-
Journal of Vascular Surgery Sep 2015Endovascular aortic repair has become increasingly popular the last years for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) and thoracic aortic aneurysms. EVAR is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endovascular aortic repair has become increasingly popular the last years for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) and thoracic aortic aneurysms. EVAR is less invasive compared with the classic open approach, related to a decreased immediate postoperative morbidity and mortality. Those beneficial characteristics of EVAR do not come without a cost, since EVAR requires that the patient will be exposed to a significant amount of radiation during preoperative planning, graft placement, and consecutive follow-up. This systematic review examines the periprocedural radiation exposure to patients and staff as well as ways to ameliorate it.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE electronic database. All articles reporting radiation exposure to alive humans during EVAR were eligible for review. Only studies publishing numerical data regarding radiation exposure were included in the Results section. Other relevant articles were used for further discussion.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies, both prospective and retrospective in nature, were included. These studies revealed that the radiation exposure depends on the specific type of procedure, with more complex procedures carrying greater radiation burden. Variations in the positioning and operating of the fluoroscopic unit may significantly alter radiation dose to both patients and staff. There was an apparent lack of education among vascular specialists and trainees in terms of radiation safety awareness. At follow-up, a significant number of patients needed additional procedures, and all required radiographic imaging, further increasing the radiation exposure to alarming levels.
CONCLUSIONS
Every effort should be made to decrease radiation exposure related to endovascular aortic procedures. Attempts must be directed towards maximizing the operator's awareness, welcoming new imaging technology emitting less radiation, and shifting to follow-up strategies that require minimal or no radiation.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic; Aortography; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection; Radiography, Interventional; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 26169014
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.05.033 -
ANZ Journal of Surgery May 2023Duodenal diverticulum occurs in approximately 20% of the population and can lead to life-threatening complications such as perforation. Most perforations are secondary...
BACKGROUND
Duodenal diverticulum occurs in approximately 20% of the population and can lead to life-threatening complications such as perforation. Most perforations are secondary to diverticulitis, with iatrogenic causes being exceptionally rare. This systematic review explores the aetiology, prevention and outcomes of iatrogenic perforation of duodenal diverticulum.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Four databases were searched, including Pubmed, Medline, Scopus and Embase. The primary data extracted were clinical findings, type of procedure, prevention and management of perforation and outcomes.
RESULTS
Forty-six studies were identified, of which 14 articles met inclusion criteria and comprised 19 cases of iatrogenic duodenal diverticulum perforation. Four cases identified duodenal diverticulum pre-intervention, nine were identified peri-intervention, and the remainder were identified post-intervention. Perforation secondary to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (n = 8) was most common, followed by open and laparoscopic surgery (n = 5), gastroduodenoscopy (n = 4) and other (n = 2). Operative management with diverticulectomy was the most frequent treatment (63%). Iatrogenic perforation was associated with 50% morbidity and 10% mortality.
CONCLUSION
Iatrogenic perforation of duodenal diverticulum is exceptionally rare and associated with high morbidity and mortality. There are limited guidelines surrounding standard perioperative steps to prevent iatrogenic perforations. A review of preoperative imaging helps identify potential aberrant anatomy, such as a duodenal diverticulum, to allow for recognition and prompt management initiation in the event of perforation. Intraoperative recognition and immediate surgical repair are safe options for this complication.
Topics: Humans; Duodenal Ulcer; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Gastroscopy; Diverticulum; Iatrogenic Disease; Intestinal Perforation
PubMed: 36881513
DOI: 10.1111/ans.18376 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences May 2019Periampullary diverticulum (PAD) is most often asymptomatically found in elderly population. ERCP in the presence of PAD is technically challenging since the location... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Periampullary diverticulum (PAD) is most often asymptomatically found in elderly population. ERCP in the presence of PAD is technically challenging since the location and orientation of the ampulla could be altered. Various studies have reported differing results on the technical success and safety outcomes of ERCP in the presence of PAD. We aimed at a meta-analysis of such studies to assess the technical success and the occurrence of complications during ERCP in patients with PAD.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (earliest inception to October 2017). The search was done in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to identify studies. Studies that reported on the ERCP outcomes based on the presence of PAD were included. Both prospective and retrospective studies, manuscripts and abstracts were included. Only articles in English literature were included. The primary analysis focused on the overall technical success of ERCP in the presence of PAD, and the secondary analysis was to estimate the risk of occurrence of complications.
RESULTS
Our search resulted in 16 studies that were included for final analysis. These 16 studies reported on 2794 patients, who had PAD, and the control group included 13,032 patients, who did not have a PAD during ERCP. Our meta-analysis of this data showed an Odd's ratio estimate of having a successful ERCP procedure in patients with PAD to be 0.51 [95% C.I. (0.35-0.72)] when compared to patients without it. This was statistically significant, with a p value 0.00. Considerable heterogeneity was noted among the studies. The heterogeneity proportion was quantified at 74.6% based on I statistic. The secondary outcomes measured were complications. We analyzed the pooled Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP), cholangitis, perforation, and bleeding. Only those studies that had the data for these complications in both the study and the control groups were selected. PEP: The pooled Odd's estimate of having PEP was 1.28, [95% C.I (0.88-1.87)] from 12 studies reporting on 1863 patients with PAD in comparison with 7803 patients without it. The risk of PEP occurrence tended to be more in the group without PAD, though it was not statistically significant, with a p value 0.20. There was some heterogeneity observed between the studies, with the quantification I statistic being 28.6%. Our analysis shows that having PAD does not put a patient at increased risk for PEP. Bleeding: The pooled Odds estimate was 1.69, 95% C.I. 0.88-3.25 from nine studies reporting on 1816 patients with PAD in comparison with 5327 patients without it. This was not statistically significant, p value 0.11. Considerable heterogeneity was noted, with I being 55.7%. The risk of having a bleed was noted to be more in control group, and having PAD did not put patients at increased risk for bleeding during an ERCP procedure. Perforation: Patients with PAD undergoing ERCP were not at increased risk for perforation. Seven studies reported on this complication. This was noted in seven patients out of 1245 in study group, and 19 patients out of 4912 in control group. The pooled Odd's estimate was 1.24, 95% C.I. 0.54-2.87. There was no statistical significance, p value 0.61. No heterogeneity was noted among the studies included in this analysis. Cholangitis: Only four studies reported on this complication. In a total of 778 patients in study group, four had cholangitis and eight had this complication out of 3886 patients in the control group. The pooled Odd's was 2.12, 95% C.I. 0.61-7.33. There was no statistical significance, p value 0.24. No heterogeneity was noted.
CONCLUSION
ERCP is technically feasible and increasingly successful when performed by experts in the presence of PAD. The risk of complications such as PEP, bleeding, perforation and cholangitis does not differ between ERCP done in patients with and without PAD.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Diverticulum; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30293190
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-018-5314-y -
Medicine Jan 2017In patients with inoperable malignant biliary strictures, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) guided biliary stenting fails in 5% to 10% patients due... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A meta-analysis and systematic review: Success of endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary stenting in patients with inoperable malignant biliary strictures and a failed ERCP.
BACKGROUND
In patients with inoperable malignant biliary strictures, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) guided biliary stenting fails in 5% to 10% patients due to difficult anatomy/inability to cannulate the papilla. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been described.Primary outcomes were to evaluate the biliary drainage success rates with EUS and compare it to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). Secondary outcomes were to evaluate overall procedure related complications.
METHODS
STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:: Studies evaluating the efficacy of EUS-BD and comparing EUS-BD versus PTBD in inoperable malignant biliary stricture patients with a failed ERCP were included in this analysis.
DATA COLLECTION AND EXTRACTION
Articles were searched in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid journals. Two authors independently searched and extracted data. The study design was written in accordance to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Subgroup analyses of prospective studies and EUS-BD versus PTBD were performed.
STATISTICAL METHOD
Pooled proportions were calculated using fixed and random effects model. I statistic was used to assess heterogeneity among studies.
RESULTS
Initial search identified 846 reference articles, of which 124 were selected and reviewed. Sixteen studies (N = 528) that met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. In the pooled patient population, the percentage of patients that had a successful biliary drainage with EUS was 90.91% (95% CI = 88.10-93.38). The proportion of patients that had overall procedure related complications with EUS-PD was 16.46% (95% CI = 13.20-20.01). The pooled odds ratio for successful biliary drainage in EUS-PD versus PTBD group was 3.06 (95% CI = 1.11-8.43). The risk difference for overall procedure related complications in EUS-PD versus PTBD group was -0.21 (95% CI = -0.35 to -0.06). Relative risk for infectious complications and bile leak in EUS-BD versus PTBD was 0.25 (95% CI = 0.07-0.94) and 0.33 (95% CI = 0.12-0.87), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with inoperable malignant biliary strictures who failed an ERCP guided biliary stenting, EUS-BD seems to be an excellent management option and superior to PTBD with higher successful biliary drainage rates and relatively fewer complications.
Topics: Biliary Tract Neoplasms; Biliary Tract Surgical Procedures; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Constriction, Pathologic; Humans; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 28099327
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005154 -
The Lancet. Gastroenterology &... Sep 2021Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous fluid, pancreatic stents, or combinations of these have been evaluated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intravenous fluids, pancreatic stents, or their combinations for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous fluid, pancreatic stents, or combinations of these have been evaluated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, but the comparative efficacy of these treatments remains unclear. Our aim was to do an exploratory network meta-analysis of previous RCTs to systematically compare the direct and indirect evidence and rank NSAIDs, intravenous fluids, pancreatic stents, or combinations of these to determine the most efficacious method of prophylaxis for post-ERCP pancreatitis.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register from inception to Nov 15, 2020, for full-text RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of NSAIDs, pancreatic stents, intravenous fluids, or combinations of these for post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention in adult (aged ≥18 years) patients undergoing ERCP. Summary data from intention-to-treat analyses were extracted from published reports. We analysed incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis across studies using network meta-analysis under the frequentist framework, obtaining pairwise odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system for the confidence rating. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020172606.
FINDINGS
We identified 1503 studies, of which 55 RCTs evaluating 20 interventions in 17 062 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The mean incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the placebo or active control group was 12·2% (95% CI 11·4-13·0). Normal saline plus rectal indometacin (OR 0·02, 95% CI 0·00-0·40), intramuscular diclofenac 75 mg (0·24, 0·09-0·69), intravenous high-volume Ringer's lactate plus rectal diclofenac 100 mg (0·30, 0·16-0·55), intravenous high-volume Ringer's lactate (0·31, 0·12-0·78), 5-7 Fr pancreatic stents (0·35, 0·26-0·48), rectal diclofenac 100 mg (0·36, 0·25-0·52), 3 Fr pancreatic stents (0·47, 0·26-0·87), and rectal indometacin 100 mg (0·60, 0·50-0·73) were all more efficacious than placebo for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis in pairwise comparisons. 5-7 Fr pancreatic stents (0·59, 0·41-0·84), intravenous high-volume Ringer's lactate plus rectal diclofenac 100 mg (0·49, 0·26-0·94), intravenous standard-volume normal saline plus rectal indometacin 100 mg (0·04, 0·00-0·66), and rectal diclofenac 100 mg (0·59, 0·40-0·89) were more efficacious than rectal indometacin 100 mg. The GRADE confidence rating was low to moderate for 98·3% of the pairwise comparisons.
INTERPRETATION
This systematic review and network meta-analysis summarises the available literature on NSAIDs, pancreatic stents, intravenous fluids, or combinations of these for prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Rectal diclofenac 100 mg is the best performing rectal NSAID in this network meta-analysis. Combinations of prophylaxis might be more effective, but there is little evidence. These findings help to establish prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis for future research and practice, and could reduce costs and increase adoption of prophylaxis.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Fluid Therapy; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Pancreatitis; Postoperative Complications; Stents
PubMed: 34214449
DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00170-9 -
Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology Apr 2022In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guideline on the endoscopic management of choledocholithiasis modified the individual predictors of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guideline on the endoscopic management of choledocholithiasis modified the individual predictors of choledocholithiasis proposed in the widely referenced 2010 guideline to improve predictive performance. Nevertheless, the primary literature, especially for the 2019 iteration, is limited. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to examine the diagnostic performance of the 2010, and where possible the 2019, predictors. PROSPERO protocol CRD42020194226. A comprehensive literature search from 2001 to 2020 was performed to identify studies on the diagnostic performance of any of the 2010 and 2019 ASGE choledocholithiasis predictors. Identified studies underwent keyword screening, abstract review, and full-text review. The primary outcomes included multivariate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for each criterion. Secondary outcomes were reported sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive value. A total of 20 studies met inclusion criteria. Based on reported ORs, of the 2010 guideline "very strong" predictors, ultrasound with stone had the strongest performance. Of the "strong" predictors, CBD > 6 mm demonstrated the strongest performance. "Moderate" predictors had inconsistent and/or weak performance; moreover, all studies reported gallstone pancreatitis as non-predictive of choledocholithiasis. Only one study examined the new predictor (bilirubin > 4 mg/dL and CBD > 6 mm) proposed in the 2019 guideline. Based on this review, aside from CBD stone on ultrasound, there is discordance between the proposed strength of 2010 choledocholithiasis predictors and their published diagnostic performance. The 2019 guideline appears to do away with the weakest 2010 predictors.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Choledocholithiasis; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Humans; Predictive Value of Tests; Retrospective Studies; Ultrasonography; United States
PubMed: 35072902
DOI: 10.1007/s12328-021-01575-4 -
Revista Espanola de Enfermedades... Aug 2016Agenesis of the dorsal pancreas is a rare malformation. Since 1911 and until 2008, 53 cases have been reported. Several authors have recently described the association... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Agenesis of the dorsal pancreas is a rare malformation. Since 1911 and until 2008, 53 cases have been reported. Several authors have recently described the association of this anomaly with neoplasia of the ventral pancreas, thus we performed a systematic review of the literature from 2008 to 2015.
METHODS
A systematic review of the MedLine and ISI Web of Science Databases from 2008 until 2015 was carried out, and 30 articles which met the inclusion criteria were identified that included a total of 53 patients: 7 children and 46 adults.
CONCLUSIONS
Although dorsal pancreatic agenesis is a rare malformation, given its association with non-alcoholic pancreatitis and neoplasia of the residual pancreas, physicians should maintain an expectant attitude.
Topics: Adult; Child; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Congenital Abnormalities; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatitis
PubMed: 27468966
DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4474/2016 -
Pancreatology : Official Journal of the... Jun 2018To perform a meta-analysis of all available studies on the effect of prophylactic somatostatin administration on prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To perform a meta-analysis of all available studies on the effect of prophylactic somatostatin administration on prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and post-ERCP hyperamylasemia (PEHA).
METHODS
Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and the Science Citation Index were searched to retrieve relevant trials. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials in adult patients that compared somatostatin versus placebo in prevention of PEP were included. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to assess the ratios of PEP, PEHA and post-ERCP abdominal pain.
RESULTS
Total ratio of PEP of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group. For the short-term injection or bolus injection there were no heterogeneity and no significance between the ratio of PEP of somatostatin group and placebo group. For the long-term injection subgroup there was heterogeneity, and the ratio of PEP of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group. There was no significance between the ratio of PEP of somatostatin group and placebo group for the low-risk PEP subgroup, while the ratio of PEP of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group for the high-risk PEP subgroup. The ratio of PEP of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group for the long-term injection high-risk PEP subgroup. There was no significance between the ratio of PEHA of somatostatin group and placebo group for the short-term injection subgroup or bolus injection subgroup. The ratio of PEHA of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group for the long-term injection subgroup. The total ratio of post-ERCP abdominal pain of somatostatin group was significantly lower than that of placebo group. The funnel plot of incidence of PEP and PEHA showed no asymmetry with a negative slope.
CONCLUSION
Prophylactic use of long-term injection of somatostatin can significantly reduce the incidence of PEP, PEHA and post-ERCP abdominal pain for the high-risk PEP patients, while it is not necessary to be used for the low-risk PEP patients.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Humans; Hyperamylasemia; Pancreatitis; Somatostatin
PubMed: 29550097
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2018.03.002 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Jan 2023Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Nineteen randomized controlled trials (2752 patients) comparing different treatments for management of large bile stones (>10 mm) (endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon sphincteroplasty, sphincterotomy followed by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation [S+EPLBD], mechanical lithotripsy, single-operator cholangioscopy [SOC]) with each other were identified. Study outcomes were the success rate of stone removal and the incidence of adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria to appraise the quality of evidence.
RESULTS
All treatments except mechanical lithotripsy significantly outperformed sphincterotomy in terms of stone removal rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.03-1.29). SOC was superior to other adjunctive interventions (vs balloon sphincteroplasty [RR, 1.24; 95% CIs, 1.07-1.45], vs S+EPLBD [RR, 1.23; range, 1.06-1.42] and vs mechanical lithotripsy [RR, 1.34; range, 1.14-1.58]). Cholangioscopy ranked the highest in increasing the success rate of stone removal (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score, 0.99) followed by S+EPLBD (SUCRA score, 0.68). SOC and S+EPLBD outperformed the other modalities when only studies reporting on stones greater than 15 mm were taken into consideration (SUCRA scores, 0.97 and 0.71, respectively). None of the assessed interventions was significantly different in terms of adverse event rate compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy or with other treatments. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding were the most frequent adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with large bile stones, cholangioscopy represents the most effective method, in particular in patients with larger (>15 mm) stones, whereas S+EPLBD could represent a less expensive and more widely available alternative.
Topics: Humans; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Gallstones; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic; Dilatation
PubMed: 34666153
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.10.013 -
The Journal of Pediatrics Dec 2016To systematically review risks and summarize reported complication rates associated with the performance of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review risks and summarize reported complication rates associated with the performance of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in children during the past 2 decades.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from January 1995 to January 2016 was conducted for observational studies published in English. Studies reporting ERCP complications in patients <21 years without history of liver transplant or cholecystectomy were included. A summary estimate of the proportion of children who experienced complications following ERCP was derived via a random effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies involving 2612 children and 3566 procedures were included. Subjects' ages ranged from 3 days to 21 years. Procedures were performed for biliary (54%), pancreatic (38%), and other (8%) indications; 56% of ERCPs were interventional. The pooled complication rate was 6% (95% CI 4%- 8%). Procedural complications included post-ERCP pancreatitis (166, 4.7%), bleeding (22, 0.6%), and infections (27, 0.8%). The pooled estimate of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 3% (95% CI 0.02-0.05), and other complications were 1% (95% CI 0.02-0.05). In the subgroup with neonatal cholestasis, the pooled complication rate was 3% (95% CI 0.01-0.07). Adult and pediatric gastroenterologists and surgeons performed the ERCPs. Available data limited the ability to report differences between pediatric-trained and other endoscopists.
CONCLUSIONS
Complications associated with pediatric ERCP range widely in severity and are reported inconsistently. Our review suggests 6% of pediatric ERCPs have complications. Further studies that use systematic and standardized methodologies are needed to determine the frequency and risk factors for ERCP-related complications.
Topics: Child; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Humans; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 27663215
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.08.046