Manatsathit, Wuttiporn

AbstractBackground and AimBleeding from gastric varices is a catastrophic event and poses difficulty in management. The efficacy and safety of cyanoacrylate injection remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the effect of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection in the management of gastric varices.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus databases, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through November 2020 and manually reviewed the literature. Trial‐specific risk ratios (RRs) were estimated and pooled using random‐effect model meta‐analysis.ResultsWe included seven randomized controlled trials (six for secondary prophylaxis and one for primary prophylaxis) at low risk of bias in which 126 deaths were reported among 583 patients with gastric varices. All studies reported the use of N‐butyl‐2‐cyanoacrylate glue. Cyanoacrylate use was associated with significantly lower all‐cause mortality (RR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36–0.98; I2 = 41%) and rebleeding rate after hemostasis (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35–0.68, I2 = 0%) compared with any other treatment approach not involving cyanoacrylate. When cyanoacrylate was compared with each individual treatment approach (propranolol only, band ligation, sclerotherapy with alcohol or ethanolamine), data comprised sparse limited comparative conclusions. The use of cyanoacrylate injection was not associated with an increase in serious adverse events. The quality of evidence is moderate, graded down due to the small number of events and wide CIs.ConclusionThe use of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection therapy for gastric varices may be associated with lower all‐cause mortality and better hemostasis compared with other therapies.

Background/Objectives: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is the most common chronic bacterial infection. Patients with H. pylori infection may be at an increased risk of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) because of chronic inflammation and insulin resistance. Several epidemiologic studies attempting to determine this risk have yielded inconsistent results. This meta-analysis was conducted with the aims to summarize all available evidence and estimate the risk of NAFLD in patients with H. pylori infection. Methods: A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE database from inception to June 2016. Studies that reported relative risks, odd ratios, or hazard ratios comparing the risk of NAFLD among patients with H. pylori infection versus without H. pylori infection were included. Pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method. Results: Six studies met our eligibility criteria and were included in this analysis. We found a statistically significant increased risk of NAFLD among patients with H. pylori infection with the pooled odds ratios of 1.21 (95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.37). The statistical heterogeneity was low with an I 2 of 49%. Conclusions: A significantly increased risk of NAFLD among patients with H. pylori infection was demonstrated in this meta-analysis. Further studies are required to clarify how this risk should be addressed in clinical practice.

Background/objectives Gallstone disease and its complications are common, particularly in Western populations. Recent studies have reported a significantly increased risk of gallstones among hepatitis C virus-infected patients. However, the data on patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are still limited. This meta-analysis was carried out with the aim of summarizing all available evidence. Patients and methods A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and the EMBASE database from inception to May 2016. Studies that reported relative risks, odd ratios, or hazard ratios comparing the risk of gallstones among HBV-infected patients versus patients without HBV infection were included. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse-variance method. Results Nine studies fulfilled our eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. We found no significant association between HBV infection and the risk of gallstones, with a pooled OR of 1.10 (95% CI, 0.91–1.33). The statistical heterogeneity was moderate, with an I 2 of 69%. Subgroup analysis was carried out. The pooled OR of cross-sectional studies was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.91–1.12; I 2 0%), whereas the pooled OR of case–control studies was 1.53 (95% CI, 0.85–2.74; I 2 80%). Conclusion A significant association between HBV infection and the risk of gallstones was not observed in this study.