Search

Ampullary lesions (ALs) can be treated through either an endoscopic approach (EA) or a surgical approach (SA). However, it is important to note that EAs carry a significant risk of incomplete resection, while opting for surgical interventions can result in substantial morbidity. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for R0 resection, recurrence, adverse events in general, major adverse events, mortality, and length of hospital stay between SAs and EAs. Electronic databases were searched from inception to 2023. We identified nine independent studies. The risk difference was -0.32 (95% CI: -0.50, -0.15; p <0.001) for R0, 0.12 (95% CI: 0.06, 0.19; p < 0.001) for recurrence, -0.22 (95% CI: -0.43, 0.00; p 0.05) for overall adverse events, -0.11 (95% CI: -0.32, 0.10; p = 0.31) for major complications, -0.01 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.01; p = 0.43) for mortality, and -14.69 (95% CI: -19.91, -9.47; p < 0.001) for length of hospital stay. As expected, our data suggest a higher complete resection rate and lower recurrence from surgical interventions, but this is associated with an elevated risk of adverse events and a longer hospital stay., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2024, Baroni et al.)

Background and study aims Biliary sphincterotomy is a crucial step in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a procedure known to carry a 5% to 10% risk of complications. The relationship between Pure cut, Endocut, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and bleeding is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared these two current types and their relationships with adverse events. Patients and methods This systematic review involved searching articles in multiple databases until August 2023 comparing pure cut versus Endocut in biliary sphincterotomy. The meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Results A total of 987 patients from four randomized controlled trials were included. Overall pancreatitis: A higher risk of pancreatitis was found in the Endocut group than in the Pure cut group ( P =0.001, RD=0.04 [range, 0.01 to 0.06]; I 2 =29%). Overall immediate bleeding: Statistical significance was found to favor Endocut, ( P =0.05; RD=-0.15 [range, -0.29 to -0.00]; I 2 =93%). No statistical significance between current modes was found in immediate bleeding without endoscopic intervention ( P =0.10; RD=-0.13 [range, -0.29 to 0.02]; I 2 =88%), immediate bleeding with endoscopic intervention ( P =0.06; RD=-0.07 [range, -0.14 to 0.00]; I 2 =76%), delayed bleeding (P=0.40; RD=0.01 [range, -0.02 to 0.05]; I 2 =72%), zipper cut ( P =0.58; RD=-0.03 [range, -0.16 to 0.09]; I 2 =97%), perforation ( P =1.00; RD=0.00 [range, -0.01 to 0.01]; I 2 =0%) and cholangitis ( P =0.77; RD=0.00 [range, -0.01 to 0.02]; I 2 =29%). Conclusions The available data in the literature show that Endocut carries an increased risk for PEP and does not prevent delayed or clinically significant bleeding, although it prevents intraprocedural bleeding. Based on such findings, Pure cut should be the preferred electric current mode for biliary sphincterotomy., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Vitor Ottoboni Brunaldi: payment for lectures by Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH; Tomazo Antonio Prince Franzini: consultant to Boston Scientific; Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura: consultant to Boston Scientific and Olympus; The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background and study aims Recurrent biliary stent occlusion and tumor ingrowth remain a major concern among patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) with significant impact on patient morbidity and survival. Intraductal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has emerged as a promising treatment that seeks to extend stent patency. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of RFA on overall survival (OS) and stent patency among patients with unresectable MBO. Methods A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA plus biliary stent (RFA+S) versus biliary stent alone (S-alone). Outcomes assessed included overall survival, stent patency, and adverse events (AEs) with mean difference (MD) calculated from pooled proportions. Subgroup analyses were performed for hilar strictures and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Results Six RCTs (n=439 patients) were included and demonstrated improved survival among patients who received RFA+S (MD 85.80 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35.02-136.58; I 2 =97%; P <0.0009). The pooled MD for total stent patency was 22.25 days (95% CI 17.38-61.87; I 2 =97%; P =0.27). There was no difference in AEs between RFA+S vs S-alone ( P >0.05). On subgroup analyses, RFA+S was associated with improved stent patency (MD 76.73 days; 95% CI 50.11-103.34; I 2 =67%; P <0.01) and OS (MD 83.14 (95% CI 29.52-136.77; I 2 =97%; P <0.01] for CCA. For hilar strictures, stent patency was improved among patients with RFA+S [MD 83.71 days (95% CI 24.85-142.56; I 2 =84%; P <0.01]. Conclusions RFA+S improved OS in the treatment of MBO when compared with S-alone. Moreover, the RFA therapy prolonged stent patency in hilar strictures and CCA, with similar rates of AEs., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr. Diogo Turiani Hourneaux De Moura: BariaTek Medical - Advisory Board Member (Consulting fees). This was not relevant to this study. Dr. Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux De Moura: Olympus - Consultant (Consulting fees) and Boston Scientific - Consultant (Consulting fees). These were not relevant to this study. The other authors declare no potential conflict of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a minimally invasive and reversible therapy for weight loss with a good efficacy and safety profile. Introduced in the 1980s, IGBs have significantly evolved in the last couple of decades. They mechanically act by decreasing the volume of the stomach and its reservoir capacity, delaying gastric emptying, and increasing satiety leading to a subsequent weight loss. Despite the low rates of complications and mortality associated with IGBs, adverse events and complications still occur and can range from mild to fatal. This review aims to provide an update on the current scientific evidence in regard to complications and adverse effects of the use of the IGB and its treatment. This is the first comprehensive narrative review in the literature dedicated to this subject.

Background: Endoscopic drainage remains the treatment of choice for unresectable or inoperable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO)., Aim: To compare the safety and efficacy of plastic stent (PS) vs self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement for treatment of MDBO., Methods: This meta-analysis was developed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and grey literature to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing clinical success, adverse events, stent dysfunction rate, reintervention rate, duration of stent patency, and mean survival. Risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 statistic. Subgroup analyses were performed by SEMS type., Results: Twelve RCTs were included in this study, totaling 1005 patients. There was no difference in clinical success (RD = -0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.01, 0.07; I 2 = 0%), rate of adverse events (RD = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.10, 0.03; I 2 = 57%), and mean patient survival (MD = -0.63, 95%CI: -18.07, 19.33; I 2 = 54%) between SEMS vs PS placement. However, SEMS placement was associated with a lower rate of reintervention (RD = -0.34, 95%CI: -0.46, -0.22; I 2 = 57%) and longer duration of stent patency (MD = 125.77 d, 95%CI: 77.5, 174.01). Subgroup analyses revealed both covered and uncovered SEMS improved stent patency compared to PS (RD = 152.25, 95%CI: 37.42, 267.07; I 2 = 98% and RD = 101.5, 95%CI: 38.91, 164.09; I 2 = 98%; respectively). Stent dysfunction was higher in the covered SEMS group (RD = -0.21, 95%CI: -0.32, -0.1; I ² = 205%), with no difference in the uncovered SEMS group (RD = -0.08, 95%CI: -0.56, 0.39; I ² = 87%)., Conclusion: While both stent types possessed a similar clinical success rate, complication rate, and patient-associated mean survival for treatment of MDBO, SEMS were associated with a longer duration of stent patency compared to PS., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors do not have any conflicts of interest., (©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Biliary sphincterotomy is an invasive method that allows access to the bile ducts, however, this procedure is not exempt of complications. Studies in the literature indicate that the mode of electric current used for sphincterotomy may carry different incidences of adverse events such as pancreatitis, hemorrhage, perforation, and cholangitis., Aim: To evaluate the safety of different modes of electrical current during biliary sphincterotomy based on incidence of adverse events., Methods: We searched articles for this systematic review in Medline, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, Lilacs, and gray literature from inception to September 2019. Data from studies describing different types of electric current were meta-analyzed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The following electric current modalities were evaluated: endocut, blend, pure cut, pure cut followed by blend, monopolar, and bipolar., Results: A total of 1791 patients from 11 randomized clinical trials evaluating the following comparisons: 1. Endocut vs Blend: No statistical difference in the incidence of bleeding (7% vs 13.4%; RD: -0.11 [-0.31, 0.08], P=0.27, I 2 =86%), pancreatitis (4.4% vs 3.5%; RD: 0.01 [-0.03, 0.04], P=0.62, I 2 =48%) and perforation (absence of cases in both arms). 2. Endocut vs Pure cut: Higher incidence of mild bleeding (without drop in hemoglobin levels, clinical repercussion or need for endoscopic intervention) in the pure cut group (9.2% vs 28.8%; RD: -0.19 [-0.27, -0.12], P<0.00001, I 2 =0%). No statistical difference regarding pancreatitis (5.2% vs 0.9%; RD: 0.05 [-0.01, 0.11], P=0.12, I 2 =57%), perforation (0.4% vs 0%; RD: 0.00 [-0.01, 0.02], P=0.7, I 2 =0%) or cholangitis (1.8% vs 3.2%; RD: -0.01 [-0.09, 0.06], P=0,7). 3. Pure cut vs blend: higher incidence of mild bleeding in the pure cut group (40.4% vs 16.7%; RD: 0.24 [0.15, 0.33], P<0.00001, I 2 =0%). No statistical difference concerning incidence of pancreatitis or cholangitis. 4. Pure cut vs Pure cut followed by Blend: No statistical difference regarding incidence of bleeding (22.5% vs 11.7%; RD: -0.10 [-0.24, 0.04], P=0.18, I 2 =61%) and pancreatitis (8.9% vs 14.8%; RD 0.06 [-0.02, 0.13], P=0.12, I 2 =0%). 5. Blend vs pure cut followed by blend: no statistical difference regarding incidence of bleeding and pancreatitis (11.3% vs 10.4%; RD -0.01 [-0.11, 0.09], P=0.82, I 2 =0%). 6. Monopolar vs bipolar: higher incidence of pancreatitis in the monopolar mode group (12% vs 0%; RD 0.12 [0.02, 0.22], P=0.01)., Conclusion: Pure cut carries higher incidences of mild bleeding compared to endocut and blend. However, this modality might present a lower incidence of pancreatitis. The monopolar mode elicits higher rates of pancreatitis in comparison with the bipolar mode. There is no difference in incidence of cholangitis or perforation between different types of electric current. There is a lack of evidence in the literature to recommend one method over the others, therefore new studies are warranted. As there is no perfect electric current mode, the choice in clinical practice must be based on the patient risk factors., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Indeterminate biliary strictures remain a significant diagnostic challenge. Digital single-operator cholangioscopy (D-SOC) incorporates digital imaging which enables higher resolution for better visualization and diagnosis of biliary pathology. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature in an attempt to determine the efficacy of D-SOC in the visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures., Material and Methods: Electronic searches were performed using Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. All D-SOC studies that reported the diagnostic performance in visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures and biliary malignancies were included. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. All data were extracted and pooled to construct a 2 × 2 table. The visual interpretation of D-SOC was compared to resected surgical specimens or clinical follow-up in the included patients. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, prevalence, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood ratio (-LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) were calculated. The summarized receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve corresponding with the area under the curve (AUC) was also analyzed., Results: The search yielded 465 citations. Of these, only six studies with a total of 283 procedures met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of D-SOC in the visual interpretation of biliary malignancies was 94% (95% CI 89-97) and 95% (95%CI 90-98), respectively, while +LR, -LR, diagnostic OR, and AUC were 15.20 (95%CI 5.21-44.33), 0.08 (95%CI 0.04-0.14), 308.83 (95%CI 106.46-872.82), and 0.983, respectively. The heterogeneity among 6 included studies was moderate for specificity (I 2  = 0.51) and low for sensitivity (I 2  = 0.17) and diagnostic OR (I 2  = 0.00)., Conclusion: D-SOC is associated with high sensitivity and specificity in the visual interpretation of indeterminate biliary strictures and malignancies. D-SOC should be considered routinely in the diagnostic workup of indeterminate biliary lesions.

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.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis, in comparison with conservative treatment., Methods: Systematic review via databases (MEDLINE [PubMed], Latin-American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Embase, Cochrane Central, and the [Brazilian] Regional Library of Medicine) is conducted. We analyzed 10 randomized controlled trials (1091 patients). Outcomes were the following: local and systemic adverse events; acute cholangitis; death; length of hospital stay; cost; abdominal pain; and time to a reduction in body temperature. For the meta-analysis, we used risk difference (RD) and mean with standard deviation as measures of variability., Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the patients submitted to ERCP in terms of the following: local adverse events (RD, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.99), time to pain relief and time to a reduction in axillary temperature (RD, -5.01; 95% CI, -6.98 to -3.04, and RD, -1.70; 95 CI%, -2.33 to -1.08, respectively). Patients undergoing ERCP spent less time in hospital (RD, -11.04; 95% CI, -15.15 to -6.93). Cost was lower in the group treated with ERCP., Conclusions: Early ERCP decreases local adverse events, shortening the time to pain relief, to a reduction in axillary temperature, hospital stays, and cost in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis.