RESUMEN
Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), both distal and hilar, represents an ensemble of different clinical conditions frequently encountered in everyday practice. Given the frequent unresectability of the disease at presentation and the increasing indications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, endoscopic biliary drainage is generally required during the course of the disease. With the widespread use of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the introduction of dedicated devices, EUS-guided biliary drainage has rapidly gained acceptance, together with transpapillary endoscopic biliary drainage and the percutaneous approach. This comprehensive review describes the current role of endoscopy for distal and hilar MBO supported by evidence, with a focus on the current hot topics in this field.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is a valid option for EUS-guided biliary drainage that has been increasingly used in the last decade. The aims of this study were to provide a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of the features and outcomes of this procedure. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for literature pertinent to EUS-HGS. Meta-analysis of the proportions and meta-regression of potential modifiers of the main outcome measures were applied. The main outcome was technical success; secondary outcomes were clinical success and procedure-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: 33 studies, including 1644 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) was the underlying cause in almost all cases (99.6%); the main indications for EUS-HGS were duodenal/papillary invasion (34.8%), surgically altered anatomy (18.4%), and hilar stenosis (16.0%). The pooled technical success of EUS-HGS was 97.7% (95%CI 96.1%-99.0%; I 2 = 0%), the intention-to-treat clinical success rate was 88.1% (95%CI 84.7%-91.2%; I 2 = 33.9%), and procedure-related AEs occurred in 12.0% (95%CI 9.8%-14.5%; I 2 = 20.4%), with cholangitis/sepsis (2.8%) and bleeding (2.3%) the most frequent. The rate of procedure-related AEs was lower with the use of dedicated stents on univariable meta-regression analysis. Meta-regression showed that technical success and clinical success rates were modified by the centers' experience (>4/year). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-HGS represents an effective and safe procedure for EUS-guided biliary drainage in patients with MBO. Future studies should address the impact of center experience, patient selection, and the use of dedicated stents to improve performance of this technique.
RESUMEN
Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are well-known complications of acute pancreatitis. The overinfection of these collections leads to a worsening of the prognosis with an increase in the morbidity and mortality rate. The primary strategy for managing infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or symptomatic PFCs is a minimally invasive step-up approach, with endosonography-guided (EUS-guided) transmural drainage and debridement as the preferred and less invasive method. Different stents are available to drain PFCs: self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), double pigtail stents (DPPSs), or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs). In particular, LAMSs are useful when direct endoscopic necrosectomy is needed, as they allow easy access to the necrotic cavity; however, the rate of adverse events is not negligible, and to date, the superiority over DPPSs is still debated. Moreover, the timing for necrosectomy, the drainage technique, and the concurrent medical management are still debated. In this review, we focus attention on indications, timing, techniques, complications, and particularly on aspects that remain under debate concerning the EUS-guided drainage of PFCs.
Asunto(s)
Endosonografía , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante , Humanos , Endosonografía/métodos , Enfermedad Aguda , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante/diagnóstico por imagen , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante/cirugía , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante/etiología , Stents/efectos adversos , Drenaje/métodos , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are one of the local complications of acute pancreatitis and include walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN), which are complex entities with challenging management. The infection of pancreatic necrosis leads to a poorer prognosis, with a growth of the mortality rate up to 30%. The primary strategy for managing PFCs is a minimally invasive step-up approach, with endosonography-guided transmural drainage and debridement as the preferred and less invasive method. Percutaneous drainage (PCD) can be the technique of choice when endoscopic drainage is not feasible, for example for early PFCs without a mature wall or for the anatomic location and extension to the paracolic gutter of the collection. As PCD alone may be ineffective, especially when a great amount of necrosis is present, a percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy (PEN) has been proposed, showing interesting results. The technique consists of the placement of an esophageal fully or partially covered self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) percutaneously into the collection and a direct debridement can be performed using a flexible endoscope through the SEMS. In this review, we will discuss about the role of metal stent and PEN for the management of complex walled-off pancreatic necrosis.
Asunto(s)
Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante , Humanos , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante/diagnóstico por imagen , Pancreatitis Aguda Necrotizante/cirugía , Enfermedad Aguda , Endoscopía/métodos , StentsRESUMEN
Postoperative non variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage may occur early or late and affect a variable percentage of patients-up to about 2%. Most cases of intraluminal bleeding are an indication for urgent Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and require endoscopic haemostatic treatment. In addition to the approach usually adopted in non-variceal upper haemorrhages, these cases may be burdened with difficulties in terms of anastomotic tissue, angled positions, and the risk of further complications. There is also extreme variability related to the type of surgery performed, in the context of oncological disease or bariatric surgery. At the same time, the world of haemostatic devices available in digestive endoscopy is increasing, meeting high efficacy rates and attempting to treat even the most complex cases. Our narrative review summarises the current evidence in terms of different approaches to endoscopic haemostasis in upper bleeding in altered anatomy after surgery, proposing an up-to-date guidance for endoscopic clinicians and at the same time, highlighting areas of future scientific research.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Digestivo , Hemostáticos , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior , Humanos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiología , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/cirugía , Endoscopía GastrointestinalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab (VDZ) can be used to treat refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed whether there are differences in treating UC vs CD with VDZ. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Mayo score in UC and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD scored the clinical activity. Achievement and maintenance of clinical remission during the follow-up, and safety were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: 729 patients (475 with UC and 254 with CD), median follow-up of 18 (IQR 6-36) months, were enrolled. Clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment was achieved in 488 (66.9%) patients (74.4% in CD vs 62.9% in UC, p<0.002) while, during the follow-up, no difference was found (81.5% in the UC group and 81.5% pts in the CD group; p=0.537). The clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment (p=0.001) and being naïve to biologics (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with prolonged clinical remission. The clinical response was significantly higher in UC (90.1%) vs CD (84.3%) (p=0.023), and surgery occurred more frequently in CD (1.9% in UC vs 5.1% in CD, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: We found differences when using VDZ in UC vs CD in real life. These parameters can help the physician predict this drug's longterm efficacy.
Asunto(s)
Colitis Ulcerosa , Enfermedad de Crohn , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino , Humanos , Enfermedad de Crohn/tratamiento farmacológico , Colitis Ulcerosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Proteína C-Reactiva/análisis , Inducción de Remisión , Italia , Fármacos Gastrointestinales/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Butyrate has shown anti-inflammatory and regenerative properties, providing symptomatic relief when orally supplemented in patients suffering from various colonic diseases. We investigated the effect of a colonic-delivery formulation of butyrate on the fecal microbiota of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot study, 49 IBD patients (n = 19 Crohn's disease, CD and n = 30 ulcerative colitis, UC) were randomized to oral administration of microencapsulated-sodium-butyrate (BLM) or placebo for 2 months, in addition to conventional therapy. Eighteen healthy volunteers (HVs) were recruited to provide a healthy microbiota model of the local people. Fecal microbiota from stool samples was assessed by 16S sequencing. Clinical disease activity and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated before and after treatment. KEY RESULTS: At baseline, HVs showed a different microbiota composition compared with IBD patients. Sodium-butyrate altered the gut microbiota of IBD patients by increasing bacteria able to produce SCFA in UC patients (Lachnospiraceae spp.) and the butyrogenic colonic bacteria in CD patients (Butyricicoccus). In UC patients, QoL was positively affected by treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Sodium-butyrate supplementation increases the growth of bacteria able to produce SCFA with potentially anti-inflammatory action. The clinical impact of this finding requires further investigation.