Pan-Esophageal Submucosal Dissection following Transesophageal Echocardiography.

A 73-year-old female underwent open mitral valve replacement with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) guidance. She developed upper gastrointestinal bleeding postoperatively and was found on upper endoscopy to have a bleeding site at the gastric cardia with the appearance of focal trauma and a possible puncture site. A submucosal bluish protrusion was seen throughout the esophagus with a mucosal flap at the proximal esophagus. As a unifying diagnosis, it was suspected that the intraoperative TEE probe caused a submucosal dissection with point of entry at the proximal esophagus, running the entire length of the esophagus and exiting at the gastric cardia, giving rise to a clinical upper gastrointestinal bleed. Closure of the esophageal defect was achieved using an endoclip. A CT scan showed focal pneumomediastinum along the proximal esophagus, confirming the hypothesis. We report the first case to our knowledge of iatrogenic pan-esophageal submucosal dissection, which, in this case, presented as a clinical bleed from the exit point trauma to the gastric cardia mucosa caused by a TEE probe. Endoscopic management of the gastric injury as well as the esophageal defect led to resolution of the bleeding and avoidance of mediastinitis, respectively, allowing for an excellent recovery.

Use of fully covered self-expanding metal biliary stents for managing endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy related bleeding.

Background and study aims Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) related-bleeding is a common adverse event related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Traditionally, endoscopic modalities such as epinephrine injection, cauterization, and balloon tamponade have been used for management. Recently, use of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) to manage EBS-related bleeding has gained popularity. However, data regarding its use are limited to small case series. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FCSEMS placement for the treatment of EBS-related bleeding. Patients and methods All patients referred to our center from October 2014 to November 2019 who had an FCSEMS placed for EBS-related bleeding were included. FCSEMS was placed either for primary control of bleeding or after failure of other traditional endoscopic hemostasis techniques at the discretion of the endoscopist. Data was collected regarding patient demographics, procedural characteristics, clinical and technical success rates of FCSEMS, as well as adverse events. Results A total of 97 patients underwent placement of FCSEMS for EBS-related bleeding, of which 76.3 % had immediate bleeding and 23.7 % had delayed bleeding. Mean age was 67.2 years and 47.4 % were males. Seven patients who had immediate EBS-related bleeding at index ERCP underwent other endoscopic therapies prior to placement of FCSEMS for rebleeding. The technical success rate for FCSEMS placement was 100 % and the rebleeding rate was 6.2 %. Four patients with FCSEMS placement developed pancreatitis and four had stent migration. Conclusions Our findings suggest that FCSEMS is a highly effective treatment modality for managing EBS-related bleeding and has an acceptable safety profile.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for distal malignant obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (BD) is increasingly used for distal malignant biliary obstruction, yet its safety and efficacy compared to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) remain unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to improve our understanding of the role of EUS-BD in this patient population. Methods We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of Knowledge through September 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-BD to ERCP-BD or PTBD as treatment of distal malignant biliary obstruction. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were combined using random effects models. The primary outcome was risk of stent/catheter dysfunction requiring reintervention. Results Of six trials identified, three (n = 222) compared EUS-BD to ERCP-BD for first-line therapy; three others (n = 132) evaluated EUS-BD versus PTBD after failed ERCP-BD. EUS-BD was associated with a decreased risk of stent/catheter dysfunction overall (RR, 0.39; 95 %CI 0.27 - 0.57) and in planned subgroup analysis when compared to ERCP (RR, 0.41; 95 %CI 0.23 - 0.74) or PTBD (RR, 0.37, 95 %CI 0.22 - 0.61). Compared to ERCP, EUS was associated with a decreased risk of post-procedure pancreatitis (RR, 0.12; 95 %CI 0.01 - 0.97). No differences were noted in technical or clinical success. Conclusions In a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing EUS-BD to conventional biliary drainage modalities, no difference in technical or clinical success was observed. Importantly, EUS-BD was associated with decreased risks of stent/catheter dysfunction when compared to both PTBD and ERCP, and decreased post-procedure pancreatitis when compared to ERCP, suggesting the potential role for EUS-BD as an alternative first-line therapy in distal malignant biliary obstruction.

Current role of endoscopic pancreatoscopy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of the field of pancreatoscopy and to summarize the data informing its clinical utility. RECENT FINDINGS: Regarding the technological advance of pancreatoscopy, recent studies are the first to report the use of digital, single-operator pancreatoscopy (SpyGlass DS; Boston Scientific, Natick, MA). New data on the use of preoperative pancreatoscopy offer promising results for the potential to optimize treatment of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and to differentiate between benign and malignant pancreatic strictures. Finally, there has been accumulating evidence for the use of pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy for the management of painful chronic calcific pancreatitis. SUMMARY: Endoscopic pancreatoscopy offers the advantage of direct visualization of the pancreatic duct, allowing for optimal macroscopic assessment, targeted tissue acquisition and guided therapies such as lithotripsy of pancreatic duct stones. The data informing some aspects remain limited, but the accumulating literature forms our understanding of the current and future role of pancreatoscopy in the management of pancreatic disease.

Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients Taking Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are convenient and effective in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism and the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, these drugs have been associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the risk of GI bleeding in patients receiving these drugs. METHODS: We searched the EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, and ISI Web of knowledge databases through January 2016 for randomized trials that compared NOACs with conventional anticoagulants for approved indications. We conducted a meta-analysis, reporting odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome was major GI bleeding. Secondary outcomes included clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding and upper and lower GI bleeding. We performed a priori subgroup analyses by individual drug. RESULTS: Our analysis included a total of 43 randomized trials, comprising 166,289 patients. There was no difference between NOACs and conventional anticoagulants in the risk of major bleeding (1.5% vs 1.3%, respectively; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.80-1.21), clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (0.6% vs 0.6%, respectively; OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.36), upper GI bleeding (1.5% vs 1.6%, respectively; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77-1.20), or lower GI bleeding (1.0% vs 1.0%, respectively; OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.67-1.15). Dabigatran (2.0% vs 1.4%, respectively; OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.55) and rivaroxaban (1.7% vs 1.3%, respectively; OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.70) were associated with increased odds of major GI bleeding compared with conventional anticoagulation, whereas no difference was found for apixaban (0.6% vs 0.7%, respectively; OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.64-1.02) or edoxaban (1.9% vs 1.6%, respectively; OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.11). These subgroup findings were not observed in other sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found risk of major GI bleeding to be similar between NOACs and conventional anticoagulation. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban, however, may be associated with increased odds of major GI bleeding. Further high-quality studies are needed to characterize GI bleeding risk among NOACs.

A randomized trial of early versus delayed mediastinal drain removal after cardiac surgery using silastic and conventional tubes.

OBJECTIVES: Mediastinal drainage following cardiac surgery with traditional large-bore plastic tubes can be painful and cumbersome. This study was designed to determine whether prolonged drainage (5 days) with a silastic tube decreased the incidence of significant pericardial effusion and tamponade following aortic or valvular surgery. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients undergoing valvular or aortic surgery in a tertiary cardiac surgery institution were randomized to receive a conventional mediastinal tube plus a silastic Blake drain (n = 75), or two conventional tubes (n = 75). Conventional drains were removed on postoperative day (POD) 1, while Blake drains were removed on POD 5. The primary end-point was the combined incidence of significant pericardial effusion (≥ 15 mm) or tamponade through POD 5. Secondary end-points included total mediastinal drainage, postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) and pain. RESULTS: Analysis was performed for 67 patients in the Blake group and 73 in the conventional group. There was no difference between the two groups in the combined end-point of significant effusion or tamponade (7.4 vs 8.3%, P = 0.74), or in the incidence of AF (47 vs 46%, P = 0.89). Mean 24-h drainage was greater in the Blake group than in the conventional group (749 ± 444 ml vs 645 ± 618 ml, P < 0.01). Overall incidence of significant pericardial effusion at 30 days was 12.1% (n = 17), with 5% (n = 7) requiring drainage. The Blake group had a numerically lower incidence of effusion requiring drainage at POD 30 (3.0 vs 6.8%, P = 0.44). Postoperative pain was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing ascending aortic or valvular surgery, prolonged drainage with silastic tubes is safe and does not increase postoperative pain. There was no difference between the Blake and conventional drains with regard to significant pericardial effusion or tamponade in this cohort; however, this conclusion is limited by the low overall incidence of the primary outcome in this cohort.

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

New oral anticoagulants, including apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban, have been developed as alternatives to warfarin, the standard oral anticoagulation therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants to those of warfarin in patients with AF. The published research was systematically searched for randomized controlled trials of >1 year in duration that compared new oral anticoagulants to warfarin in patients with AF. Random-effects models were used to pool efficacy and safety data across randomized controlled trials. Three studies, including 44,563 patients, were identified. Patients randomized to new oral anticoagulants had a decreased risk for all-cause stroke and systemic embolism (relative risk [RR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 0.92), ischemic and unidentified stroke (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.99), hemorrhagic stroke (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.68), all-cause mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95), and vascular mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98). Randomization to a new oral anticoagulant was associated with a lower risk for intracranial bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.66). Data regarding the risks for major bleeding (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.09) and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.72) were inconclusive. In conclusion, the new oral anticoagulants are more efficacious than warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with AF. With a decreased risk for intracranial bleeding, they appear to have a favorable safety profile, making them promising alternatives to warfarin.