Search

Study Objective: Semaglutide is a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist used for management of type 2 diabetes and/or obesity. To test the hypothesis that perioperative semaglutide use is associated with delayed gastric emptying and increased residual gastric content (RGC) despite adequate preoperative fasting, we compared the RGC of patients who had and had not taken semaglutide prior to elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy. The primary outcome was the presence of increased RGC., Design: Single-center retrospective electronic chart review., Setting: Tertiary hospital., Patients: Patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy under deep sedation/general anesthesia between July/2021-March/2022., Interventions: Patients were divided into two (SG = semaglutide, NSG = non-semaglutide) groups, according to whether they had received semaglutide within 30 days prior to the esophagogastroduodenoscopy., Measurements: Increased RGC was defined as any amount of solid content, or > 0.8 mL/Kg (measured from the aspiration/suction canister) of fluid content., Main Results: Of the 886 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed, 404 (33 in the SG and 371 in the NSG) were included in the final analysis. Increased RGC was observed in 27 (6.7%) patients, being 8 (24.2%) in the SG and 19 (5.1%) in the NSG (p < 0.001). Semaglutide use [5.15 (95%CI 1.92-12.92)] and the presence of preoperative digestive symptoms (nausea/vomiting, dyspepsia, abdominal distension) [3.56 (95%CI 2.2-5.78)] were associated with increased RGC in the propensity weighted analysis. Conversely, a protective [0.25 (95%CI 0.16-0.39)] effect against increased RGC was observed in patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy combined with colonoscopy. In the SG, the mean time of preoperative semaglutide interruption in patients with and without increased RGC was 10.5 ± 5.5 and 10.2 ± 5.6 days, respectively (p = 0.54). There was no relationship between semaglutide use and the amount/volume of RGC found on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (p = 0.99). Only one case (in the SG) of pulmonary aspiration was reported., Conclusions: Semaglutide was associated with increased RGC in patients undergoing elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Digestive symptoms prior to esophagogastroduodenoscopy were also predictive of increased RGC., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Biliary drainage for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA) can be performed either by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD). To date there is no consensus about which method is preferred. Taking that into account, the aim of this study is to compare Endoscopic Biliary Drainage (EBD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma through a systematic review and metanalysis. A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed. Evaluated outcomes included technical success, clinical success, post drainage complications (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and major complications), crossover, hospital length stay, and seeding metastases. Data extracted from the studies were used to calculate Mean Differences (MD). Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 2284 patients (EBD = 1239, PTBD = 1045). Considering resectable PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated lower rates of crossover (RD = 0.29; 95% CI 0.07‒0.51; p = 0.009 I² = 90%), post-drainage complications (RD = 0.20; 95% CI 0.06‒0.33; p < 0.0001; I² = 78%), and post-drainage pancreatitis (RD = 0.10; 95% CI 0.05‒0.16; p < 0.0001; I² = 64%). The EBD group presented reduced length of hospital stay (RD = -2.89; 95% CI -3.35 ‒ -2,43; p < 0.00001; I² = 42%). Considering palliative PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated a higher clinical success (RD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.27 ‒ -0.11; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%) and less post-drainage cholangitis (RD = 0.08; 95% CI 0.01‒0.15; p = 0.02; I² = 48%) when compared to the EBD group. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding: technical success, post-drainage bleeding, major post-drainage complications, and seeding metastases., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest DTHM: BariaTek ‒ Advisory Board Member (Consulting fees). SASL: Recipient of the 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Endoscopic Training Award by the ASGE and Fujifilm. EGHM: Olympus ‒ Consultant (Consulting fees), Boston Scientific ‒ Consultant (Consulting fees)., (Copyright © 2022 HCFMUSP. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Brazil has rapidly developed the second-highest number of COVID-19 cases in the world. As such, proper symptom identification, including gastrointestinal manifestations, and relationship to health outcomes remains key. We aimed to assess the prevalence and impact of gastrointestinal symptoms associated with COVID-19 in a large quaternary referral center in South America., Methods: This was a single-center cohort study in a COVID-19 specific hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Consecutive adult patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 were included. Baseline patient history, presenting symptoms, laboratory results, and clinically relevant outcomes were recorded. Regression analyses were performed to determine significant predictors of the gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19 and hospitalization outcomes., Results: Four-hundred patients with COVID-19 were included. Of these, 33.25% of patients reported ≥1 gastrointestinal symptom. Diarrhea was the most common gastrointestinal symptom (17.25%). Patients with gastrointestinal symptoms had higher rates of concomitant constitutional symptoms, notably fatigue and myalgia (p<0.05). Gastrointestinal symptoms were also more prevalent among patients on chronic immunosuppressants, ACE/ARB medications, and patient with chronic kidney disease (p<0.05). Laboratory results, length of hospitalization, ICU admission, ICU length of stay, need for mechanical ventilation, vasopressor support, and in-hospital mortality did not differ based upon gastrointestinal symptoms (p>0.05). Regression analyses showed older age [OR 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02-1.06)], male gender [OR 1.94 (95% CI, 1.12-3.36)], and immunosuppression [OR 2.60 (95% CI, 1.20-5.63)], were associated with increased mortality., Conclusion: Based upon this Brazilian study, gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19 are common but do not appear to impact clinically relevant hospitalization outcomes including the need for ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or mortality.

Objectives: The present coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has ushered in an unprecedented era of quality control that has necessitated advanced safety precautions and the need to ensure the adequate protection of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Endoscopy units, endoscopists, and other HCP may be at a significant risk for transmission of the virus. Given the immense burden on the healthcare system and surge in the number of patients with COVID-19, well-designed protocols and recommendations are needed. We aimed to systematically characterize our approach to endoscopic procedures in a quaternary university hospital setting and provide summary protocol recommendations., Method: This descriptive study details a COVID-19-specific protocol designed to minimize infection risks to patients and healthcare workers in the endoscopy unit., Results: Our institution, located in São Paulo, Brazil, includes a 900-bed hospital, with a 200-bed-specific intensive care unit exclusively designed for patients with moderate and severe COVID-19. We highlighted recommendations for infection prevention and control during endoscopic procedures, including appropriate triage and screening, outpatient management and procedural recommendations, role and usage of personal protective equipment (PPE), and role and procedural logistics involving COVID-19-positive patients. We also detailed hospital protocols for reprocessing endoscopes and cleaning rooms and also provided recommendations to minimize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission., Conclusion: This COVID-19-specific administrative and clinical protocol can be replicated or adapted in multiple institutions and endoscopy units worldwide. Furthermore, the recommendations and summary protocol may improve patient and HCP safety in these trying times.

Serologic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) promises to assist in assessing exposure to and confirming the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to provide a roadmap for reopening countries worldwide. Considering this, a proper understanding of serologic-based diagnostic testing characteristics is critical. The aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of serological-based COVID-19 testing. Electronic searches were performed using Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Full-text observational studies that reported IgG or IgM diagnostic yield and used nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) of respiratory tract specimens, as a the reference standard in English language were included. A bivariate model was used to compute pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (OR), and summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies (n=1,166 individual tests) met inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for IgG was 81% [(95% CI, 61-92);I2=95.28], 97% [(95% CI, 78-100);I2=97.80], and 93% (95% CI, 91-95), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for IgM antibodies was 80% [(95% CI, 57-92);I2=94.63], 96% [(95% CI, 81-99);I2=92.96] and 95% (95% CI, 92-96). This meta-analysis demonstrates suboptimal sensitivity and specificity of serologic-based diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 and suggests that antibody testing alone, in its current form, is unlikely to be an adequate solution to the difficulties posed by COVID-19 and in guiding future policy decisions regarding social distancing and reopening of the economy worldwide.

Background: The management of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy leaks remains a challenge. This can be treated with placement of self-expandable metal stents, which are most effective in the acute and early settings. However, migration is a frequent adverse event (AE). Novel, fully covered stents with a larger proximal flare to limit migration designed specifically to treat postsleeve leaks were recently introduced., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel stent specifically designed for postsleeve leaks treatment., Setting: Multicenter retrospective study., Methods: This is a multicenter study, including patients with acute and early post laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy leaks, treated with a large bariatric stent. The outcomes include technical success, clinical success, and safety profile. A multivariable regression was performed to assess predictors of success., Results: Thirty-seven patients were included (10 acute and 27 early leaks), with 30 stents in the postpyloric (POST) and 7 in the prepyloric position. Technical success was 100%. Mean stent dwell time was 29.08 days. Clinical success was achieved in 78.37%. Leak duration, leak size, and stent dwell time did not correlate with clinical success. During follow-up, 8 patients had stent migration (21.62%) and all were in a POST position. AE poststent removal were also evaluated (prepyloric: 57.14% vs POST: 33.3%, P = .45). There was no difference between prepyloric and POST position in the severe AE analysis., Conclusions: This novel, large-caliber, fully covered stent specifically designed for sleeve leaks appears to be effective at treating acute and early leaks. However, the large flanges and long stent length do not appear to reduce migration rate and may be associated with higher overall severe AE rates. Avoiding placement in the POST position may help mitigate migration risk; however, owing to the risk profile this stent should be used with caution., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) limits food ingestion and may alter the intestinal expression of genes involved in the endogenous synthesis of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs). These changes may decrease the systemic availability of bioactive PUFAs after RYGB. To study the impact of RYGB on the dietary ingestion and plasma concentration of PUFAs and on the intestinal expression of genes involved in their endogenous biosynthesis in severely obese women with type 2 diabetes., Methods: Before, and 3 and 12 months after RYGB, obese women (n = 20) self-reported a seven-day dietary record, answered a food frequency query and provided plasma samples for alpha-linolenic (ALA), eicosapentaenoic (EPA), docosahexaenoic (DHA) and arachidonic (ARA) acid assessment by gas chromatography. Intestinal biopsies (duodenum, jejunum and ileum) were collected through double-balloon endoscopy before and 3 months after RYGB for gene expression analysis by microarray (Human GeneChip 1.0 ST array) and RT-qPCR validation., Results: Compared to the preoperative period, patients had decreased intakes of PUFAs, fish and soybean oil (p < 0.05) and lower plasma concentrations of ALA and EPA (p < 0.001) 3 and 12 months after RYGB. FADS1 gene expression was lower in duodenum (RT-qPCR fold change = -1.620, p < 0.05) and jejunum (RT-qPCR fold change = -1.549, p < 0.05) 3 months following RYGB, compared to before surgery., Conclusion: RYGB decreased PUFA ingestion, plasma ALA and EPA levels, and intestinal expression of FADS1 gene. The latter encodes a key enzyme involved in endogenous biosynthesis of PUFAs. These data suggest that supplementation of omega-3 PUFAs may be required for obese patients undergoing RYGB. Clinical Trial Registry number and website: www.clinicaltrials.gov - NCT01251016; Plataforma Brasil - 19339913.0.0000.0068., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

Our aim in this study was to compare the efficiency of 25G versus 22G needles in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions by EUS-FNA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were identified in five databases using an extensive search strategy. Only randomized trials comparing 22G and 25G needles were included. The results were analyzed by fixed and random effects. A total of 504 studies were found in the search, among which 4 randomized studies were selected for inclusion in the analysis. A total of 462 patients were evaluated (233: 25G needle/229: 22G needle). The diagnostic sensitivity was 93% for the 25G needle and 91% for the 22G needle. The specificity of the 25G needle was 87%, and that of the 22G needle was 83%. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.57 for the 25G needle and 4.26 for the 22G needle. The area under the sROC curve for the 25G needle was 0.9705, and it was 0.9795 for the 22G needle, with no statistically significant difference between them (p=0.497). Based on randomized studies, this meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference between the 22G and 25G needles used during EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions.

Introduction: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is a commonly used technique of bariatric surgery. One of the most important complications is gastrojejunal anastomotic stricture. Endoscopic balloon dilation appears to be well tolerated and effective, but well-designed randomized, controlled trials have not yet been conducted., Objective: Identify factors associated with complications or failure of endoscopic balloon dilation of anastomotic stricture secondary to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery., Setting: Gastrointestinal endoscopy service, university hospital, Brazil., Methods: The records of 64 patients with anastomotic stricture submitted to endoscopic dilation with hydrostatic balloon dilation were reviewed. Information was collected on gastric pouch length, anastomosis diameter before dilation, number of dilation sessions, balloon diameter at each session, anastomosis diameter after the last dilation session, presence of postsurgical complications, endoscopic complications, and outcome of dilation. Comparisons were made among postsurgical and endoscopic complications; number of dilations, balloon diameter; anastomosis diameter before dilation; and dilation outcome., Results: Success of dilation treatment was 95%. Perforation was positively and significantly associated with the number of dilation sessions (P = .03). Highly significant associations were found between ischemic segment and perforation (P<.001) and between ischemic segment and bleeding (P = .047). Ischemic segment (P = .02) and fistula (P = .032) were also associated with dilation failure., Conclusion: Ischemic segment and fistula were found to be important risk factors for balloon dilation failure. The greater the number of dilation sessions, the greater the number of endoscopic complications., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)