-
International Journal of Colorectal... Jan 2020The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional...
PURPOSE
The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are scarce and controversial. This systematic review sought to synthesize fecal continence, QoL, and manometric outcomes after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS).
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted searching for articles reporting on functional outcomes after TEM or TAMIS between January 1995 and June 2018. The evaluated outcome parameters were pre- and postoperative fecal continence (primary endpoint), QoL, and manometric results. Data were extracted using the same scales and measurement units as from the original study.
RESULTS
A total of 29 studies comprising 1297 patients were included. Fecal continence outcomes were evaluated in 23 (79%) studies with a wide variety of assessment tools and divergent results. Ten studies (34%) analyzed QoL changes, and manometric variables were assessed in 15 studies (51%). Most studies reported some deterioration in manometric scores without major QoL impairment. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, it was not possible to perform any pooled analysis or meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
These techniques do not seem to affect continence by themselves except in minor cases. The possibility of worsened function after TEM and TAMIS should not be underestimated. There is a need to homogenize or standardize functional and manometric outcomes assessment after TEM or TAMIS.
Topics: Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Manometry; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31761962
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-019-03439-3 -
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and... Jan 2024We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the symptomatic response rate to antibiotics in patients with small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/AIMS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the symptomatic response rate to antibiotics in patients with small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). Similarly, we performed a meta-analysis on the symptomatic response to antibiotics in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients with and without SIBO.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials and prospective studies reporting dichotomous outcomes were included.
RESULTS
There were 6 studies included in the first meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antibiotics to placebo or no antibiotic. This included 196 patients, of whom 101 received antibiotics and 95 received placebo or no antibiotics. Significantly more patients improved with antibiotics (relative risk [95% CI] = 2.46 [1.33-4.55], = 0.004). There were 4 studies included in the analysis comparing symptomatic response rates in IBS patients with or without SIBO with 266 IBS patients, of whom 172 had SIBO and 94 did not. The pooled response rate for symptomatic response was 51.2% in the SIBO group vs 23.4% in the no SIBO group, respectively. Significantly more IBS patients with SIBO responded to antibiotics compared to those without SIBO (relative risk [95% CI] = 2.07 [1.40-3.08], = 0.0003).
CONCLUSIONS
Antibiotics appear to be efficacious in treating SIBO, although small sample sizes and poor data quality limit this interpretation. Symptomatic response rates also appear to be higher in IBS patients with SIBO. This may be the first example of precision medicine in IBS as opposed to our current empiric treatment approach. Large-multicenter studies are needed to verify the results.
PubMed: 38173154
DOI: 10.5056/jnm22187 -
Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira... Jan 2021To demonstrate the need of performing esophageal pH monitoring and manometry in patients with clinical suspicion of Gastroesophageal reflux disease, as more accurate and...
OBJECTIVE
To demonstrate the need of performing esophageal pH monitoring and manometry in patients with clinical suspicion of Gastroesophageal reflux disease, as more accurate and practical complementary exams in the indication of surgical treatment.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out in the PubMed/Medline database, based on the recommendations of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) protocol, selecting studies in humans, published in Portuguese, Spanish, and English, from January 1, 2009 to August 5, 2020. The following descriptors were used: "reflux gastroesophageal" AND "surgery" AND "surgical treatment" AND "esophageal manometry" OR "pH monitoring". After that, retrospective or prospective observational studies with a sample of less than 100 individuals, or with limited access, reports or case series, review articles, letters, comments, or book chapters were excluded. To facilitate the application of the exclusion criteria, the Rayyan management base was used.
RESULTS
Out of the 676 studies found, 19 valid and eligible studies were selected to make inferences.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the best evidence, currently, considering national particularities, performing a 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and esophageal manometry for all patients undergoing anti-reflux surgery.
Topics: Esophageal pH Monitoring; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Manometry; Observational Studies as Topic; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34161486
DOI: 10.1590/1806-9282.67.01.20200354 -
European Archives of... Apr 2024Retrograde cricopharyngeal dysfunction (RCPD) is a disease first described systematically in 2019. The main symptom is inability to belch due to cricopharyngeal muscle... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Retrograde cricopharyngeal dysfunction (RCPD) is a disease first described systematically in 2019. The main symptom is inability to belch due to cricopharyngeal muscle dysfunction. Other symptoms include gurgling noises, chest pain, bloating, and excessive flatulence. This paper aims to describe RCPD, the aetiology and diagnosis, treatment options, follow-up, and treatment with botulinum toxin (BT).
METHODS
A systematic review was done according to the PRISMA guidelines, using the databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane at 8/3/2024. The search combined BT with different descriptions of RCPD. All papers were screened by two authors.
RESULTS
120 papers were identified in the search. After screening 13 papers describing 472 patients in total were included. Mean age was 29.3 years with 51.1% men. Diagnosis was established in 82.4% of the cases by symptomatology, 2.1% by high-resolution manometry, and 15.3% by oesophagoscopy. The mean amount of BT was 66 units (U). Mean follow-up time was 13 months. After 1-4 weeks 93.7% had an effect post-treatment and 81.0% after 6 months. Common symptoms were inability to belch (99.8%), chest pain and/or bloating (95.4%), gurgling noises (84.9%), and excessive flatulence (75.9%). Common complications were mild and transient dysphagia (59.4%) and reflux (35.4%).
CONCLUSION
The accumulated numbers of patients with RCPD indicates a growing attention to the plausible condition. Injection with BT is a good and safe treatment of RCPD. Most patients only experience mild and transient complications to the treatment. Much is still unknown about RCPD and conditions for setting the diagnosis needs to be evaluated and established internationally.
PubMed: 38564007
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08619-8 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jul 2006Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction is a benign, functional gastrointestinal disorder for which invasive endoscopic therapy with potential complications is often recommended. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction is a benign, functional gastrointestinal disorder for which invasive endoscopic therapy with potential complications is often recommended.
AIMS
To review the available evidence regarding the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive methods that have been used to establish the diagnosis and to estimate the long-term outcome after endoscopic sphincterotomy.
METHODS
A systematic review of English language articles and abstracts containing relevant terms was performed.
RESULTS
Non-invasive diagnostic methods are limited by their low sensitivity and specificity, especially in patients with Type III sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Secretin-stimulated magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography appears to be useful in excluding other potential causes of symptoms, and morphine-provocated hepatobiliary scintigraphy also warrants further study. Approximately 85%, 69% and 37%, of patients with biliary Types I, II and III sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, respectively, experience sustained benefit after endoscopic sphincterotomy. In pancreatic sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, approximately 75% of patients report symptomatic improvement after pancreatic sphincterotomy, but the studies have been non-controlled and heterogeneous.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, particularly those with biliary Type III, should be carefully evaluated before considering sphincter of Oddi manometry and endoscopic sphincterotomy. Further controlled trials are needed to justify the invasive management of patients with biliary Type III and pancreatic sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.
Topics: Common Bile Duct Diseases; Humans; Sphincter of Oddi; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic
PubMed: 16842450
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.02971.x -
Techniques in Coloproctology Jul 2015There is still no clear consensus about surgical treatment of anal fistulas. Fistulotomy or fistulectomy and primary sphincter reconstruction is still regarded with... (Review)
Review
There is still no clear consensus about surgical treatment of anal fistulas. Fistulotomy or fistulectomy and primary sphincter reconstruction is still regarded with skepticism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence in the literature supporting the use of this technique in the treatment of complex anal fistulas. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched for the period between 1985 and 2015. The studies selected were peer-reviewed articles, with no limitations concerning the study cohort size, length of the follow-up or language. Technical notes, commentaries, letters and meeting abstracts were excluded. The major endpoints were the technique adopted, clinical efficacy, changes at anorectal manometry and assessment of quality of life after the procedure. Fourteen reports (666 patients) satisfied the inclusion criteria. The quality of the studies was low. Some differences about the surgical technique emerged; however, after a weighted average duration of follow-up of 28.9 months, the overall success rate was 93.2 %, with a low morbidity rate. The overall postoperative worsening continence rate was 12.4 % (mainly post-defecation soiling). In almost all cases, the anorectal manometry parameters remained unchanged. The quality of life, when evaluated, improved significantly. Fistulotomy or fistulectomy and primary sphincteroplasty could be a therapeutic option for complex anal fistula. Success rates were very high and the risk of postoperative fecal incontinence was lower than after simple fistulotomy. Well-designed trials are needed to support the inclusion of this technique in a treatment algorithm for the management of complex anal fistulas.
Topics: Anal Canal; Defecation; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Manometry; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Fistula; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26062740
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-015-1323-4 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Apr 2021Two subgroups of fecal incontinence (FI) are described in literature and used in clinical practice. However, the pertinence of this classification of FI is still unknown... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Two subgroups of fecal incontinence (FI) are described in literature and used in clinical practice. However, the pertinence of this classification of FI is still unknown as there are no clear established guidelines. To a better understanding, we performed a systematic review to characterize the different types of FI (active, passive, or mixed) on the basis of clinical presentation and complementary explorations.
METHODS
This systematic literature review was performed in reference to recommendations for systematic review using PRISMA guidelines without date restriction, until May 2020. This systematic review was performed without temporal limitation using MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases.
RESULTS
Six hundred nine unique citations were identified from all the databases combined. Of those, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 8 retrospective observational studies and 13 prospective observational studies. There was a lack of homogeneity in definitions of passive and urge (active) FI among studies. Prevalence of passive and urge FI was respectively of 4.0-5.0 and 15.0-35.0%. Clinical characteristics, physical examination, and endoanal imaging were not evaluated in most studies. In anorectal manometry, maximal squeeze pressure was higher in passive FI subgroup in most studies and results regarding maximal resting pressure remain discordant. There seemed to be no difference regarding first sensation volume and maximal tolerable volume among subgroups. A few studies evaluated pudendal terminal nerve motor latency with no difference among subgroups.
CONCLUSION
There is a lack of well-conducted prospective studies comparing the different subtypes of FI with validated definitions in both clinical and paraclinical examinations.
Topics: Anal Canal; Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Manometry; Observational Studies as Topic; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33210162
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03803-8 -
International Journal of Pediatric... Dec 2021adenoidectomy is one of the most common surgical procedure in pediatric otolaryngology practice. Clinical guidelines (such as the Spanish or American) suggest... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
adenoidectomy is one of the most common surgical procedure in pediatric otolaryngology practice. Clinical guidelines (such as the Spanish or American) suggest adenoidectomy when the enlargement of the adenoids is associated with nasal obstruction. Nasal endoscopy and cephalograms are adequate methods to estimate the size of the adenoids. However, they do not measure nasal patency. This systematic review is designed with the objective of exploring the relationship between adenoid size and nasal ventilation through rhinomanometry.
REVIEW METHODS
3 authors members of the YO-IFOS rhinology study group independently analyzed the data sources (Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO) for papers assessing both nasal resistance and/or nasal airflow in rhinomanometry and adenoid size by any method (endoscopy, cephalogram, direct examination).
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies with a total population of 969 participants met the inclusion criteria. 5 authors explored the size of the adenoids through endoscopy. 4 authors explored the adenoids through lateral cephalograms. Finally, a further 2 authors explored adenoid size studying the resected tissue. Five studies explored the correlation between adenoid size and nasal resistance in rhinomanometry, which ranged from 0.20 to 0.84. Finally, 5 studies used nasal decongestant. It was found higher sensitivity and specificity, a higher area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic curve, and higher correlation with adenoid size for rhinomanometry under nasal decongestion.
CONCLUSION
Up to now, there is no ideal diagnostic method for adenoid hypertrophy. Therefore, it seems prudent to use a combination of all currently available tools, as they provide complementary, rather than supplementary information. Available evidence suggests that rhinomanometry combined with nasal decongestant could help to elucidate the existence of nasal obstruction in intermediate cases of adenoid hypertrophy, as well as throw light on other possible causes for nasal obstruction, mainly turbinate hypertrophy.
Topics: Adenoidectomy; Adenoids; Child; Endoscopy; Humans; Hypertrophy; Nasal Obstruction; Rhinomanometry
PubMed: 34537548
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2021.110895 -
Head & Neck Jan 2018No practice guidelines have been established for swallowing outcomes after cricopharyngeal myotomy (CPM). The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize evidence... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
No practice guidelines have been established for swallowing outcomes after cricopharyngeal myotomy (CPM). The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize evidence for swallowing outcomes in patients undergoing CPM to treat symptomatic cricopharyngeal dysfunction, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol.
METHODS
Swallowing outcomes examined included penetration/aspiration ratings, manometric measures, patient-rated dysphagia scales, clinician-rated dysphagia scales, diet level, and weight.
RESULTS
Three databases were queried for studies published between January 1995 and July 2015, resulting in a total of 122 full-text eligible records. Studies were screened and reviewed, culminating in 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Critical appraisal of study design, swallowing outcomes measures, and statistical analysis were summarized.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review revealed insufficient evidence for guiding clinical practice. Future investigations should use validated patient-rated and clinician-rated instruments as well as detailed high-resolution manometry measures to optimally capture postoperative swallowing outcomes.
Topics: Cricoid Cartilage; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Female; Humans; Male; Myotomy; Pharyngeal Diseases; Pharyngeal Muscles; Recovery of Function; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29083513
DOI: 10.1002/hed.24977 -
Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow in Healthy and Obstructed Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Laryngoscope Feb 2021Nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) is a practical and affordable tool that measures maximum inspiratory flow rate through both nostrils. Although NPIF values for healthy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) is a practical and affordable tool that measures maximum inspiratory flow rate through both nostrils. Although NPIF values for healthy controls and patients appear to differ considerably, a generally expected value for populations with and without nasal obstruction has yet to be established. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the mean NPIF value in populations with and without nasal obstruction.
METHODS
Medline (1946-) and Embase (1947-) were searched until July 1, 2017. A search strategy was used to identify studies that reported NPIF values for defined healthy or disease states. All studies providing original data were included. The study population was defined as having either normal nasal breathing or nasal obstruction. A meta-analysis of the mean data was presented in forest plots, and data were presented as mean (95% confidence interval [CI]).
RESULTS
The search yielded 1,526 studies, of which 29 were included. The included studies involved 1,634 subjects with normal nasal breathing and 817 subjects with nasal obstruction. The mean NPIF value for populations with normal nasal breathing was 138.4 (95% CI: 127.9-148.8) L/min. The mean value for populations with nasal obstruction was 97.5 (95% CI: 86.1-108.8) L/min.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence confirms a difference between mean NPIF values of populations with and without nasal obstruction. The mean value of subjects with no nasal obstruction is 138.4 L/min, and the mean value of nasally obstructed populations is 97.5 L/min. Prospective studies adopting a standardized procedure are required to further assess normative NPIF values. Laryngoscope, 131:260-267, 2021.
Topics: Humans; Inhalation; Nasal Obstruction; Nose; Reference Values; Respiratory Function Tests; Rhinomanometry
PubMed: 32386248
DOI: 10.1002/lary.28682