RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the panorama of therapeutic strategies for inflammatory bowel diseases, oral upadacitinib stands out for its potential to improve short-term and long-term patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aspires to collate and assess the available evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in managing moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using studies sourced from MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase, published from January 2010 to March 2024. Peer-reviewed articles that reported data on the effects of upadacitinib in adult patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis were included based on established inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Eight studies, encompassing a total of 2818 patients treated with upadacitinib, were included. In primary outcomes, for patients with Crohn's disease who were using upadacitinib, the weighted pooled clinical remission rate was found to be 45.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.52), while for patients with ulcerative colitis who were using upadacitinib, the rate was 25.4% (95% CI 0.17-0.36). The pooled clinical response rate for Crohn's disease was 53.6% (95% CI 0.50-0.57), and for ulcerative colitis it was 72.6% (95% CI 0.69-0.76). The pooled serious adverse event rate was 6.0% (95% CI 0.07-0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib demonstrates significant efficacy in achieving clinical remission and response in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, as shown by clinical remission rates of 44.9% and 36.0%, respectively. The treatment also maintains a favorable safety profile with a serious adverse event rate of 7.8%, making it an effective option for those resistant or intolerant to traditional immunosuppressants or tumor necrosis factor antagonists.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplasms can be challenging due to limited traction and visualization. The efficacy of traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (TA-ESD) continues to require additional validation. This study aims to explore the safety and efficiency of TA-ESD for early gastric neoplasms located at varying sites, in comparison with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD). METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search using databases up until August 2022. The outcome measures procedure time, en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, procedure time, and procedure-related adverse event rate. We calculated pooled mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs) for these outcomes. RESULTS: The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the TA-ESD group compared to the C-ESD group (MD - 14.9, 95% CI - 21.78 to - 8.03, I2 = 83%, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis revealed that mean procedure times for lesions on the greater curvature and upper/middle of the stomach were significantly shorter in the TA-ESD group - 19.2 min (95% CI - 27.75 to - 10.65, I2 = 12%, p < 0.0001) and - 7.35 min (95% CI - 35.4 to - 1.15, p = 0.04), respectively. The en bloc resection and complete resection rates were comparable between the two groups. The rate of perforation was significantly lower in the TA-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.85, p = 0.02, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential benefits of TA-ESD over C-ESD in treating patients with early-stage gastric tumors, highlighting its safety and efficacy. The findings indicate a significant reduction in procedure times at challenging stomach sites with TA-ESD in comparison to C-ESD.
