44 research outputs found
A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
Background and aim: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are new techniques capable of providing deep enteroscopy. Results of individual studies comparing these techniques have not been able to identify a superior strategy. Our aim was to systematically pool all available studies to compare the efficacy and safety of DBE with SBE for evaluation of the small bowel. Methods: Databases were searched, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The main outcome measures were complete small-bowel visualization, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and complication rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan version 5.2). Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on the absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. We used the χ2 and I2 test to assess heterogeneity between trials. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Four prospective, randomized, controlled trials with a total of 375 patients were identified. DBE was superior to SBE for visualization of the entire small bowel [pooled RR = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.19–0.73; P = 0.004)]. DBE and SBE were similar in ability to provide diagnosis [pooled RR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.77–1.17; P = 0.62)]. There was no significant difference between DBE and SBE in therapeutic yield [pooled RR = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.59–1.04; P = 0.09)] and complication rate [pooled RR = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28–4.22); P = 0.91]. Conclusions: DBE was superior to SBE with regard to complete small bowel visualization. DBE was similar to SBE with regard to diagnostic yield, ability to provide treatment and complication rate, but these results should be interpreted with caution as they is based on very few studies and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low to moderate, due to the small sample size
Safety and Efficacy of Digital Single-Operator Pancreatoscopy for Obstructing Pancreatic Ductal Stones
Recommended from our members
Light scattering spectroscopy identifies the malignant potential of pancreatic cysts during endoscopy
Pancreatic cancers are usually detected at an advanced stage and have poor prognosis. About one fifth of these arise from pancreatic cystic lesions. Yet not all lesions are precancerous, and imaging tools lack adequate accuracy for distinguishing precancerous from benign cysts. Therefore, decisions on surgical resection usually rely on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). Unfortunately, cyst fluid often contains few cells, and fluid chemical analysis lacks accuracy, resulting in dire consequences, including unnecessary pancreatic surgery for benign cysts and the development of cancer. Here, we report an optical spectroscopic technique, based on a spatial gating fibre-optic probe, that predicts the malignant potential of pancreatic cystic lesions during routine diagnostic EUS-FNA procedures. In a double-blind prospective study in 25 patients, with 14 cysts measured in vivo and 13 postoperatively, the technique achieved an overall accuracy of 95%, with a 95%confidence interval of 78–99%, in cysts with definitive diagnosis
Effects of Blended (Yellow) vs Forced Coagulation (Blue) Currents on Adverse Events, Complete Resection, or Polyp Recurrence After Polypectomy in a Large Randomized Trial
Background & aims: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence.
Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 Ă— 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis.
Results: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006).
Conclusions: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference
Clip Closure Prevents Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Large Colon Polyps in a Randomized Trial
Background & aims: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding.
Methods: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event.
Results: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%).
Conclusions: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon
Rectal Indomethacin Dose Escalation (RIDE) for Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients: a Randomized Trial
Background
Although rectal indometacin 100 mg is effective in reducing the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients, the optimal dose is unknown, and pancreatitis incidence remains high. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two dose regimens of rectal indometacin on the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after ERCP in high-risk patients.
Methods
In this randomised, double-blind, comparative effectiveness trial, we enrolled patients from six tertiary medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients were those at high risk for the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) immediately after ERCP to receive either two 50 mg indometacin suppositories and a placebo suppository (standard-dose group) or three 50 mg indometacin suppositories (high-dose group). 4 h after the procedure, patients assigned to the high-dose group received an additional 50 mg indometacin suppository, whereas patients in the standard-dose group received an additional placebo suppository. The randomisation schedule, stratified according to study centre and with no other restrictions, was computer generated by an investigator who was uninvolved in the clinical care of any participants, distributed to the sites, and kept by personnel not directly involved with the study. These same personnel were responsible for packaging the drug and placebo in opaque envelopes. Patients, study personnel, and treating physicians were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome of the study was the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01912716, and enrolment is complete.
Findings
Between July 9, 2013, and March 22, 2018, 1037 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either standard-dose (n=515) or high-dose indometacin (n=522). Pancreatitis after ERCP occurred in 141 (14%) of 1037 patients—76 (15%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and 65 (12%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (risk ratio [RR] 1·19, 95% CI 0·87–1·61; p=0·32). We observed 19 adverse events that were potentially attributable to study drug. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 14 (1%) of 1037 patients—six (1%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and eight (2%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (p=0·79). Three (1%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group developed acute kidney injury versus none in the standard-dose group (p=0·25). A non-ST elevation myocardial infarction occurred in the standard-dose indometacin group 2 days after ERCP. A transient ischaemic attack occurred in the high-dose indometacin group 5 days after ERCP. All 19 adverse events, in addition to the 141 patients who developed pancreatitis after ERCP, were considered serious as all required admission to hospital. We observed no allergic reactions or deaths at 30 day follow-up.
Interpretation
Dose escalation to rectal indometacin 200 mg did not confer any advantage compared with the standard 100 mg regimen, with pancreatitis incidence remaining high in high-risk patients. Current practice should continue unchanged. Further research should consider the pharmacokinetics of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to determine the optimal timing of their administration to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP
The new kid on the block for advanced imaging in Barrett’s esophagus: a review of volumetric laser endomicroscopy
Advanced imaging techniques used in the management of Barrett’s esophagus include electronic imaging enhancement (e.g. narrow band imaging, flexible spectral imaging color enhancement, and i-Scan), chromoendoscopy, and confocal laser endomicroscopy. Electronic imaging enhancement is used frequently in daily practice, but use of the other advanced technologies is not routine. High-definition white light endoscopy and random four quadrant biopsy remain the standard of care for evaluation of Barrett’s esophagus; this is largely due to the value of advanced imaging technologies not having been validated in large studies or in everyday practice. A new advanced imaging technology called volumetric laser endomicroscopy is commercially available in the United States. Its ease of use and rapid acquisition of high-resolution images make this technology very promising for widespread application. In this article we review the technology and its potential for advanced imaging in Barrett’s esophagus
Not every cyst is an intraductal papillary mucosal neoplasm: a case of intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasm
Real-Time Intraductal Confocal Microscopy During ERCP: Feasibility and Technical Considerations
The location of obstruction predicts stent occlusion in malignant gastric outlet obstruction
Background: Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) can occur with locally invasive or metastatic cancer involving the upper gastrointestinal tract at the pylorus or the duodenum. Endoscopic management with self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) is often the preferred palliative approach. Stent occlusion is a common reason for failure and reintervention. We set out to determine whether the location of the malignant obstruction is associated with the angulation of the stent and can predict stent occlusion. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent successful duodenal stenting with SEMS for malignant GOO between 2006 and 2015 at a large advanced endoscopy referral center. We determined the location of obstruction, the stent angle, and the rate of technical and clinical success of stent placement. We then identified cases of subsequent stent occlusion confirmed by endoscopic evaluation. Results: A total of 100 consecutive patients were included in the study; 91 of these patients had enough data to evaluate SEMS occlusion. A total of 21 patients (23%) developed stent occlusion with a median time of 39 days. The risk of occlusion sequentially increased as the obstruction occurred more distally from the antrum to the third or fourth portion of the duodenum ( p = 0.006). This relationship was maintained after controlling for stent angle ( p = 0.05). Conclusions: A distal location of malignant GOO was strongly predictive of stent occlusion, independent of stent angle. This may be due to longer and more complex distal obstructions, along with foreshortening of the stent during placement and tumor infiltration. If replicated, these results will have implications for endoscopic practice and future device development