Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided cholecystostomy versus percutaneous cholecystostomy (PTC) in the management of acute cholecystitis in patients unfit for surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Surgical cholecystectomy is the gold standard strategy for the management of acute cholecystitis (AC). However, some patients are considered unfit for surgery due to certain comorbid conditions. As such, we aimed to compare less invasive treatment strategies such as endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) for the management of patients with AC who are suboptimal candidates for surgical cholecystectomy. METHODS: A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed to identify all the studies comparing EUS-GBD versus PT-GBD for patients with AC who were unfit for surgery. A subgroup analysis was also performed for comparison of the group undergoing drainage via cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) versus PT-GBD. The outcomes included technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), recurrent cholecystitis, reintervention, and hospital readmission. RESULTS: Eleven studies including 1155 patients were included in the statistical analysis. There was no difference between PT-GBD and EUS-GBD in all the evaluated outcomes. On the subgroup analysis, the endoscopic approach with cautery-enhanced LAMS was associated with lower rates of adverse events (RD = - 0.33 (95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.14; p = 0.0006), recurrent cholecystitis (- 0.05 RD (95% CI - 0.09 to - 0.02; p = 0.02), and hospital readmission (- 0.36 RD (95% CI-0.70 to - 0.03; p = 0.03) when compared to PT-GBD. All other outcomes were similar in the subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GBD using cautery-enhanced LAMS is superior to PT-GBD in terms of safety profile, recurrent cholecystitis, and hospital readmission rates in the management of patients with acute cholecystitis who are suboptimal candidates for cholecystectomy. However, when cautery-enhanced LAMS are not used, the outcomes of EUS-GBD and PT-GBD are similar. Thus, EUS-GBD with cautery-enhanced LAMS should be considered the preferable approach for gallbladder drainage for this challenging population.

A case of esophageal histoplasmosis mimicking carcinoma on endoscopy.

A 54-year-old woman with progressive and non-acute dysphagia to solid foods, post-feeding vomiting, and weight loss of 10 kg in 1 year. As personal history, she was a former smoker of 60 pack-year, heart transplant for idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, and type 2 diabetes. She was on daily use of metformin and immunosuppressive drugs. The laboratory tests were all normal. Upper digestive endoscopy (UDE) revealed in the middle third of the esophagus a lesion of 3 cm presenting atypical rectified vessels, covering 50% of the esophageal lumen, suggestive type 0-IIc+IIa1 (A). The chromoendoscopy with Lugol iodine at 1.25% showed a positive pink sign (B). Biopsies showed esophagitis with mixed inflammatory infiltrate and numerous macrophages (C-upper panel). The Periodic Acid-Schiff staining showed small yeasts compatible with Histoplasma capsulatum, measuring 0.5 to 2.5 µm, within the cytoplasm of macrophages (arrows), with a clear halo (inset, arrows) (C-lower panel). These findings were compatible with esophageal histoplasmosis. Treatment was started with oral Itraconazole 400mg/day. After 3 months, a new UDE with biopsies showed complete esophageal healing. Gastrointestinal histoplasmosis manifests mainly in the small bowel and colon, related to a great amount of lymphoid tissue in these areas. Patients can present with fever, weight loss, abdominal pain and diarrhea. In endoscopy, we may find ulcerations, thickened wall, plaques and pseudopolyps2. It is considered a rare condition, and in only 3% of cases, there is esophageal involvement. This manifestation is mainly in immunosuppressed patients. It can be related to direct involvement of the esophagus or secondary to infiltration of mediastinal nodes2. In endoscopy, ulcerations, inflammatory masses, strictures, and external compressions can be found. This case illustrated the difficulty in differentiating early cancer from an esophageal histoplasmosis.

Diagnostic performance of three non-invasive fibrosis scores (Hepamet, FIB-4, NAFLD fibrosis score) in NAFLD patients from a mixed Latin American population.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Several non-invasive scoring systems have been developed and validated worldwide to predict the risk of liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). However, information about the performance of these systems in Latin American populations is scarce. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of the Hepamet Fibrosis Score, Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) and the NAFLD Fibrosis Score (NFS) in a mixed Latin American group of NAFLD patients. METHODS: Clinical, laboratory and liver biopsy data collected from 379 biopsy-proven NAFLD patients from Latin American tertiary health centers were reviewed. Histological fibrosis stages were classified using the Kleiner score. Accuracy was determined, and new fibrosis score thresholds were calculated to better compare the performances of non-invasive tests and to explore their usefulness in excluding fibrosis. RESULTS: The distribution of fibrosis stages among the sample population was as follows: F0 (45%), F1 (27%), F2 (8%), F3 (16%) and F4 (4%). Using modified thresholds, the areas under the ROC curves (AUROC) for Hepamet and FIB-4 (0.73 and 0.74, respectively) to detect significant fibrosis were higher than that of NFS (0.58). However, the AUROCs of the three scores were not significantly different in advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis. To exclude fibrosis, we calculated lower cutoffs than standard thresholds for Hepamet, FIB-4 and NFS with similar performances. CONCLUSION: Thresholds of non-invasive fibrosis scores (Hepamet, FIB-4 and NFS) can be modified to maximize diagnostic accuracy in Latin American patients with NAFLD.

Endoscopic Ultrasound View of Pneumatosis Cystoides Intestinalis.

Pneumatosis cystoid intestinalis (PCI) is a rare condition, with a worldwide incidence of 0.3-1.2%. PCI is classified into primary (idiopathic) and secondary forms, with 15% and 85% of presentations, respectively. This pathology was associated with a wide variety of underlining etiologies to explain the abnormal accumulation of gas within the submucosa (69.9%), subserosa (25.5%), or both layers (4.6%). Many patients endure misdiagnosis, mistreatment, or even inadequate surgical exploration. In this case, a patient presented acute diverticulitis, after treatment, a control colonoscopy was performed that found multiple rounds and elevated lesions. To further study the subepithelial lesion (SEL), a colorectal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was performed with an overtube in the same procedure. For safe insertion of the curvilinear array EUS, an overtube with colonoscopy was positioned through the sigmoid as described by Cheng et al. The EUS evaluation evidenced air reverberation in the submucosal layer. The pathological analysis was consistent with PCI's diagnosis. The diagnosis of PCI is usually made by colonoscopy (51.9%), surgery (40.6%), and radiological findings (10.9%). Although the diagnosis can be made by radiological studies, a colorectal EUS and colonoscopy can be made in the same section without radiation and with high precision. As it is a rare disease, there are not enough studies to define the best approach, although colorectal EUS should be preferred for a reliable diagnosis.

The Effectiveness and Safety of the Duodenal-Jejunal Bypass Liner (DJBL) for the Management of Obesity and Glycaemic Control: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: The duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL) is a less-invasive treatment of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis including randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DJBL versus sham or pharmacotherapies aiming to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of DJBL. RESULTS: Ten RCTs (681 patients) were included. The DJBL group showed superior excess weight loss (+ 11.4% [+ 7.75 to + 15.03%], p < 0.00001) and higher decrease in HbA1c compared to the control group (- 2.73 ± 0.5 vs. - 1.73 ± 0.4, p = 0.0001). Severe adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 19.7%. CONCLUSION: The DJBL did not reach the ASGE/ASMBS thresholds for the treatment of obesity. However, it is important to state that many SAEs were not really severe. Therefore, we believe this therapy plays an important role in the management obesity and T2DM.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenterostomy for the Palliation of Gastric Outlet Obstruction (GOO): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Different Techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is usually associated with a poor prognosis and a significant decrease in a patient's quality of life. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has emerged as a safe and effective palliation procedure for GOO in patients that are unfit for surgery. Without an exclusive gold-standard technique for EUS-GE, we aimed to compare the currently available ones in this systematic review and meta-analysis, the first on this subspecialty. METHODS: A comprehensive search from multiple electronic databases was performed. The search had a particular emphasis on the techniques used in performing EUS-GE. We identified all the studies in which EUS-GE was performed as palliation for GOO from its inception to the current date. The outcomes analyzed were the following: technical and clinical success, total and severe adverse events (AEs), procedure duration, and length of hospital stay (LOHS). RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 863 patients were the basis of this statistical analysis. Patients underwent the following techniques: direct gastroenterostomy (DGE) (n=718), balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy (BAGE) (n=27), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass (n=118). In comparison to balloon-assisted techniques, DGE had a lower rate of AEs, -0.121 (95% CI -0.191 to -0.051 p=0.001); and LOHS for the DGE group, -2.684 (95% CI -1.031 to -4.337 p=0.001). The other analyzed outcomes presented no statistically significant differences. On a sub-analysis, BAGE showed a lower rate of AEs than EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass, -0.196 (95% CI -0.061 to -0.331 p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GE is a safe and effective procedure for palliating GOO. When correctly administered, any of the analyzed techniques may be used to palliate GOO with similar technical and clinical outcomes. DGE had significantly lower rates of AEs and LOHS, which can be inferred as a safer procedure. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to the limited few studies that are available and accessible. Therefore, further well-designed, randomized clinical studies on the topic are warranted to compare the different techniques from more sources.

SARS-CoV-2 leading to acute pancreatitis: an unusual presentation.

During SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2) pandemic, the etiologic agent of COVID-19, several studies described the involvement of other tissues besides the respiratory tract, such as the gastrointestinal tract. Angiotensin-converting enzyme-2, the functional virus host cell receptor expressed by organs and tissues, seems to have an important role in the pathophysiology and presentation of this disease. In pancreas, this receptor is expressed in both exocrine glands and islets, being a potential target for the virus and subsequent pancreatic injury. There are few articles reporting pancreatic injury in COVID-19 patients but most of them do not report acute pancreatitis. Diagnosing acute pancreatitis secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection is challenging due to the need to rule out other etiologies as well the notable heterogeneous presentations. Herein we report the case of a patient with COVID-19 who developed severe acute pancreatitis.