Khan, Shahab R.

Abstract EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by I 2 statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%–95.9%; I 2 = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%–92.2%; I 2 = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%–28.5%; I 2 = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%–8.1%; I 2 = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%–15.8%; I 2 = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%–5.7%; I 2 = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%–5.4%; I 2 = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%–21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%–94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%–97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.

Abstract Background and study aims Hemospray (TC-325) is a mineral powder with adsorptive properties designed for use in various gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) scenarios. We conducted a systematic review & meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TC-325 to standard endoscopic therapy (SET) for non-variceal GIB (NVGIB). Methods Multiple databases were searched through October 2022. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to determine pooled relative risk (RR) and proportions with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for primary hemostasis, hemostasis failure, 30-day rebleeding, length of stay (LOS), and need for rescue interventions. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2%. Results Five RCTs with 362 patients (TC-325 178, SET 184) – 123 females and 239 males with a mean age 65 ± 16 years). The most common etiologies were peptic ulcer disease (48 %), malignancies (35 %), and others (17 %). Bleeding was characterized as Forrest IA (7 %), IB (73 %), IIA (3 %), and IIB (1 %). SET included epinephrine injection, electrocautery, hemoclips, or a combination. No statistical difference in primary hemostasis between TC-325 compared to SET, RR 1.09 (CI 0.95–1.25; I2 43), P = 0.2, including patients with oozing/spurting hemorrhage, RR 1.13 (CI 0.98–1.3; I2 35), P = 0.08. Failure to achieve hemostasis was higher in SET compared to TC-325, RR 0.30 (CI 0.12–0.77, I2 0), P = 0.01, including patients with oozing/spurting hemorrhage, RR 0.24 (CI 0.09 – 0.63, I2 0), P = 0.004. We found no difference between the two interventions in terms of rebleeding, RR 1.13 (CI 0.62–2.07, I2 26), P = 0.8 and LOS, standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.27 (CI, –0.20–0.74; I2 62), P = 0.3. Finally, pooled rate of rescue interventions (angiography) was statistically higher in SET compared to TC-325, RR 0.68 (CI 0.5–0.94; I2 0), P = 0.02. Conclusions Our analysis shows that for acute NV GIB, including oozing/spurting hemorrhage, TC-325 does not result in higher rates of primary hemostasis compared to SET. However, lower rates of failures were seen with TC-325 than SET. In addition, there was no difference in the two modalities when comparing rates of rebleeding and LOS.

ABSTRACT EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has gained momentum in recent years, especially with availability of newer needle designs. Given the emerging comparative data on EUS-LB with second-generation needles and percutaneous LB (PC-LB), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the two techniques. We searched multiple databases from inception through November 2021 to identify studies comparing outcomes of EUS-LB and PC-LB. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and the results were expressed in terms of pooled proportions and odds ratio (OR) along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies with 748 patients were included in the final analysis. EUS-LB was performed in 276 patients and PC-LB in 472 patients. Across all studies, PC-LB had an overall higher diagnostic accuracy than EUS-LB, 98.6% confidence interval (CI: 94.7–99.7) versus 88.3% (49.6–98.3), OR: 1.65, P = 0.04. On assessing data from randomized controlled trials, there was no difference between the two. While pooled diagnostic adequacy and overall adverse events were not significantly different between PC-LB and EUS-LB, the former was superior in terms of the mean number of complete portal tracts (CPT) and total specimen length. PC-LB and EUS-LB produce similar results. PC-LB allows obtaining longer samples and more CPT. Further studies are needed to see if these trends hold up as more providers begin to perform EUS-LB.

Abstract Background Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic progressive condition that is complicated by intestinal or colonic stricture in nearly 30% of cases within 10 years of the initial diagnosis. Endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) is associated with a risk of perforations and recurrence rates of up to 60% at 5 years. Endoscopic stenting has been used as an alternative to EBD, but data on its safety and efficacy are limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcomes of endoscopic stenting in CD-related strictures. Methods A systematic and detailed search was run in January 2022 with the assistance of a medical librarian for studies reporting on outcomes of endoscopic stenting in CD-related strictures. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model, and results were expressed in terms of pooled proportions along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Nine studies with 163 patients were included in the final analysis. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) including both partial and fully covered were used in 7 studies, whereas biodegradable stents were used in 2 studies. Pooled rate of clinical success and technical success was 60.9% (95% CI, 51.6-69.5; I2 = 13%) and 93% (95% CI, 87.3-96.3; I2 = 0%), respectively. Repeat stenting was needed in 9.6% of patients (95% CI, 5.3-16.7; I2 = 0%), whereas pooled rate of spontaneous stent migration was 43.9% (95% CI, 11.4-82.7; I2 = 88%). Pooled incidence of overall adverse events, proximal stent migration, perforation, and abdominal pain were 15.7%, 6.4%, 2.7%, and 17.9%, respectively. Mean follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 69 months. Discussion Endoscopic stenting in CD-related strictures is a safe technique that can be performed with technical ease, albeit with a limited clinical success. Postprocedure abdominal pain and proximal stent migration are some of the common adverse events reported.

Abstract Background and study aims Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a precursor condition to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), resulting in transformation of the squamous epithelium of distal esophagus to columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia (IM). Liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy (LNSC) is a non-contact method of BE eradication and has been used both as primary and salvage therapy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of LNSC. Methods We searched multiple databases from inception through December 2021 to identify studies on use of LNSC for Barrett’s neoplasia. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects model and results were expressed in terms of pooled proportions with relevant 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) of complete eradication (CE) of dysplasia(D), high grade dysplasia (HGD) and IM. Results Fourteen studies with 707 patients were included in our final analysis. Overall pooled rates of CE-D, CE-HGD and CE-IM were 80.8 % (CI 77.4–83.8; I2 62), 90.3 % (CI 85.2–93.7; I2 33) and 55.8 % (CI 51.7–59.8; I2 73) with follow up ranging from 4.25 months to 69.7 months. In patients with follow up beyond 24 months, the rates of CE-D and CE-IM were 83.6 % (CI 77.6–88.2; I2 60) and 54.7 % (CI 47.6–61.6; I2 81). Among LNSC naïve patients with prior history of endoscopic resection, the rates were 79.9 % (CI 73.3–85.2; I2 50) and 67.1 % (CI 59.5–73.8; I2 0). Pooled rate of therapeutic failures, defined as lack of response to LNSC therapy, was 23.6 % (CI 19.4–28.3; I2 73). Post LNSC strictures and perforation pooled rates were 4 % and 0.8 %, respectively, which are similar to those previously reported for RFA. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy is an acceptable treatment for BE in both ablation naïve and experienced patients.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and guaiac-based fecal occult blood (gFOBT) are associated with a substantial reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate colonoscopy-related adverse events in individuals with a positive FIT or gFOBT. METHODS: A systematic and detailed search was run in January 2021, with the assistance of a medical librarian for studies reporting on colonoscopy-related adverse events as part of organized CRC screening programs. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, and the results were expressed for pooled proportions along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 771,730 colonoscopies were performed in patients undergoing CRC screening using either gFOBT or FIT across 31 studies. The overall pooled incidence of severe adverse events in the entire patient cohort was 0.42% (CI 0.20–0.64); I 2 = 38.76%. In patients with abnormal gFOBT, the incidence was 0.2% (CI 0.1–0.3); I 2 = 24.6%, and in patients with a positive FIT, it was 0.4% (CI 0.2–0.7); I 2 = 48.89%. The overall pooled incidence of perforation, bleeding, and death was 0.13% (CI 0.09–0.21); I 2 = 22.84%, 0.3% (CI 0.2–0.4); I 2 = 35.58%, and 0.01% (CI 0.00–0.01); I 2 = 33.21%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Our analysis shows that in colonoscopies performed after abnormal stool-based testing, the overall risk of severe adverse events, perforation, bleeding, and death is minimal.