-
Digestive and Liver Disease : Official... Apr 2024The role of small-bowel (SB) cancer surveillance by capsule endoscopy (CE) in Lynch syndrome (LS) patients has been investigated in recent years, with contradicting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
The role of small-bowel (SB) cancer surveillance by capsule endoscopy (CE) in Lynch syndrome (LS) patients has been investigated in recent years, with contradicting results. This meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic yield (DY) of CE as a screening tool in asymptomatic LS patients.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed for all studies reporting the results of SB cancer screening in patients with LS. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the DY of CE in this setting for consecutive screening rounds.
RESULTS
Five studies comprising 428 patients and CE 677 procedures were included for data extraction and statistical analysis. The estimated pooled DY for CE-identified pathological findings was 8% in the first screening round and 6% in the second. Limiting the analysis to histologically-confirmed pathological findings, the pooled DY of second-round screening dropped to 0%. The included studies showed a significantly different prevalence of pathogenic variants in mismatch repair (path_MMR) genes, which underlie different cumulative incidences of extracolonic cancers.
CONCLUSIONS
SB surveillance by CE with a 2-year interval in asymptomatic LS individuals does not appear to be an effective screening strategy. Confirmatory prospective studies in this context are needed, considering the different cumulative incidence of SB tumors according to underlying path_MMR defects.
Topics: Humans; Capsule Endoscopy; Colorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary Nonpolyposis; Prospective Studies; Intestine, Small; Intestinal Neoplasms; Duodenal Neoplasms
PubMed: 37563008
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2023.07.028 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Oct 2023Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is increasingly applied in the treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors ≤20 mm: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is increasingly applied in the treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR).
METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched from 2012 until November 20, 2021: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the rates of en bloc resection and complete (R0) resection, and the secondary outcomes were procedure time, adverse events (delayed bleeding and delayed perforation), and recurrence rate.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies with 679 lesions (331 underwent UEMR and 348 CEMR) were included in this study. The pooled analysis showed that UMER achieves a similar en bloc resection rate (87.6 vs. 89.9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 3.73; P =0.64; I2 =74%), a similar R0 resection rate (67.3 vs. 73.6%; OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.23; P =0.78; I2 =59%), a shorter procedure time (min) (mean difference [MD], -4.05, 95% CI: -6.40 to -1.71; P =0.0007; I2 =70%) compared with CEMR. There were no significant differences in the rates of delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and recurrence (2.4 vs. 1.7%, 0 vs. 0.6%, 2.2 vs. 4.4%, respectively).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis demonstrated that UEMR appears to be an effective and safe alternative to CEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm.
Topics: Humans; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Intestinal Mucosa; Treatment Outcome; Duodenum; Duodenal Neoplasms; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36084162
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001763 -
ANZ Journal of Surgery Feb 2024The majority of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have advanced disease at presentation, preventing treatment with curative intent. Management of these...
BACKGROUND
The majority of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have advanced disease at presentation, preventing treatment with curative intent. Management of these patients is often provided by surgical teams for whom there are a lack of widely accepted strategies for care. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to identify key issues in patients with advanced PDAC and integrate the evidence to form a care bundle checklist for use in surgical clinics.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed regarding best supportive care for advanced PDAC according to the PRISMA guidelines. Interventions pertaining to supportive care were included whilst preventative and curative treatments were excluded. A narrative review was planned.
RESULTS
Forty-four studies were assessed and four themes were developed: (i) Pain is an undertreated symptom, requiring escalating analgesics and sometimes invasive modalities. (ii) Health-related quality of life necessitates optimisation by involving family, carers and multi-disciplinary teams. (iii) Malnutrition and weight loss can be mitigated with early assessment, replacement therapies and resistance exercise. (iv) Biliary and duodenal obstruction can often be relieved by endoscopic/radiological interventions with surgery rarely required.
CONCLUSION
This is the first systematic review to evaluate the different types of interventions utilized during best supportive care in patients with advanced PDAC. It provides a comprehensive care bundle for surgeons that informs management of the common issues experienced by patients within a multidisciplinary environment.
PubMed: 38366699
DOI: 10.1111/ans.18906 -
Non-Operative Approach to Contained Perforated Marginal Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Case Series.The American Surgeon Apr 2024Perforated marginal ulcers (PMUs) are a rare but known complication of bariatric surgery. Management typically involves prompt surgical intervention, but limited data...
BACKGROUND
Perforated marginal ulcers (PMUs) are a rare but known complication of bariatric surgery. Management typically involves prompt surgical intervention, but limited data exists on non-operative approaches. This study reviews published data on non-operative management of PMUs and presents a case series of patients who were managed non-operatively. Our hypothesis is that certain patients with signs of perforation can be successfully managed non-operatively with close observation.
METHODS
We completed a systematic review searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov. Ultimately 3 studies described the presentation and non-operative management of 5 patients. Additionally, we prospectively collected data from our institution on all patients who presented between Dec. 2022 and Dec. 2023 with PMUs confirmed on imaging and managed non-operatively.
RESULTS
In our literature review, three patients had Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), while two had one anastomosis gastric bypass. One patient required surgery two days after admission. Another underwent elective conversion surgery weeks later for a non-healing ulcer. Two received endoscopic interventions. One patient recovered with nil-per-os (NPO) status, and intravenous proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. The patients in our case series presented with normal vital signs, an average of 30 months after RYGB, and with CT scan signs of perforation. None of these patients required surgical or endoscopic intervention.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, while perforated marginal ulcers have traditionally been considered a surgical emergency, some patients can be successfully treated with non-operative management. More research is needed to identify the clinical presentation features, comorbidities, and imaging findings of this group.
Topics: Humans; Administration, Intravenous; Gastric Bypass; Peptic Ulcer; Research; Ulcer
PubMed: 37927010
DOI: 10.1177/00031348231209533 -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2024Marginal ulcer (MU) is a common complication of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). The primary goal of this meta-analysis was to identify potential risk factors for MU... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUNDS
Marginal ulcer (MU) is a common complication of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). The primary goal of this meta-analysis was to identify potential risk factors for MU post-RYGB.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted on four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) to identify articles published from inception to 23 May 2023 that reported risk factors linked to ulcer occurrence post-RYGB. Hazard Ratio (HR) and Odds Ratio (OR) with respective 95% CI were calculated to estimate the impact of selected risk factors on MU. The risk factors were evaluated through multivariate analyses. The estimated risk factors were subjected to a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis based on study baseline characteristics and leave-one-out sensitivity analysis were also performed to investigate the potential sources of heterogeneity and assess the robustness of the findings.
RESULT
Herein, 14 observational studies involving 77 250 patients were included. Diabetes, smoking, and steroid use were identified to be risk factors of MU, with pooled ORs of (1.812; 95% CI: 1.226-2.676; P =0.003), (3.491; 95% CI: 2.204-5.531; P< 0.001), and (2.804; 95% CI: 1.383-5.685; P =0.004), respectively. Other risk factors, such as alcohol consumption, male sex, and PPI use, were deemed not significant due to differences in data acquisition and effect estimates.
CONCLUSION
Diabetes, smoking, and steroid use were identified as independent risk factors of MU. Enhancing awareness of these identified risk factors will lead to more effective preoperative prevention and targeted postoperative interventions for patients undergoing RYGB.
Topics: Humans; Male; Gastric Bypass; Obesity; Peptic Ulcer; Risk Factors; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Cohort Studies; Steroids; Obesity, Morbid; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 38320087
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001042