Chandan, Saurabh

Background and Aim: Extrahepatic unresectable cholangiocarcinoma carries a dismal prognosis. In addition to biliary drainage by stent placement; photodynamic therapy (PDT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been tried to prolong survival. In this meta-analysis, we appraise the current known data on the use of PDT, RFA in the palliative treatment of extrahepatic unresectable cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2020 to identify studies that reported on PDT and RFA. Pooled rates of survival, stent patency, 30-, 90-day mortality, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I 2% and 95% prediction interval. Results: A total of 55 studies (2146 patients) were included. A total of 1149 patients underwent treatment with PDT (33 studies), 545 with RFA (22 studies), and 452 patients with stent-only strategy. The pooled survival rate with PDT, RFA, and stent-only groups was 11.9 [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-13.1] months, 8.1 (95% CI: 6.4-9.9) months, and 6.7 (95% CI: 4.9-8.4) months, respectively. The pooled time of stent patency with PDT, RFA, and stent-only groups was 6.1 (95% CI: 4.2-8) months, 5.5 (95% CI: 4.2-6.7) months, and 4.7 (95% CI: 2.6-6.7) months, respectively. The pooled rate of 30-day mortality with PDT was 3.3% (95% CI: 1.6%-6.7%), with RFA was 7% (95% CI: 4.1%-11.7%) and with stent-only was 4.9% (95% CI: 1.7%-13.1%). The pooled rate of 90-day mortality with PDT was 10.4% (95% CI: 5.4%-19.2%) and with RFA was 16.3% (95% CI: 8.7%-28.6%). Conclusion: PDT seemed to demonstrate better overall survival and 30-day mortality rates than RFA and/or stent-only palliation.

Abtract Background and study aims Endoscopic and surgical techniques have been utilized for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Enteral stenting (ES) is an established technique with high clinical success and low morbidity rate. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel approach that aims to provide sustained palliation of GOO. We conducted a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness in terms of clinical and technical success, as well as the safety profile of EUS-GE and ES. Methods We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2020 to identify studies that reported on safety and effectiveness of EUS-GE in comparison to ES. Pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I2% and 95 % confidence interval. Results Five studies including 659 patients were included in our final analysis. Pooled rate of technical and clinical success for EUS-GE was 95.2 % (CI 87.2-.98.3, I2 = 42) and 93.3 % (CI 84.4–97.3, I2 = 59) while for ES it was 96.9 % (CI 90.9–99, I2 = 64) and 85.6 % (CI 73–92.9, I2 = 85), respectively. Pooled rate of re-intervention was significantly lower with EUS-GE i. e. 4 % (CI 1.8–8.7, I2 = 35) compared to ES, where it was 23.6 % (CI 17.5–31, I2 = 35), p = 0.001. Pooled rates of overall and major AEs were comparable between the two techniques. Conclusion EUS-GE is comparable in terms of technical and clinical effectiveness and has a similar safety profile when compared to ES for palliation of GOO.

Abstract Background Data on efficacy of hepatitis-B vaccine (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. Our aim was to review the literature and perform meta-analysis of available studies to quantify efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2020) to identify studies evaluating efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Random effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2 percentage values were used to assess the heterogeneity. Results A total of 14 studies (2375 patients) were included. Four data sets were available from 2 studies that compared HBV response in patients with IBD against healthy controls. The pooled odds ratio of HBV response in IBD patients was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05–0.33, P = 0.001). The pooled proportion of adequate immune response (AIR) was 64% (95% CI, 55–72.1, P = 0.003) from 13 data sets, and effective immune response (EIR) was 39.7% (95% CI, 30.7–49.5, P = 0.04) from 10 data sets. Conclusion Patients with IBD on immunosuppression demonstrated significantly reduced HBV response as compared with general population.

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has limitations of inadequate sampling and false-negative results for malignancy. It has been performed using conventional smear (CS) cytology with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) with reasonable diagnostic accuracy. An alternative to ROSE is liquid-based cytology (LBC). Commonly used LBC techniques include precipitation-based (SurePath™) and filtration-based (ThinPrep®, CellPrep®). Data regarding the diagnostic efficacy of LBC compared with CS are limited. Methods Multiple databases were searched through March 2020 to identify studies reporting diagnostic yield of EUS-guided CS and LBC in pancreatic lesions. Pooled diagnostic odds and rates of performance for the cytologic diagnoses of benign, suspicious, and malignant lesions were calculated. Diagnostic efficacy was evaluated by pooled rates of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Results Nine studies with a total of 1308 patients were included in our final analysis. Pooled diagnostic odds of CS cytology were 1.69 (CI 1.02–2.79) and 0.39 (CI 0.19–0.8) for malignant lesions when compared to filtration-based and precipitation-based LBC techniques, respectively. For CS, precipitation-based and filtration-based LBC, pooled diagnostic accuracy was 79.7 %, 85.2 %, 77.3 %, sensitivity was 79.2 %, 83.6 %, 68.3 %, and specificity was 99.4 %, 99.5 %, 99.5 %, respectively. Conclusions The precipitation-based LBC technique (SurePath™) had superior diagnostic odds for malignant pancreatic lesions compared with CS cytology in the absence of ROSE. It showed superior accuracy and sensitivity, but comparable specificity and PPV. Diagnostic odds of CS cytology in the absence of ROSE were superior to the filtration-based LBC technique (ThinPrep®, Cellprep®) for diagnosing malignant pancreatic lesions.

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a minimal-invasive therapeutic option to surgery and in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). The aim of this review was to quantitatively appraise the clinical outcomes of EUS-PDD by meta-analysis methods. Methods We searched multiple databases from inception through March 2020 to identify studies that reported on EUS-PDD. Pooled rates of technical success, successful drainage of pancreatic duct, clinical success, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I2% and 95 % prediction interval. Results A total of 22 studies (714 patients) were included. The pooled rate of technical success in EUS-PDD was 84.8 % (95 % CI 79.1–89.2). The pooled rate of successful PD drained by EUS-PDD was 77.5 % (95 % CI 63.1–87.4). The pooled rate of clinical success of EUS-PDD was 89.2 % (95 % CI 82.1–93.7). The pooled rate of all adverse events was 18.1 % (95 % CI 14.2–22.9). On sub-group analysis, the pooled technical success and clinical success of EUS-PDD from Japanese data were considerably superior (91.2 %, 83–95.6 & 92.5 %, 83.9–96.7, respectively). The pooled rate of post EUS-PDD acute pancreatitis was 6.6 % (95 % CI 4.5–9.4), bleeding was 4.1 % (95 % CI 2.7–6.2), perforation and/or pneumoperitoneum was 3.1 % (95 % CI 1.9–5), pancreatic leak and/or pancreatic fluid collection was 2.3 % (95 % CI 1.4–4), and infection was 2.8 % (95 % CI 1.7–4.6). Conclusion EUS-PDD demonstrates high technical success and clinical success rates with acceptable adverse events. Technical success was especially high for anastomotic strictures.

Background and AimsColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cause of cancer worldwide. Studies have shown a strong association between screening colonoscopy and a reduced risk of death from colorectal cancers. The incidence of poor bowel preparation has been reported in up to 25% cases. We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive meta‐analysis to evaluate the effect of patient education using multimedia platforms on adenoma detection rate and adequacy of bowel preparation.MethodsMultiple databases were searched through May 2020 for studies that reported the efficacy of multimedia education (smartphone app and online audio‐visual aids) in improving quality of bowel preparation and its effect on adenoma detection rate (ADR). Meta‐analysis was performed to determine whether multimedia based patient education (MM) helps improve ADR and bowel preparation quality as compared to controls (CT).ResultsWe included 13 randomized controlled trials with a total of 3754 patients. Eight studies reported outcomes on ADR and 12 reported on adequacy of bowel preparation. Overall ADR was higher in patients receiving multimedia based education as compared to CT (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.56, P = 0.04). A higher proportion of patients receiving multimedia based education achieved adequate bowel preparation (RR 1.2, CI 1.1–1.3, P = 0.001). In patients with mean age over 50 years, ADR was better in MM cohort as compared to controls (RR 1.3, CI 1.1–1.6, P = 0.001).ConclusionPre‐colonoscopy patient education using multimedia based platforms seems to improve ADR and the adequacy of bowel preparation.