RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a major concern in patients undergoing SG and is a risk factor for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of and analyze predictive factors for post-SG BE. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in April 2024, for studies reporting on incidence of BE, erosive esophagitis (EE) and hiatal hernia (HH) post SG. Primary outcomes were post SG pooled rates of de novo BE, EE, GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and HH. Meta-regression analysis was performed to assess if patient and post SG factors influenced the rates of post SG BE. RESULTS: Nineteen studies with 2046 patients (79% females) were included. Mean age was 42.2 years (SD 11.1) and follow up ranged from 2 to 11.4 years. The pooled rate of de novo BE post SG was 5.6% (CI 3.5-8.8). Significantly higher pooled rates of EE [Risk Ratio (RR) 3.37], HH [RR 2.09], GER/GERD symptoms [RR 3.32] and PPI use [RR 3.65], were found among patients post SG. GER/GERD symptoms post SG positively influenced the pooled BE rates, while age, sex, BMI, post SG EE and HH did not. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that SG results in a significantly increased risk of de novo BE and higher rates of EE, PPI use and HH. Our findings suggest that clinicians should routinely screen patients with SG for BE and future surveillance intervals should be followed as per societal guidelines.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies assessing EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) or gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) have shown variable results based on the type of LAMS. We performed a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Multiple online databases were searched for studies using LAMSs (Axios [Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA] or Spaxus [Taewoong Medical Co, Gimpo, Korea]) for EUS-BD and EUS-GB. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Pooled proportions along with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 18 observational studies were included: 11 for the Axios stent (433 patients; mean age, 72 years; 54% male) and 7 for the Spaxus stent (242 patients; mean age, 74 years; 50% male). The respective pooled outcomes for the Axios stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) were technical success, 96.2% and 96.2%; clinical success, 92.8% and 92.7%; total adverse events, 10.1% and 23.6%; and bleeding, 3.7% and 4.8%. The respective pooled outcomes for the Spaxus stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) were technical success, 93.8% and 95.9%; clinical success, 90.1% and 94.2%; total adverse events, 12.6% and 9.5%; and bleeding, 3.1% and 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Axios and Spaxus stents demonstrate similar pooled technical and clinical success rates. Adverse events occurred in 23.6% of patients (Axios stent) and 9.5% of patients (Spaxus stent) during EUS-GB.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries (ERIs) are commonly reported but their exact prevalence and clinical impact remain obscure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature aiming to answer these questions. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases were searched for studies evaluating ERIs in gastroenterologists and surgeons. The co-primary outcome was the prevalence of ERIs (i.e. carpal tunnel syndrome, de Quervain's tenosynovitis, and hand numbness). The second co-primary outcome was the prevalence of endoscopy-related pain syndromes. RESULTS: 12 studies, including 4563 respondents, were included. The majority of respondents were men (n = 3321; 72.8%) and most were right-handed (86.2%). The career prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome (pooled from 10 studies) was 5.3% (95%CI 1.5%-8.9%; I 2 = 97.1%), while the prevalence of de Quervain's tenosynovitis (five studies) was 8.5% (95%CI 0.1%-17.0%). The pooled prevalences of thumb pain, neck pain, and back pain were 25.4%, 23.1%, and 19.7%, respectively, but the prevalence varied according to the type of questionnaire used. Only 341/864 respondents (39.5%) had received prior training in ergonomics, while 623/889 respondents (70.1%) expressed a desire for further training in ergonomics. Overall, there is a moderate risk of bias in the present literature. CONCLUSION: ERIs, including carpal tunnel syndrome, de Quervain's tenosynovitis, and endoscopy-related pain, are very common. These injuries can be severe, requiring surgery, and lead to loss of productivity. Most gastroenterologists report an unmet need for training in the proper ergonomics of endoscopy.
Assuntos
Síndrome do Túnel Carpal , Humanos , Prevalência , Síndrome do Túnel Carpal/epidemiologia , Síndrome do Túnel Carpal/etiologia , Doença de De Quervain/epidemiologia , Endoscopia/efeitos adversos , Traumatismos Ocupacionais/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/etiologia , Gastroenterologistas/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital malformation of the pancreas and is implicated as a cause of pancreatitis. The role of endotherapy has been variable in symptomatic PD indicated by recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), or chronic pancreatic-type abdominal pain (PP). The aim of this study was to analyze the pooled data to determine the success of endoscopic intervention for pancreas divisum. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2023) to identify studies reporting on the use of endoscopic therapy in symptomatic pancreatic divisum. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2% values were used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were retrieved that reported endoscopic intervention in pancreatic divisum. The calculated pooled rate of technical success was 92% (95% CI: 87-95; I2=63%). The calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 65% (95% CI: 60-70; I2=60%). The rate of clinical success by PD subtypes was highest in RAP at 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). Available studies had significant heterogeneity in defining clinical success. The rate of adverse events was 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). CONCLUSIONS: The role of endoscopic therapy in pancreatic divisum is variable with the highest success rate in recurrent acute pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is associated with a higher-than-usual rate of adverse events, including post-ERCP pancreatitis.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is limited data on Vedolizumab utilization in elderly patients. Our study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of Vedolizumab in this subset population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Databases including Cochrane Central, Embase, Medline (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science were searched in August 2022 to identify studies that assessed Vedolizumab therapy in elderly patients. Pooled proportion and risk ratios (RR) were calculated. RESULTS: Total 11 studies with 3546 IBD patients (1314 elderly and 2232 young) were included in the final analysis. Pooled rate of overall and serious infections in the elderly cohort was 8.45% (95% CI=6.27-11.29; I 2 23%) and 2.59% (95% CI=0.78-8.29; I 2 76%), respectively. However, there was no difference in overall infection rates between elderly and young patients. Pooled rate of endoscopic, clinical, and steroid-free remission for elderly IBD patients was 38.45% (95% CI=20.74-59.56; I 2 93%), 37.95% (95% CI=33.08-43.06; I 2 13%), and 38.8% (95% CI=31.6-46.4; I 2 77%), respectively. Elderly patients had lower steroid-free remission rates [RR 0.85, 95% CI=0.74-0.99; I 2 0%, P =0.03]; however, there was no difference in rates of clinical (RR 0.86, 95% CI=0.72-1.03; I 2 0%, P =0.10) or endoscopic remission (RR 1.06, 95% CI=0.83-1.35; I 2 0%, P =0.63) compared with younger patients. Pooled rate of IBD-related surgery and IBD-related hospitalizations was 9.76% (95% CI=5.81-15.92; I 2 78%) and 10.54% (95% CI=8.37-13.2; I 2 0%), respectively for the elderly cohort. There was no statistical difference in IBD-related surgeries between elderly and young IBD patients, RR 1.20 (95% CI=0.79-1.84; I 2 16%), P =0.4. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab is equally safe and effective for clinical and endoscopic remission in elderly and younger populations.
Assuntos
Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais , Humanos , Idoso , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/tratamento farmacológico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Razão de ChancesRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10 mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10 mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement. RESULTS: Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5 mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.
Assuntos
Pólipos do Colo , Colonoscopia , Humanos , Pólipos do Colo/cirurgia , Pólipos do Colo/patologia , Colonoscopia/métodos , Colonoscopia/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/etiologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for colorectal lesions, the traction method (T-ESD) allows the lesion to be stabilized with easier dissection. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results on the clinical outcomes of T-ESD as compared with C-ESD. We conducted a meta-analysis to compile the data. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for RCTs evaluating C-ESD versus T-ESD for colorectal tumors. The end points of interest were procedure time (min), resection speed (mm²/min), R0 resection, en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Six RCTs with a total of 566 patients (C-ESD n=284, T-ESD n=282) were included. The mean age was 67±10 y and 60% were men. As compared with the T-ESD technique, the C-ESD group was associated with longer procedure time (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23, P<0.00001) and lesser resection speed (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.06, P=0.04). No significant difference was found in the 2 groups with respect to R0 resection rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, P=0.87), en bloc resection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, P=0.35), delayed bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.59, P=0.55) and perforation (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 6.27, P=0.16). DISCUSSION: On meta-analysis, pooled procedure time was significantly faster with T-ESD compared with C-ESD. The clinical outcomes, however, were comparable.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for complex colorectal lesions have shown variable results. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies comparing EFTR versus ESD for complex colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were resection rates, procedure time (min), and complications. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) along with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4 studies with 530 patients (n=215 EFTR, n=315 ESD) were included. The mean follow-up duration was 5 months. The mean age of the patients was 68 years and 64% were men. The EFTR and ESD groups had similar rates of en bloc resection (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 0.60-4.97, P=0.31) and R0 resection (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 0.55-4.14, P=0.42). The EFTR group had significantly reduced procedure time (SMD -1.87, 95% CI: -3.13 to -0.61, P=0.004), total complications (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13-0.44, P<0.00001), perforation (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.39, P=0.0005) and postresection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.48, P=0.008). Delayed bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.12, P=0.66). Residual/recurrent lesions were significantly higher in the EFTR group (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 1.39-15.66, P=0.01). DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis of small studies with high heterogeneity showed that EFTR and ESD have comparable resection rates for complex colorectal lesions. EFTR is faster and has fewer complications, but it increases residual or recurrent lesions.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Thalidomide has been used for angioectasia-associated refractory gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), with studies showing variable efficacy and side effects profile. We conducted a meta-analysis to reconcile the data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies evaluating thalidomide in patients with refractory/recurrent GIB due to angioectasias. The outcomes of interest were cessation of bleeding, rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, hospitalization and adverse events. Pooled proportions for incidence, and odds ratios (OR) for comparison with control were calculated along with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of seven studies with 346 patients (n = 269 thalidomide, n = 77 control) were included. Thalidomide dose was usually started at 50-100mg/day. The mean age was 65 years, 45% patients were men, and mean follow-up was 1.8 years. The pooled clinical outcomes with thalidomide were: cessation of bleeding 42.2% (95% CI 36.02 to 48.41), rebleeding 30%, need for blood transfusion 20.1%, hospitalization 40% and adverse events 55.9%. When compared with the control group in 2 studies, patients on thalidomide had significantly higher odds of cessation of bleeding (OR 21.40, 95% CI 5.78 to 79.29, p < 0.00001) and adverse events, with lower need for blood transfusion and hospitalization. DISCUSSION: In patients with angioectasias-related refractory/recurrent GIB, the use of thalidomide results in significantly decreased bleeding risk and may play a role in the management of such patients.
Assuntos
Inibidores da Angiogênese , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal , Talidomida , Feminino , Humanos , Inibidores da Angiogênese/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Angiogênese/uso terapêutico , Transfusão de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/tratamento farmacológico , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Recidiva , Talidomida/uso terapêutico , Talidomida/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the post-endoscopic adverse events in patients with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Current guidelines do not provide clear direction on this topic. AIM: We explore the pooled rates of safety and adverse effects of endoscopic interventions in thrombocytopenia and neutropenia patients via a systematic review & meta-analysis. METHODS: Databases, including Medline, Scopus, and Embase, were searched (in May 2023) using specific terms for studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of endoscopy in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: Six studies and four studies evaluated endoscopic outcomes in patients with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia respectively with mean age was 56 years. The pooled rate of total post-biopsy bleeding and total post-polypectomy bleeding among patients with thrombocytopenia was 4% (95% CI 1-11), I2 = 84%, and 12% (95% CI 3-36) I2 = 43%. The total rate of post procedure-related bleeding in thrombocytopenia was 5% (95% CI 1-14) I2 = 95%. The pooled rate of post-endoscopic infection (fever from any cause, bacteremia) in neutropenia was 10% (95% CI 3-28%) I2 = 96%. On sub analysis, the pooled rate of bacteremia and 30 days all-cause mortality in neutropenia was 4% (95% CI 3-5%) I2 = 0% and 13% (95% CI 4-34%) I2 = 95% respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data supports the notion that endoscopic procedures are safe for neutropenic, thrombocytopenic patients with suitable indications and reasonable functional status and have an acceptable risk/benefit ratio.
Assuntos
Neutropenia , Trombocitopenia , Humanos , Trombocitopenia/epidemiologia , Neutropenia/epidemiologia , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal/efeitos adversos , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting (PPDS) in preventing post-ampullectomy pancreatitis (PAP) at the time of endoscopic ampullectomy (EA) has been reported, however, results are conflicting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis looking at the use of PPDS in reducing PAP as well as overall post-ampullectomy complications. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through May 2023 for studies reporting on EA. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of PAP, with and without PPDS. Pooled rates of adverse events including perforation, delayed bleeding, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were assessed. Random effects model was used for our meta-analysis and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (14 case series, 18 cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trials) with 1868 patients were included. The overall pooled rate of PAP was 12.3% (CI 10.3-14.5). We found no statistically significant difference in rates of PAP among patients with PPDS, 11.9% (CI 8.9-15.7) and without PPDS, 16.6% (CI 13.4-20.4), RR 0.8 (CI 0.51-1.28), p = 0.4. In terms of severe PAP, we found no difference between the two groups. The overall pooled rates of successful en-bloc and piecemeal resection were 74.8% (CI 67.3-81.1) and 25.1% (CI 19-32.4). Additionally, pooled rates of ampullary stenosis, post procedural bleeding, perforation, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were 3.6%, 11.1%, 4.2%, 3.5%, and 1.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that PPDS at the time of EA does not offer a significant protective effect against PAP. While the incidence of PAP was higher among the no PPDS group, it is plausible that this is more likely due to variation among studies in terms of lesion size, length/size of pancreatic stent used and etiology of ampullary lesions. Future well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is emerging as an effective modality for mucosal and submucosal lesions in the colorectum. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to analyze the success and safety of device-assisted EFTR in the colon and rectum. METHODS: A literature search was performed in the Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies evaluating device-assisted EFTR between inception to October 2022. The primary outcome of the study was clinical success (R0 resection) with EFTR. Secondary outcomes included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. RESULTS: In all, 29 studies with 3467 patients (59% male patients, 3492 lesions) were included in the analysis. The lesions were located in right colon (47.5%), left colon (28.6%), and rectum (24.3%). EFTR was performed for subepithelial lesions in 7.2% patients. The pooled mean size of the lesions was 16.6 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.9-18.2, I2 98%). Technical success was achieved in 87.1% (95% CI 85.1-88.9%, I2 39%) procedures. The pooled rate of en bloc resection was 88.1% (95% CI 86-90%, I2 47%) and R0 resection was 81.8% (95% CI 79-84.3%, I2 56%). In subepithelial lesions, the pooled rate of R0 resection was 94.3% (95% CI 89.7-96.9%, I2 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events was 11.9% (95% CI 10.2-13.9%, I2 43%) and major adverse events requiring surgery was 2.5% (95% CI 2.0-3.1%, I2 0%). CONCLUSION: Device-assisted EFTR is a safe and effective treatment modality in cases with adenomatous and subepithelial colorectal lesions. Comparative studies are required with conventional resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.
Assuntos
Adenoma , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/métodos , Colo/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Reto/cirurgia , Reto/patologia , Adenoma/cirurgia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms are an essential criterion for Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening in most gastroenterology society guidelines, a significant proportion of BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) cases do not endorse them. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the prevalence of BE/EAC in those with and without GERD. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted through 5 major databases for studies reporting prevalence of BE/EAC in patients with and without GERD. Pooled proportions and odds ratios (ORs) of BE, long-segment BE, short-segment BE, dysplasia, and EAC in patients with and without GERD were synthesized. RESULTS: Forty-three articles (12,883 patients with GERD; 51,350 patients without GERD) were included in the final analysis. BE prevalence was 7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8%-8.5%) and 2.2% (95% CI, 1.6%-3%) among individuals with and without GERD, respectively. EAC prevalence was 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-1%) and 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.2%) in those with and without GERD, respectively. The overall risks for BE (OR, 2.91; 95% CI, 2.06-4.11) and long-segment BE (OR,4.17; 95% CI, 1.78-9.77) were higher in patients with GERD, but the risk for short-segment BE (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.89-3.52) did not differ between the two groups. In 9 population-based high-quality studies (2244 patients with GERD; 3724 patients without GERD), BE prevalence in patients without GERD was 4.9% (95% CI, 2.6%-9%). BE prevalence was highest in North American studies (10.6% [GERD] and 4.8% [non-GERD]). CONCLUSIONS: BE prevalence in those without GERD is substantial, particularly in large high-quality population-based studies. These data are important to factor in future BE/EAC early detection guidelines.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Multiple meta-analyses have evaluated the technical and clinical success of EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD), but meta-analyses concerning adverse events (AEs) are limited. The present meta-analysis analyzed AEs associated with various types of EUS-BD. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from 2005 to September 2022 for studies analyzing the outcome of EUS-BD. The primary outcomes were incidence of overall AEs, major AEs, procedure-related mortality, and reintervention. The event rates were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five studies (7887 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled clinical success rates and incidence of AEs with EUS-BD were 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.1-95.9) and 13.7% (95% CI, 12.3-15.0), respectively. Among early AEs, bile leak was the most common followed by cholangitis with pooled incidences of 2.2% (95% CI, 1.8-2.7) and 1.0% (95% CI, .8-1.3), respectively. The pooled incidences of major AEs and procedure-related mortality with EUS-BD were .6% (95% CI, .3-.9) and .1% (95% CI, .0-.4), respectively. The pooled incidences of delayed migration and stent occlusion were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.3-12.8), respectively. The pooled event rate for reintervention (for stent migration or occlusion) after EUS-BD was 16.2% (95% CI, 14.0-18.3; I2 = 77.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high clinical success rate, EUS-BD may be associated with AEs in one-seventh of the cases. However, major AEs and mortality incidence remain less than 1%, which is reassuring.
Assuntos
Colangite , Colestase , Humanos , Colestase/etiologia , Colestase/cirurgia , Endossonografia/efeitos adversos , Drenagem/efeitos adversos , Stents/efeitos adversos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic assessment of ulcerative colitis (UC) can be performed by using the Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES) or the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS). In this meta-analysis, we assessed the pooled diagnostic accuracy parameters of deep machine learning by means of convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithms in predicting UC severity on endoscopic images. METHODS: Databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were searched in June 2022. Outcomes of interest were the pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Standard meta-analysis methods used the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2statistics. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled diagnostic parameters of CNN-based machine learning algorithms in endoscopic severity assessment of UC were as follows: accuracy 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.3-93.8; I2 = 84%), sensitivity 82.8% (95% CI, 78.3-86.5; I2 = 89%), specificity 92.4% (95% CI, 89.4-94.6; I2 = 84%), PPV 86.6% (95% CI, 82.3-90; I2 = 89%), and NPV 88.6% (95% CI, 85.7-91; I2 = 78%). Subgroup analysis revealed significantly better sensitivity and PPV with the UCEIS scoring system compared with the MES (93.6% [95% CI, 87.5-96.8; I2 = 77%] vs 82% [95% CI, 75.6-87; I2 = 89%], P = .003, and 93.6% [95% CI, 88.7-96.4; I2 = 68%] vs 83.6% [95% CI, 76.8-88.8; I2 = 77%], P = .007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CNN-based machine learning algorithms demonstrated excellent pooled diagnostic accuracy parameters in the endoscopic severity assessment of UC. Using UCEIS scores in CNN training might offer better results than the MES. Further studies are warranted to establish these findings in real clinical settings.
Assuntos
Colite Ulcerativa , Humanos , Colite Ulcerativa/diagnóstico , Colonoscopia/métodos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Redes Neurais de Computação , Aprendizado de Máquina , AlgoritmosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite advances in endoscopic therapies, malignancy-related GI bleeding remains difficult to manage with high rates of treatment failure and rebleeding. Topical hemostatic agents (THAs) are easier to apply to the wide bleeding surface of tumors. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases to identify studies reporting on the use of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleeding. The primary outcome was the achievement of hemostasis; secondary outcomes were early rebleeding (≤3 days), delayed rebleeding (>3 days), aggregate rebleeding, all-cause mortality, and GI bleeding-related mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions was done for all outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 355 citations, 16 studies with 530 patients were included. Primary hemostasis was achieved in 94.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.5-96.0). Early rebleeding was seen in 13.9% (95% CI, 9.7-19.4) and delayed rebleeding in 11.4% (95% CI, 5.8-21.1). Aggregate rebleeding was seen in 24.2% (95% CI, 18.5-31.0). All-cause mortality was 33.1% (95% CI, 23.7-44.0), whereas GI bleeding-related mortality occurred in 5.9% (95% CI, 2.2%-14.8). CONCLUSIONS: THAs are highly effective for achieving primary hemostasis in malignancy-related GI bleeding. It should be considered as an alternative to traditional endotherapy methods in malignancy-related GI bleeding. Future studies should be designed to evaluate its efficacy and safety as a primary method of hemostasis as compared with traditional endotherapy measures.
Assuntos
Hemostase Endoscópica , Hemostáticos , Humanos , Hemostase Endoscópica/métodos , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/tratamento farmacológico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemostáticos/uso terapêutico , RecidivaRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: GI bleeding after ERCP is a serious adverse event and most commonly occurs after endoscopic biliary and/or pancreatic sphincterotomy. Although the strength of available evidence for post-sphincterotomy GI bleeding risk is high for therapeutic warfarin and heparin, it remains unknown for antiplatelet agents like clopidogrel and prasugrel. We conducted a retrospective United States-based, propensity-matched cohort study to assess the risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding in patients receiving anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (APT) therapy. METHODS: We analyzed the U.S. Collaborative Network in the TriNetX platform through December 27, 2022, to include patients receiving APT and AC therapy who underwent ERCP within 7 days of hospitalization. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed. The primary outcome was the incidence of GI bleeding within 7 days of sphincterotomy. Secondary outcomes included need for blood transfusion, intensive care unit care, and all-cause mortality within 30 days of bleeding. RESULTS: Overall, 2806 patients (1806 in the AC cohort and 1000 in the APT cohort) underwent ERCP with sphincterotomy. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for age, body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, gender, race, ethnicity, diabetes mellitus, nicotine dependence, presence and severity of chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, and thrombocytopenia between the cohorts. Patients in both cohorts had an increased risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding compared with matched control subjects (adjusted odds ratios of 3.6 [95% confidence interval, 2.58-5.06] and 2.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.43-3.56], respectively). Although heparin bridging therapy and concurrent use of aspirin did not further increase the risk of GI bleeding, resumption of AC within 24 hours' postprocedure did. Neither cohort of patients was at an increased risk for blood transfusion, intensive care unit care, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our database analysis shows that patients receiving AC and APT therapy are at a higher risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding compared with matched control subjects. An appropriate drug cessation period or alternative biliary decompression modalities may be used in these patients.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes , Esfincterotomia , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Coortes , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/epidemiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Esfincterotomia/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Reintervention after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) can be indicated because of postprocedural adverse events from various preinterventional or postprocedural comorbidities. We developed and internally validated an ESG reintervention score (ESG-RS) that determines the individualized risk of reintervention within the first 30 days after ESG. METHODS: We used data from a sample of 3583 patients who underwent ESG in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Program database (2016-2021). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO)-penalized regression was used to select the most promising predictors of reintervention after ESG within 30 days. The predictive variables extracted by LASSO regression were entered into multivariate analysis to generate an ESG-RS by using the coefficients of the statistically significant variables. The model performance was assessed using receiver-operator curves by 10-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: Eleven variables were selected by LASSO regression and used in the final multivariate analysis. The ESG-RS was inferred using 5 factors (history of previous foregut surgery, preoperative anticoagulation use, female gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥II, and hypertension) weighted by their regression coefficients in the multivariable logistic regression model. The area under the curve of the ESG-RS was .74 (95% confidence interval, .70-.78). For the ESG-RS, the optimal cutpoint was 67.9 (high risk vs low risk), with a sensitivity of .76 and specificity of .71. CONCLUSIONS: The ESG-RS aids clinicians in preoperative risk stratification of patients undergoing ESG while clarifying factors contributing to a higher risk of reintervention.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of tissue sampling techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques. METHODS: Rates of sample adequacy, blood contamination, and tissue integrity using fine-needle biopsy sampling needles were evaluated. Direct and indirect comparisons were performed among the slow-pull, dry-suction, modified wet-suction, or no-suction techniques. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 9 randomized controlled trials (756 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, the no-suction technique was significantly inferior to the other techniques (RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs slow pull; RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs dry suction; RR, .83 [95% CI, .76-.90] vs modified wet suction) in terms of sample adequacy. Consequently, modified wet suction was shown to be the best technique (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .90), with the no-suction technique showing poorer performance in terms of sample adequacy (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .14). Dry suction was associated with significantly higher rates of blood contamination as compared with the slow-pull technique (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), whereas no suction led to less blood contamination of samples in comparison with other techniques (RR, .71 [95% CI, .52-.97] vs slow pull; RR, .49 [95% CI, .36-.66] vs dry suction; RR, .57 [95% CI, .40-.81] vs modified wet suction). The modified wet-suction technique significantly outperformed dry suction in terms of tissue integrity of the sample (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Modified wet suction seemed to provide high rates of integrity and adequate samples, albeit with high blood contamination. The no-suction technique performed significantly worse than other sampling strategies.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Metanálise em Rede , Aspiração por Agulha Fina Guiada por Ultrassom Endoscópico/métodos , Sucção/métodosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies have demonstrated that the ideal time for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is 4 to 6 weeks after their development. However, some pancreatic collections, notably infected pancreatic fluid collections, require earlier drainage. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of the first intervention is unclear, and consensus data are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections <4 weeks after development compared with ≥4 weeks after development. METHODS: Search strategies were developed for PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception. Outcomes of interest were technical success, defined as successful endoscopic placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent; clinical success, defined as a reduction in cystic collection size; and procedure-related adverse events. A random-effects model was used for analysis, and results are expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Six studies (630 patients) were included in our final analysis, in which 182 patients (28.9%) were enrolled in the early drainage cohort and 448 patients (71.1%) in the standard drainage cohort. The mean fluid collection size was 143.4 ± 18.8 mm for the early cohort versus 128 ± 19.7 mm for the standard cohort. Overall, technical success was equal in both cohorts. Clinical success did not favor either standard drainage or early drainage (OR, .39; 95% CI, .13-1.22; P = .11). No statistically significant differences were found in overall adverse events (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, .63-4.45; P = .31) or mortality (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, .29-4.48; P = .85). Hospital stay was longer for patients undergoing early drainage compared with standard drainage (23.7 vs 16.0 days, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both early (<4 weeks) and standard (≥4 weeks) drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections offer similar technical and clinical outcomes. Patients requiring endoscopic drainage should not be delayed for 4 weeks.