies can be composed of food, commonly referred to as a "food bolus" (FB), or other matter (non-food). We aim to conduct systematic review and meta-analysis to compare cap-assisted and conventional endoscopic techniques for removal of esophageal FBI. METHODS: A comprehensive search technique was utilized to identify studies that used capped endoscopic devices to remove FB or other esophageal foreign bodies. The primary outcomes were the technical success rate, rate of en bloc retrieval, and procedure time. Secondary outcomes were overall adverse events, bleeding, mucosal tears, and perforation. RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 1407 patients were included. The mean patient age was 55.3 (SD ± 7.2) years and 44.8% of patients were male. There were two RCTs and five observational studies among the included studies. The technical success rate was significantly higher in the cap-assisted group compared to the conventional group (OR 3.47, CI 1.68-7.168, I2 = 0%, p = < 0.001), as well as the en bloc retrieval rate (OR 26.90, CI 17.82-40.60, I2 = 0%, p = 0.001). There was a trend towards lower procedural time for the cap-assisted group compared to the conventional group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (MD - 10.997, CI - 22.78-0.786, I2 = 99.9%, p = 0.06). The overall adverse events were significantly lower in the cap-assisted group compared to the conventional group (OR 0.118, CI 0.018-0.792, I2 = 81.79%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The cap-assisted technique has improved efficacy and safety. To confirm these results, larger randomized trials are warranted.