Chandan, Saurabh

AbstractEndoluminal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a palliative treatment for patients suffering from malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of RFA on stent patency, patient survival, and adverse events.Major databases were searched through December 2023 for patients who had undergone stenting with or without RFA for extrahepatic MBO. A random-effects model was used for analysis, with results expressed as relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95%CIs.Nine RCTs involving 750 subjects with MBO (374 RFA plus stent vs. 376 stent only) were included. Meta-analysis revealed similar risks of stent patency at 3 months (RR 1.01, 95%CI 0.92–1.11; I 2 = 4%) for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only. Meta-analysis showed improved survival at 6 months (RR 0.84, 95%CI 0.73–0.96; I 2 = 21%; P = 0.01) for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only. Subgroup analysis comparing plastic vs. uncovered metal stents showed that stent patency was unaffected at 3 months (RR 1.06, 95%CI 0.91–1.23; I 2 = 17%). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with cholangiocarcinoma experienced an overall survival benefit with RFA plus stenting vs. stenting alone (P < 0.001); however, stent patency remained unaffected (P = 0.08). An increased incidence of cholecystitis was noted with RFA plus stenting vs. stenting alone (5.1% [95%CI 3.1%–7.8%] vs. 0.3% [95%CI 0.01%–1.5%], respectively).Combining endoluminal RFA and stenting may improve overall survival in patients with MBO. RFA did not significantly impact stent patency.

Abstract Background Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the treatment of choice for medically refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess outcomes and safety of endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD) for IPAA strictures. Methods A systematic search of numerous databases was performed through June 2023 to identify studies reporting on the outcomes of EBD in pouch-related strictures. Outcomes included technical success, clinical success at index dilation and in pouch retention, recurrence of symptoms post-EBD, and adverse events of EBD. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and results were expressed in terms of pooled rates along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran Q statistical test with I2 statistics. Results Seven studies with 504 patients were included. The pooled rate of technical success and clinical success of index dilatation was 98.9% (95% CI, 94.8-99.8%; I20%) and 30.2% (95% CI, 7.1-71%; I20%), respectively. The pooled rate of clinical success in pouch retention without the need for additional surgery was 81.4% (95% CI, 69.6-89.3%; I272%). The pooled failure rate of EBD was 18.6% (95% CI, 10.7-30.4%, I272%). The pooled rate of recurrence of symptoms after index dilatation was 58.9% (95% CI, 33.3-80.5%; I213%). The pooled rate of serious adverse events was 1.8% (95% CI, 1-3.5%, I20%). No deaths related to EBD were reported. Conclusions Endoscopic balloon dilatation is safe and highly effective for management of IPAA strictures. Additional studies are needed to compare its efficacy with surgical interventions.

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.

Summary Stag Beetle Knife (SB Knife) is increasingly being utilized for Zenker’s Diverticulectomy (ZD). Our study assessed the effectiveness and safety of the SB Knife for the management of ZD. Ovid EBM reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify studies that utilized SB knife for ZD. Pooled proportions (PP) were calculated using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 statistics. A total of 7 studies with 268 patients were included in the final analysis. Dysphagia and regurgitation were the most common clinical symptoms. The mean size of the ZD was 2.8 ± 0.7 cm and 28 (of 148) patients had undergone previous treatments. The PP of technical success was 98% (95% CI: 92.3–99.5; I20) with a mean procedure duration of 26.2 ± 8.3 minutes. The PP of clinical response at first follow-up and relapse after index procedure was 87.9% (95% CI: 81.6–92.3; I219) and 13.5% (95% CI: 9.6–18.6; I22), respectively. At final follow-up, the PP of clinical remission was 96.2% (95% CI: 91–98.4; I230.6) while the PP of procedure failure was 3.6% (95% CI: 1.6–8.1; I20). No severe adverse events (AEs) were noted while using the SB Knife. However, the PP of intraprocedural and postprocedural AEs was 13.2% (95% CI: 9.6–17.8; I20) and 9.3% (95% CI: 5.7–14.9; I2 &lt; 20.9), respectively. SB Knife is highly safe and effective for Zenker’s Diverticulectomy with a failure rate of only 3.6%.

Introduction: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis studying the efficacy and safety of cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥10 mm. Methods: Multiple databases were searched until January 2023 for studies reporting outcomes of cold versus hot EMR for SSPs ≥10 mm. The primary outcome was the residual SSP rate. Secondary outcomes included technical success rate, R0 resection rate, and adverse events. We used standard meta-analysis methods using the random-effects model, and I 2% was used to assess heterogeneity. Results: Thirteen studies were included in the final analysis. In all, 1896 SSPs were included with a mean polyp size of 23.7 mm (range, 15.9 to 33). A total of 1452 SSPs were followed up for a median follow-up duration of 15.3 months (range, 6 to 37). The pooled residual SSP rate for cold EMR was 4.5% (95% CI: 1.0-17.4), and 5.1% (95% CI: 2.4-10.4) for hot EMR (P=0.9). The pooled rates of technical success, R0 resection, immediate bleeding, and perforation were comparable. Hot EMR was significantly associated with lower piecemeal resection (59.2% vs. 99.3%, P<0.001), higher en-bloc resection (41.4% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001), and delayed bleeding rate (4% vs. 0.7%, P=0.05) compared to cold EMR. Conclusions: Cold EMR has similar efficacy compared to hot EMR for resection of SSP ≥ 10 mm, despite limitations in piecemeal R0 resection rate reporting. Although hot EMR was associated with a higher rate of en-bloc resection, it also showed an increased risk of delayed bleeding compared to cold EMR.

Introduction: There is an increasing interest in cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR), and studies have shown its safety and efficacy for colonic polyps. This meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of CS-EMR for the removal of duodenal adenomas. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of several databases, from inception through February 2023, for studies that addressed outcomes of CS-EMR for nonampullary duodenal adenomas. We used the random-effects model for the statistical analysis. The weighted pooled rates were used to summarize the technical success, polyp recurrence, bleeding, and perforation events. Cochran Q test and I 2 statistics adjudicated heterogeneity. Results: Six studies were included in the analysis. In all, 178 duodenal polyps were resected using CS-EMR. The pooled rates were 95.8% (95% CI 89.1–98.5%, I 2=21.5%) for technical success and 21.2% (95% CI 8.5–43.6%, I 2=78%) for polyp recurrence. With regards to CS-EMR safety, the pooled rates were 4.2% (95% CI 1.6–10.5%, I 2=12%) for immediate bleeding, 3.4% (95% CI 1.5–7.6%, I 2=0%) for delayed bleeding, 2.8% (95% CI 1.1–6.7%, I 2=0%) for perforation, and 2% (95% CL 0.5–7.5%, I 2=0%) for post-polypectomy syndrome. Rates were not significantly different for large adenomas. Three studies reported data on CS-EMR and conventional EMR. Compared with conventional EMR, CS-EMR had lower odds of delayed bleeding, OR 0.11 (CI 0.02–0.62, P value 0.012, I 2=0%). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that CS-EMR is a safe and effective strategy for the resection of nonampullary duodenal adenomas, with an acceptable recurrence rate. Data from larger randomized controlled studies are needed to validate our findings.

Background: There is limited data on Vedolizumab utilization in elderly patients. Our study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of Vedolizumab in this subset population. Materials and Methods: Databases including Cochrane Central, Embase, Medline (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science were searched in August 2022 to identify studies that assessed Vedolizumab therapy in elderly patients. Pooled proportion and risk ratios (RR) were calculated. Results: Total 11 studies with 3546 IBD patients (1314 elderly and 2232 young) were included in the final analysis. Pooled rate of overall and serious infections in the elderly cohort was 8.45% (95% CI=6.27-11.29; I223%) and 2.59% (95% CI=0.78-8.29; I276%), respectively. However, there was no difference in overall infection rates between elderly and young patients. Pooled rate of endoscopic, clinical, and steroid-free remission for elderly IBD patients was 38.45% (95% CI=20.74-59.56; I293%), 37.95% (95% CI=33.08-43.06; I213%), and 38.8% (95% CI=31.6-46.4; I277%), respectively. Elderly patients had lower steroid-free remission rates [RR 0.85, 95% CI=0.74-0.99; I20%, P=0.03]; however, there was no difference in rates of clinical (RR 0.86, 95% CI=0.72-1.03; I20%, P=0.10) or endoscopic remission (RR 1.06, 95% CI=0.83-1.35; I20%, P=0.63) compared with younger patients. Pooled rate of IBD-related surgery and IBD-related hospitalizations was 9.76% (95% CI=5.81-15.92; I278%) and 10.54% (95% CI=8.37-13.2; I20%), respectively for the elderly cohort. There was no statistical difference in IBD-related surgeries between elderly and young IBD patients, RR 1.20 (95% CI=0.79-1.84; I216%), P=0.4. Conclusions: Vedolizumab is equally safe and effective for clinical and endoscopic remission in elderly and younger populations.

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.