Search

Objective: We aimed to assess the hospital frailty risk score on the inpatient mortality, morbidity, and health care resource utilization among endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related hospitalizations., Background: Data regarding the inpatient mortality, morbidity, and health care resource utilization of ERCP among frail individuals remain limited., Materials and Methods: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we compared the odds of inpatient mortality and morbidity of ERCP-related hospitalizations among individuals with low frailty scores, intermediate frailty scores (IFSs), and high frailty scores (HFSs)., Results: Overall, 776,025 ERCP-related hospitalizations were recorded from 2016 to 2020. 552,045 had a low frailty score, whereas 217,875 had an IFS, and 6105 had an HFS. Frail individuals had a 5-fold increase in mortality [IFS: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.81, 95% CI: 3.77-6.14; HFS: aOR = 4.62, 95% CI: 2.48-8.63]. An IFS was associated with a 24% increase in post-ERCP pancreatitis (aOR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.11-1.41), a 3-fold increase in post-ERCP bleeding (aOR = 2.59, 95% CI: 1.82-3.67), and a 2-fold increase in post-ERCP duct perforation (aOR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.38-2.64). Frail individuals experienced higher odds of in-hospital morbidity, including secondary sepsis, respiratory failure, acute kidney injury, cerebrovascular accidents, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism., Conclusions: In summary, our study presents strong evidence in support of using the hospital frailty risk score as an index to predict mortality and morbidity during ERCP-related hospitalizations. Additional caution is warranted in the management of frail individuals undergoing ERCP., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Biliary drainage is vital in managing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Suprapapillary stenting has emerged as a viable alternative to transpapillary stenting and is performed using inside plastic (iPS) or metal stents (iMS). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the outcomes of suprapapillary stent placement for MBO., Methods: The Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to include all studies published before September 31, 2023, that reported on the outcomes of suprapapillary stents placed for MBO. Using the random-effect model, the pooled, weight-adjusted event rate estimate for the clinical outcomes was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Twenty-eight studies were included, with a total of 1401 patients. The pooled clinical success rate was 98.9%. A subgroup analysis yielded non-significant differences between the iPS and iMS groups (99.3% vs. 98.6%, respectively; P = 0.44). The pooled incidence rate of adverse events (AE) with suprapapillary stents was 9.5%. In a subgroup analysis, the incidence of AEs with iPS was 10.7% compared to 9% in the iMS group without a statistical difference (P = 0.32). The most common adverse event was cholangitis (2.2%), followed by pancreatitis (1.1%), cholecystitis (0.5%), and bleeding (0.12%)., Conclusion: When technically feasible, suprapapillary stenting for MBO is a viable endoscopic option with a high clinical success rate and acceptable adverse event rates. Both iPS and iMS exhibit similar efficacy., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background/Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as an alternative option for biliary drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS. In this comprehensive meta-analysis, we aim to study the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS in cases of failed conventional ERCP. Methods: Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS. Using the random effect model, the pooled weight-adjusted event rate estimate for clinical outcomes in each group were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success rates. Secondary outcomes included overall adverse events (AEs), rates of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and rates or re-intervention. Results: Our analysis included 70 studies, with a total of 3527 patients. The pooled technical and clinical success rates for EUS-HGS were 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I 2 = 40%) and 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I 2 = 40%), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of AEs with EUS-HGS was 14.9% (95% CI, 12.7-17.1), with bile leakage being the most common (2.4% [95% CI, 1.7-3.2]). The pooled incidence of RBO was 15.8% [95% CI, 12.2-19.4], with a high success rate for re-intervention (97.5% [95% CI, 94.7-100]). Conclusions: Our analysis showed high technical and clinical success rates of EUS-HGS, making it a feasible and effective alternative to ERCP. The ongoing development of dedicated devices and techniques is expected to make EUS-HGS more accessible and safer for patients in need of biliary drainage.

Objectives: Colorectal canceris the third most common cancer worldwide, and kidney transplant patients have up to a 2.5-fold increased risk of colorectal cancer compared with the general population. Presently, colorectal cancer screening recommendations in kidney transplant candidates are the same as for the general population. We explored the literature on the prevalence of colonic polyps in patients with renal failure undergoing screening colonoscopy as part of kidney transplant evaluation., Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception through June 2023 to identify studies that explored the prevalence of colonic polyps in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing a screening colonoscopy as part of their pretransplant evaluation., Results: Of 937 patients, 371 had ≥1 polyp on their screening colonoscopy (39.6%; 95% CI, 29.3%-50.3%), 243 patients had ≥1 adenoma (25.9%; 95% CI, 14.3%- 39.6%), and 75 had ≥1 high-risk adenoma (8.7%; 95% CI, 6.9%-10.7%). Pooled analysis of the 2 studies comparing patients with end-stage renal disease versus matched control groups indicated higher pooled prevalence of adenomas in the end-stage renal disease group (33.4%) versus the control group (23.9%)., Conclusions: Our results suggest an average or increased prevalence of polyps and adenomatous polyps in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing colonoscopy during evaluation for kidney transplant. The pooled analysis of the studies comparing the end-stage renal disease population versus a matched control group indicates higher prevalence of adenomatous polyps in patients with end-stage renal disease. Multiple studies have shown that screening colonoscopy in this patient group is safe and does not delay kidney transplant evaluation or waitlistrates; hence, screening colonoscopy should be routinely considered.

Video 1Pancreatico-colonic fistula closure., Competing Interests: The authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication., (© 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Video 1Over-the-scope clip to the rescue: solution for duodenal perforation from migrated biliary stent., (© 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) is rising. Left-sided colorectal cancer (LCC) is associated with better survival compared to right-sided colon cancer (RCC) in metastatic disease. NCCN guidelines recommend the addition of EGFR inhibitors to KRAS/NRAS WT metastatic CRC originating from the left only. Whether laterality impacts survival in locoregional disease and EOCRC is of interest., Methods: 65,940 CRC cases from the National VA Cancer Cube Registry (2001-2015) were studied. EOCRC (2096 cases) was defined as CRC diagnosed at <50 years. Using ICD codes, RCC was defined from the cecum to the hepatic flexure (C18.0-C18.3), and LCC from the splenic flexure to the rectum (C18.5-18.7; C19 and C20)., Results: EOCRC is more likely to originate from the left side (66.65% LCC in EOCRC vs. 58.77% in CRC). Overall, LCC has better 5-year Overall Survival (OS) than RCC in stages I (61.67% vs. 58.01%) and III (46.1% vs. 42.1%) and better 1-year OS in stage IV (57.79% vs. 49.49%). Stage II RCC has better 5-year OS than LCC (53.39% vs. 49.28%). In EOCRC, there is no statistically significant difference between LCC and RCC in stages I-III. Stage IV EOCRC patients with LCC and RCC have a 1-year OS of 73.23% and 59.84%, respectively., Conclusion: In EOCRC, LCC is associated with better OS than RCC only stage IV. In the overall population, LCC is associated with better OS in all stages except stage II. The better prognosis of stage II RCC might be due to the high incidence of mismatch repair deficient tumors in this subpopulation., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Screening colonoscopy aims to interrupt the adenoma-carcinoma sequence by removing all precancerous adenomatous polyps. Adenomatous polyp detection rate (ADR) can vary between endoscopists as well as between race, age, and risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to compare ADR among academic gastroenterologists (A-GI), non-A-GI, and surgeons for endoscopies performed in the same endoscopic suite of a large medical center with a predominately African American (AA) population., Methods: All screening colonoscopies performed in 2014 for patients aged 62-76 years were identified using the electronic medical records data. Patients with average risk and high risk of CRC defined as having a 'personal history of polyps' or 'family history of CRC', and history of ulcerative colitis and Fecal Occult Blood Test/Fecal Immunochemical Test (FOBT/FIT) positivity were included. Patients with incomplete colonoscopy (defined as failing to achieve cecal intubation or poor preparation) and unrecovered tissue biopsy were excluded. ADR was calculated for three groups of endoscopists: A-GIs, non-A-GIs, and surgeons., Results: A total of 573 screening colonoscopies was analyzed. The endoscopists comprised five A-GIs, eight non-A-GIs, and six surgeons. The majority of patients were of AA decent (71%), female (54%) with an average age of 66 years. Patients classified as average risk comprised 79% of the population. Most of the colonoscopies were performed by A-GI (n=339), followed by non-A-GI (n=144), and surgeons (n=90). The ADR for A-GI was 50% as compared to 32% for non-A-GI (p<0.001) and 25% for surgeons (p<0.001). Also, A-GI were more likely to identify ≥3 adenomas during screening colonoscopies. Significant differences were observed (p<0.001) in the mean time of colonoscopy for A-GI (30 mins) non-A-G (14 mins), and surgeons (18 mins)., Conclusion: Significant variation in the ADR between endoscopists belonging to different specialties were observed. Although all appear to achieve acceptable ADR (ie at least 25 for men and 15 for women), academic gastroenterologists had better performance than non-academic GI and surgeons. This may be explained by a significantly longer average duration of procedures for the highest ADR group., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2019, Kundumadam et al.)