-
Journal of Hepato-biliary-pancreatic... Dec 2014The optimal management of patients with symptomatic gallstones and possible or proven common bile duct (CBD) stones and gallstones is still evolving. Today a number of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The optimal management of patients with symptomatic gallstones and possible or proven common bile duct (CBD) stones and gallstones is still evolving. Today a number of options exist: preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (pre-op ERCP), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOES), laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and postoperative ERCP (post-op ERCP). This meta-analysis was done to compare these management options and determine if any single option was clearly superior.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted using several electronic databases. The search revealed 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Six comparing pre-op ERCP with LCBDE, five comparing pre-op ERCP with IOES, two comparing IOES with LCBDE and two comparing post-op ERCP with LCBDE, comprising a total of 1992 patients.
RESULTS
The pre-op ERCP group had a significantly higher incidence of ERCP related complications (odds ratio: 2.40, 95% confidence interval: 1.21-4.75).
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence provided by this meta-analysis suggests that both of these approaches would appear comparable. To fully address which would be the better approach would require an RCT as discussed above.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholecystolithiasis; Choledocholithiasis; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 25187317
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.152 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy May 2017EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly used as an alternate therapeutic modality to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for biliary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is increasingly used as an alternate therapeutic modality to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for biliary obstruction in patients who fail ERCP. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of these 2 procedures.
METHODS
We searched several databases from inception to September 4, 2016 to identify comparative studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and PTBD. Primary outcomes of interest were the differences in technical success and postprocedure adverse events. Secondary outcomes of interest included clinical success, rate of reintervention, length of hospital stay, and cost comparison for these 2 procedures. Odds ratios (ORs) and standard mean difference were calculated for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. These were analyzed using random effects model of meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Nine studies with 483 patients were included in the final analysis. There was no difference in technical success between 2 procedures (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, .69-4.59; I = 22%) but EUS-BD was associated with better clinical success (OR, .45; 95% CI, .23-.89; I = 0%), fewer postprocedure adverse events (OR, .23; 95% CI, .12-.47; I = 57%), and lower rate of reintervention (OR, .13; 95% CI, .07-.24; I = 0%). There was no difference in length of hospital stay after the procedures, with a pooled standard mean difference of -.48 (95% CI, -1.13 to .16), but EUS-BD was more cost-effective, with a pooled standard mean difference of -.63 (95% CI, -1.06 to -.20). However, the latter 2 analyses were limited by considerable heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
When ERCP fails to achieve biliary drainage, EUS-guided interventions may be preferred over PTBD if adequate advanced endoscopy expertise and logistics are available. EUS-BD is associated with significantly better clinical success, lower rate of postprocedure adverse events, and fewer reinterventions.
Topics: Biliary Tract Surgical Procedures; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholestasis; Drainage; Endosonography; Humans; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Treatment Failure; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28063840
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.023 -
International Journal of Evidence-based... Jun 2020Previous studies, some dating back several decades, have recommended that the use of plain abdominal radiography should be curbed, particularly with the growth of more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Previous studies, some dating back several decades, have recommended that the use of plain abdominal radiography should be curbed, particularly with the growth of more accurate imaging modalities. However, evidence from referral data suggests that plain abdominal radiography continues to be a commonly requested examination. The aim of this review was to explore the gap between evidence and practice by re-examining the evidence using a robust methodology, investigating the diagnostic accuracy of plain abdominal radiography.
METHODS
Studies were identified from electronic databases and reference lists. Eligible studies provided data as to the sensitivity and specificity of plain abdominal radiography for either acute abdominal pain (Group A) or suspected intestinal obstruction (Group B). Version 2 of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was used to assess the quality of studies and hierarchical summary receiver operator characteristic curves and coupled forest plots were generated.
RESULTS
Four studies evaluated plain abdominal radiography for acute abdominal pain (Group A) and 10 for suspected intestinal obstruction (Group B). Two studies investigated both presentations and were included in both groups. Methodological quality of studies was moderately high, though incorporation bias was a common limitation. Sensitivity for Group A studies ranged from 30 to 46%, with specificity from 75 to 88%. For Group B, the range of sensitivity was 48 to 96% and specificity from 50 to 100%.
CONCLUSION
The results suggest that use of plain abdominal radiography could be substantially reduced, particularly for patients with undifferentiated acute abdominal pain. While some guidelines exist, there is sound argument for clinical decision rules for abdominal imaging to inform evidence-based clinical decision-making and radiology referrals.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Humans; Intestinal Obstruction; Professional Practice Gaps; ROC Curve; Radiography; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 32141947
DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000218 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Jan 2015Data regarding the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are primarily from nonrandomized studies. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Data regarding the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are primarily from nonrandomized studies.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from a systematic review of the placebo or no-stent arms of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs).
DESIGN
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs evaluating the efficacy of drugs and/or pancreatic stents to prevent PEP.
SETTING
Systematic review of patients enrolled in RCTs evaluating agents for PEP prophylaxis.
PATIENTS
Patients in the placebo or no-stent arms of the RCTs
INTERVENTION
ERCP.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS
Incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP.
RESULTS
There were 108 RCTs with 13,296 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. Overall, the PEP incidence was 9.7% and the mortality rate was 0.7%. Severity of PEP was reported for 8857 patients: 5.7%, 2.6%, and 0.5% of cases were mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. The incidence of PEP in 2345 high-risk patients was 14.7% and the severity of PEP was mild, moderate, and severe in 8.6%, 3.9%, and 0.8%, respectively, with a 0.2% mortality rate. The incidence of PEP was 13% in North American RCTs compared with 8.4% in European and 9.9% in Asian RCTs. ERCPs conducted before and after 2000 had a PEP incidence of 7.7% and 10%, respectively.
LIMITATIONS
Difference in PEP risk among patients in the included RCTs.
CONCLUSION
The incidence of PEP and severe PEP is similar in high-risk patients and the overall cohort. Discrepancies in the incidence of PEP across geographic regions require further study.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Humans; Incidence; Pancreatitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Stents
PubMed: 25088919
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.06.045 -
European Journal of Gastroenterology &... Dec 2016Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication following ERCP. We carried out a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication following ERCP. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the global literature on PEP prevention to provide clinical guidance and a framework for future research in this important field.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, Ovid, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched by two independent reviewers to identify full-length, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up until March 2016 investigating the use of pancreatic duct stents and pharmacological agents to prevent PEP.
RESULTS
Twelve RCTs comparing the risk of PEP after pancreatic duct stent placement (1369 patients) and 30 RCTs comparing pharmacological agents over placebo (10251 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were selected for final review and analysis. Meta-analysis showed that prophylactic pancreatic stents significantly decreased the odds of post-ERCP pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR), 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18-0.42]. Significant OR reduction of PEP was also observed in relation to rectal administration of diclofenac (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.12-0.48) and rectal administration of indometacin (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79) compared with placebo. Subgroup analysis showed a significant reduction with bolus-administered somatostatin (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49). Subgroup analysis showed a significant reduction with bolus-administered somatostatin (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49).
CONCLUSION
Pancreatic stent placement, rectal diclofenac, and bolus administration of somatostatin appear to be most effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Rectal; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Diclofenac; Hormones; Humans; Indomethacin; Odds Ratio; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatitis; Postoperative Complications; Somatostatin; Stents
PubMed: 27580214
DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000734 -
Best Practice & Research. Clinical... Jun 2016The diversity, technical skills required, and risk inherent to advanced endoscopy techniques all contribute to complex training curricula and steep learning curves.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The diversity, technical skills required, and risk inherent to advanced endoscopy techniques all contribute to complex training curricula and steep learning curves. Since trainees develop endoscopy skills at different rates, there has been a shift towards competency-based training and certification. Validated endoscopy performance measures for trainees are, therefore, necessary. The aim of this systematic review was to describe and critically assess the existing evidence regarding measures of performance for trainees in advanced endoscopy.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature from January 1980 to January 2016 was carried out using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge databases. MeSH terms related to 'advanced endoscopy' and 'performance' were applied to a highly sensitive search strategy. The main outcomes were face, content, and construct validity, as well as reliability.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 1,662 studies and 77 met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)=23, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)=30, colonoscopic polypectomy (CP)=11, balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE)=7, luminal stenting=3, radiofrequency ablation (RFA)=2, and endoscopic muscosal resection (EMR)=1). Good validity and reliability were found for measurement tools of overall performance in ERCP, EUS and CP, with applications for both patient-based and simulator training models. A number of specific technical skills were also shown to be valid measures of performance. These include: selective biliary cannulation, sphincterotomy, biliary stent placement, stone extraction and procedure time for ERCP; pancreatic solid mass T-staging, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) procedure time, number of EUS-FNA passes and puncture precision for EUS; procedure time and en bloc resection rate for CP; retrograde fluoroscopy time for BAE; and mean number of endoscopy sessions required to achieve complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CIEM) for RFA. The evidence for EMR and luminal stenting is of insufficient quality to make recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS
We have identified multiple valid and readily available performance measures for advanced endoscopy trainees for ERCP, EUS, CP, BAE and RFA procedures. These tools should be considered in advanced endoscopy training programs wishing to move away from apprenticeship-based training and towards competency-based learning with the help of patient-based and simulator tools.
Topics: Balloon Enteroscopy; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Clinical Competence; Colonoscopy; Education, Medical, Graduate; Educational Measurement; Endoscopy; Endosonography; Humans; Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 27345650
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.05.003 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jul 2014The continued need to develop less invasive alternatives to surgical and radiologic interventions has driven the development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided... (Review)
Review
The continued need to develop less invasive alternatives to surgical and radiologic interventions has driven the development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided treatments. These include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, EUS-guided necrosectomy, EUS-guided cholangiography and biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatography and pancreatic duct drainage, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage, EUS-guided drainage of abdominal and pelvic fluid collections, EUS-guided celiac plexus block and celiac plexus neurolysis, EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation, EUS-guided vascular interventions, EUS-guided delivery of antitumoral agents and EUS-guided fiducial placement and brachytherapy. However these procedures are technically challenging and require expertise in both EUS and interventional endoscopy, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and gastrointestinal stenting. We undertook a systematic review to record the entire body of literature accumulated over the past 2 decades on EUS-guided interventions with the objective of performing a critical appraisal of published articles, based on the classification of studies according to levels of evidence, in order to assess the scientific progress made in this field.
Topics: Catheter Ablation; Cholangiography; Digestive System Diseases; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Endoscopy, Digestive System; Endosonography; Endovascular Procedures; Ethanol; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Injections; Nerve Block; Patient Selection; Predictive Value of Tests; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 25024600
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i26.8424 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Apr 2022Recent advances in modern medicine have translated into increase in life expectancy in the USA and with that, a rise in the demand for invasive procedures in elderly... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recent advances in modern medicine have translated into increase in life expectancy in the USA and with that, a rise in the demand for invasive procedures in elderly patients. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the procedure of choice for managing various benign and malignant pancreatobiliary conditions and can be associated with various adverse events.
AIM
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes of ERCP in nonagenarians.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed in Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Review library until July 2020. Our primary outcomes were the rate of technical success and adverse events in nonagenarians. Secondary outcomes were comparison of technical success and adverse events compared with younger patients.
RESULTS
The initial search revealed 4933 studies, of which 24 studies with 5521 patients met our inclusion criteria. Pooled technical success rate of ERCP in nonagenarians was 92%, and pooled adverse event rate was 7.8%. There was no significant difference in technical success rate and overall rate of adverse events comparing ERCP outcomes in nonagenarians with a relatively younger population. The risk of post-ERCP bleeding was significantly higher in nonagenarians compared to younger patients with OR = 1.986 [1.113-3.544], I2 = 0. ERCP-related mortality was also significantly higher in nonagenarians compared to younger patients with OR = 4.720 [1.368-16.289], I2 = 0.
CONCLUSION
There was no significant difference in technical success rate and risk of adverse events related to ERCP in nonagenarians compared to younger patients. However, the risk of bleeding and procedure-related mortality was significantly higher.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Humans; Nonagenarians
PubMed: 33770331
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-021-06950-2 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Jul 2015Surgically altered pancreaticobiliary anatomy increases the difficulty of performing ERCP. Single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) is a relatively new technique that can be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgically altered pancreaticobiliary anatomy increases the difficulty of performing ERCP. Single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) is a relatively new technique that can be used for ERCP in patients with surgically altered anatomy.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the therapeutic and diagnostic success of SBE-ERCP among patients with surgically altered anatomy.
DESIGN/SETTING
Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving SBE-ERCP in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, hepaticojejunostomy, or Whipple procedure. Enteroscopy success was defined as success in reaching the papilla and/or biliary anastomosis by using SBE. Diagnostic success was defined as obtaining a cholangiogram. Procedural success was defined as the ability to provide successful intervention, if appropriate. A random-effects model was used.
RESULTS
A total of 461 patients underwent SBE-ERCP from 15 trials. The pooled enteroscopy, diagnostic, and procedural success rates were 80.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.3%-86.4%), 69.4% (95% CI, 61.0%-77.9%), and 61.7% (95% CI, 52.9%-70.5%), respectively. There was statistical large heterogeneity for enteroscopy, diagnostic, and therapeutic success (P < .001 for all). Adverse events occurred in 6.5% (95% CI, 4.7%-9.1%) of patients. There was no evidence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.
LIMITATIONS
Our findings and interpretations are limited by the quantity and heterogeneity of the studies included in the analysis.
CONCLUSION
SBE-ERCP has high diagnostic and procedural success rates in this challenging patient population. It should be considered a first-line intervention when biliary access is required after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, hepaticojejunostomy, or Whipple procedure.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Bile Ducts; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Gastric Bypass; Humans; Jejunum; Liver; Models, Statistical; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 25922248
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.02.013 -
Subtotal vs total cholecystectomy for difficult gallbladders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.American Journal of Surgery Mar 2024With severely inflamed gallbladders, laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be difficult and may require procedures like subtotal cholecystectomy (SC). Few studies exist... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
With severely inflamed gallbladders, laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be difficult and may require procedures like subtotal cholecystectomy (SC). Few studies exist comparing SC and total cholecystectomy (TC) in the setting of severe biliary inflammation. This meta-analysis aims to compare SC and TC for difficult gallbladders.
METHODS
Medline-OVID, Embase-OVID, and Cinahl were searched including only studies comparing SC to TC for difficult gallbladders. Primary outcome was CBD injury. Secondary outcomes included bile leak, duodenal injury, retained stone, bleeding, intraabdominal collection, wound infection, reoperation, and mortality.
RESULTS
Ten studies were included. Compared to TC, SC significantly lowered the risk for CBD injury (0 % vs. 1.6 %, RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.10-0.87) but increased risk of bile leaks (RR 3.5, 95%CI 1.79-6.84), postoperative ERCP (RR 2.86, 95%CI 1.53-5.35), intraabdominal collections (RR 2.55, 95%CI 1.32-4.93), and reoperation (RR 2.92, 95%CI 1.14-7.47).
CONCLUSION
SC is a reasonable alternative to difficult gallbladders that may decrease the risk of CBD injuries. Knowing both approaches is crucial to manage the difficult gallbladder while minimizing harm. Further studies are needed to understand the value of SC for difficult cholecystectomy.
Topics: Humans; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis; Reoperation; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde
PubMed: 38168604
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2023.12.022