Search

Background and Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care for the management of choledocholithiasis but carries risk of complications which may result in significant morbidity and mortality. While currently available guidelines endorse the use of ERCP for the management of symptomatic common bile duct stones, the need for ERCP in incidentally found asymptomatic choledocholithiasis is more controversial, and practice varies on a geographic and institutional level. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare post-ERCP adverse events between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. Methods: We searched PubMed/Embase/Web of Science databases to include all studies comparing post-ERCP outcomes between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), while secondary outcomes included post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel–Haenszel method within a random-effect model. Results: Our analysis included six observational studies, totaling 2,178 choledocholithiasis patients (392 asymptomatic and 1786 symptomatic); 53% were female. Asymptomatic patients exhibited a higher risk of PEP compared with symptomatic patients (11.7% versus 4.8%; RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.56–4.31, p ≤ 0.001). No significant difference was observed in post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, or perforation rates between the two groups. Conclusions: Asymptomatic patients with choledocholithiasis appear to have a higher risk of PEP than symptomatic patients, while the risk of other post-ERCP adverse events is similar between the two groups. Interventional endoscopists should thoroughly discuss potential adverse events (particularly PEP) with asymptomatic patients before performing ERCP and utilize PEP-prevention measures more liberally in this subgroup of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Peptic ulcers with adherent clots are associated with a high-risk of rebleeding and mortality. However, the optimal management of bleeding ulcers with adherent clots remains unclear. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare endoscopic therapy and conservative therapy to manage bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases through October 2022 to include all studies comparing the endoscopic and conservative therapeutic approaches for bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. Our primary outcome was rebleeding (overall and 30-day). The secondary outcomes were mortality (overall and 30-day), need for surgery, and length of hospital stay (LOS). The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with the corresponding confidence intervals (CI) for proportional and continuous variables, respectively. Results: Eleven studies (9 RCTs) with 833 patients (431 received endoscopic therapy vs. 402 received conservative therapy) were included. Overall, endoscopic therapy was associated with lower overall rebleeding (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22–0.79, P = 0.007), 30-day rebleeding (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21–0.89, P = 0.002), overall mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23–0.95, P = 0.04), 30-day mortality (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21–0.89, P = 0.002), need for surgery (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21–0.95, P = 0.04), and LOS (MD − 3.17 days, 95% CI − 4.14, − 2.19, P < 0.00001). However, subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no significant difference in overall mortality (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.24–2.52, P = 0.68) between the two strategies, with numerically lower but statistically non-significant rates of overall rebleeding (7.2% vs. 18.5%, respectively; OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.17–1.05, P = 0.06), statistically lower rate of need for surgery (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08–0.96, P = 0.04) with endoscopic therapy compared to conservative therapy. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrates that endoscopic therapy was overall associated with lower rates of rebleeding (overall and 30-day), mortality (overall and 30-day), need for surgery, and LOS, compared to conservative therapy for the management of bleeding ulcers with adherent clots. However, subgroup analysis of RCTs showed that endoscopic therapy was associated with numerically lower but statistically non-significant rates of overall rebleeding and a statistically lower rate of need for surgery compared to conservative therapy with similar overall mortality rates. Combined treatment with thermal therapy and injection therapy was the most effective treatment modality in reducing rebleeding risk. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biologics have emerged as an effective treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, there is a significant proportion of patients who fail to respond to biologics. Identifying the predictors that affect the response to biologics remains challenging. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted through May 1, 2022. We included all studies that used a multivariate model to assess for the predictors of remission in RA patients treated with biologics. We calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for risk factors reported in ≥ 3 studies using a random-effects model. A total of 16,934 patients with RA who were treated with biologics were included in twenty-one studies. Our study showed that old age (OR 0.98 (0.97, 0.99), P < 0.00001), female gender (OR 0.66 (0.56, 0.77), P < 0.00001), smoking history (OR 0.86 (0.75, 0.99), P 0.04), obesity (OR 0.95 (0.91, 0.99), P 0.02), poor functional status (OR 0.62 (0.48, 1.27), P < 0.00001), high disease activity (OR 0.90 (0.85, 0.96), P 0.0005), and elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (OR 0.99 (0.98, 1.00), P 0.009) were poor predictors of remission. On the other hand, positive anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (OR 2.52 (1.53, 4.12), P 0.0003) was associated with high remission rate. Old age, female gender, obesity, smoking history, poor functional status, high disease activity, and elevated ESR at the time of diagnosis have been associated with poor response to biologics. Our findings could help establish a risk stratification model for predicting the remission rate in RA patients receiving biologics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Systemic steroids are associated with reduced mortality in hypoxic patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). However, there is no consensus on the doses of steroid therapy in these patients. Several studies showed that pulse dose steroids (PDS) could reduce the progression of COVID‐19 pneumonia. However, data regarding the role of PDS in COVID‐19 is still unclear. Therefore, we performed this meta‐analysis to evaluate the role of PDS in COVID‐19 patients compared to nonpulse steroids (NPDS). Comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception through February 10, 2022 was performed for all published studies comparing PDS to NPDS therapy to manage hypoxic patients with COVID‐19. Primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation, hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse events in the form of superimposed infections. A total of 10 observational studies involving 3065 patients (1289 patients received PDS and 1776 received NPDS) were included. The mortality rate was similar between PDS and NPDS groups (risk ratio [RR]: 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92–1.65, p = 0.16). There were no differences in the need for endotracheal intubation (RR: 0.71, 95%: CI 0.37–1.137, p = 0.31), LOS (mean difference: 1.93 days; 95% CI: −1.46–5.33; p = 0.26), or adverse events (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.56–1.57, p = 0.80) between the two groups. Compared to NPDS, PDS was associated with similar mortality rates, need for endotracheal intubation, LOS, and adverse events. Given the observational nature of the included studies, randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin resistance (IR) is a major contributor to the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index has recently gained popularity for the assessment of IR and NAFLD due to its ease of acquisition and calculation. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the existing studies in the literature and provide a quantitative assessment of the significance of the TyG index in predicting the incidence of NAFLD. A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases from inception until 25 March 2022 was conducted. Published observational studies that evaluated the association between TyG index and NAFLD among the adult population and reported the hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) for this association after multivariate analysis were included. The random-effects model was used as the primary statistical analysis model in the estimation of pooled ORs and HRs with the corresponding confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 17 observational studies, including 121,975 participants, were included. For studies analyzing the TyG index as a categorical variable, both pooled OR (6.00, CI 4.12–8.74) and HR (1.70, CI 1.28–2.27) were significant for the association between TyG index and incident NAFLD. For studies analyzing the TyG index as a continuous variable, pooled OR (2.25, CI 1.66–3.04) showed similar results. Consistent results were obtained in subgroup analyses according to the study design, sample size, ethnicity, and diabetic status. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that a higher TyG index is associated with higher odds of NAFLD. TyG index may serve as an independent predictive tool to screen patients at high risk of NAFLD in clinical practice, especially in primary care settings. Patients with a high TyG index should be referred for a liver ultrasound and start intense lifestyle modifications. However, further large-scale prospective cohort studies are necessary to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of iodinated contrast material (CM) temperature on injection pressures and viscosity has been well established. However, the effect of extrinsic warming of CM on allergic reactions and extravasations remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to compare the rates of allergic reactions and extravasations between warmed CM to room temperature CM. We conducted a comprehensive systematic search using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for all studies that assess the impact of warmed CM on adverse reactions. The primary outcomes of our study were allergic reaction and extravasation rates. We calculated weighted pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes using the random-effects model. A P -value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. We conducted subgroup analyses based on the viscosity of the CM. A total of five studies, including 307,329 CM injections (86,676 at room temperature and 220,653 warmed to 37 °C), were included in the analysis. For high viscosity CM, pre-warming was associated with significantly lower allergic reaction rates (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49–0.72, P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in rates of extravasation for high viscosity CM (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.20–1.43, P = 0.21). Our meta-analysis suggests that warming CM to 37 °C is a safe and effective approach to reduce the risk of allergic reactions and physiologic reactions during injection of high-viscosity CM. However, there was no significant difference in extravasation rates between warmed and room temperature CM, regardless of viscosity. • Warming highly viscous contrast material to 37 °C reduces the rate of allergic and physiologic reactions. • Warming of low viscosity contrast material does not affect adverse reaction rates. • Warming highly viscous contrast material to 37 °C does not reduce the rate of extravasations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]