-
Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2018The use of bougies and balloons to dilate benign esophageal strictures (BES) is a consolidated procedure. However, the amount of evidence available in scientific... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of bougies and balloons to dilate benign esophageal strictures (BES) is a consolidated procedure. However, the amount of evidence available in scientific literature supporting which is the best technique is very low, despite the great prevalence and importance of such pathology. This systematic review with meta-analysis aims at comparing both techniques, providing good quality of evidence.
METHODS
We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published from insertion to November 2017, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS, and grey literature. After the data extraction, a meta-analysis was performed. The main outcomes were symptomatic relief and recurrence rate. The secondary outcomes were bleeding, perforation, and postprocedure pain.
RESULTS
We included 5 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), totalizing 461 patients. Among them, 151 were treated with bougie dilation and 225 underwent balloon dilation. Regarding symptomatic relief, recurrence, bleeding, and perforation rates, there were no differences between the methods. Concerning postprocedure pain, patients submitted to balloon dilation had less intense pain (RD 0.27, 95% IC -0.42 to -0.07, = 0.007).
CONCLUSION
We conclude that there is no difference between bougie and balloon dilation of BESs regarding symptomatic relief, recurrence rate at 12 months, bleeding, and perforation. Patients undergoing balloon dilation present less severe postprocedure pain.
PubMed: 30116265
DOI: 10.1155/2018/5874870 -
BMJ Open Feb 2024The use of minimally invasive endoluminal treatment for urethral strictures has been a subject for debate for several decades. The aim of this study was to review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The use of minimally invasive endoluminal treatment for urethral strictures has been a subject for debate for several decades. The aim of this study was to review and discuss the safety, efficacy and factors influencing the clinical application of balloon dilation for the treatment of male urethral strictures.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus were searched for publications published before 17 July 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Two independent researchers screened and assessed the results, and all clinical studies on balloon dilation for the treatment of urethral strictures in men were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The success rate, rate of adverse events, International Prostate Symptom Scores, maximum uroflow (Qmax) and postvoid residual urine volume were the main outcomes. Stata V.14.0 was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies with 715 patients were ultimately included in this systematic review. The pooled results of eight studies showed that the reported success rate of simple balloon dilation for male urethral strictures was 67.07% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55.92% to 77.36%). The maximum urinary flow rate at 3 months (risk ratio [RR]= 2.6510, 95% CI: 1.0681 to 4.2338, p<0.01) and the maximum urinary flow rate at 1 year (RR= 1.6637, 95% CI: 1.1837 to 2.1437, p<0.05) were significantly different after dilation. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that balloon dilation is superior to optical internal urethrotomy or direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) (RR= 1.4754, 95% CI: 0.7306 to 2.9793, p=0.278).
CONCLUSION
Balloon dilation may be an intermediate step before urethroplasty and is a promising alternative therapy to simple dilation and DVIU. The balloon is a promising drug delivery tool, and paclitaxel drug-coated balloon dilation is effective in reducing retreatment rates in patients with recurrent anterior urethral strictures. The aetiology, location, length, previous treatment of urethral stricture may be associated with the efficacy of balloon dilation.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022334403.
Topics: Humans; Male; Urethral Stricture; Dilatation; Urethra; Catheterization; Retreatment
PubMed: 38320837
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-071923 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2023Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) have emerged in recent years as a valid alternative to traditional transvenous ICDs (TV-ICDs). Therefore,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) have emerged in recent years as a valid alternative to traditional transvenous ICDs (TV-ICDs). Therefore, the number of S-ICD implantations is rising, leading to a consequent increase in S-ICD-related complications sometimes requiring complete device removal. Thus, the aim of this systematic review is to gather all the available literature on S-ICD lead extraction (SLE), with particular reference to the type of indication, techniques, complications and success rate.
METHODS
Studies were identified by searching electronic databases (Medline via PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science) from inception to 21 November 2022. The search strategy adopted was developed using the following key words: subcutaneous, S-ICD, defibrillator, ICD, extraction, explantation. Studies were included if they met both of the following criteria: (1) inclusion of patients with S-ICD; (2) inclusion of patients who underwent SLE.
RESULTS
Our literature search identified 238 references. Based on the abstract evaluation, 38 of these citations were considered potentially eligible for inclusion, and their full texts were analyzed. We excluded 8 of these studies because no SLE was performed. Eventually, 30 studies were included, with 207 patients who underwent SLE. Overall, the majority of SLEs were performed for non-infective causes (59.90%). Infection of the device (affecting either the lead or the pocket) was the cause of SLE in 38.65% of cases. Indication data were not available in 3/207 cases. The mean dwelling time was 14 months. SLEs were performed using manual traction or with the aid of a tool designed for transvenous lead extraction (TLE), including either a rotational or non-powered mechanical dilator sheath.
CONCLUSIONS
SLE is performed mainly for non-infective causes. Techniques vary greatly across different studies. Dedicated tools for SLE might be developed in the future and standard approaches should be defined. In the meantime, authors are encouraged to share their experience and data to further refine the existing variegated approaches.
PubMed: 37297905
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12113710 -
Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences 2018We performed a systematic review on the clinical epidemiology and outcome of difficult embryo transfers (ETs) in infertility patients who present with difficult ET. We... (Review)
Review
We performed a systematic review on the clinical epidemiology and outcome of difficult embryo transfers (ETs) in infertility patients who present with difficult ET. We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Elsevier journals from 1980 to June 2017. We aimed to determine the most successful method resulting in highest pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with difficult ET. We identified 50 articles, in which 36 were reviewed and 15 were included. Analysis of the data collected showed that the majority of the difficult ETs were caused by cervical stenosis and the most common treatment was cervical dilation. We concluded that cervical dilation was effective at managing difficult ET. Hegar dilators used a minimum of 3 weeks before ET showed to have higher PR.
PubMed: 30568351
DOI: 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_59_18 -
Pharmacological Research Sep 2016Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery reflects endothelium-dependent vasodilator function; since it correlates with coronary endothelial function, its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery reflects endothelium-dependent vasodilator function; since it correlates with coronary endothelial function, its reduction could predict cardiovascular events. Several studies have investigated the potential impact of fibrates therapy on endothelial function, but clinical findings have not been fully consistent. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials in order to clarify whether fibrate therapy could improve endothelial function. A systematic search in PubMed-Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases was performed to identify randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating the effect of fibrates on endothelial function as estimated by FMD. A random-effects model and generic inverse variance method were used for meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis, risk of bias evaluation, and publication bias assessment were carried out using standard methods. Random-effects meta-regression was used to evaluate the impact of treatment duration on the estimated effect size. Fifteen trials with a total of 556 subjects met the eligibility criteria. Fibrate therapy significantly improves FMD (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 1.64%, 95% CI: 1.15, 2.13, p<0.001) and the result was confirmed in both subgroups with treatment durations ≤8 weeks (WMD: 1.35%, 95% CI: 0.85, 1.86, p<0.001) and >8 weeks (WMD: 2.55%, 95% CI: 1.21, 3.89, p<0.001). When the analysis was stratified according to the fibrate type, a significant effect was observed with fenofibrate but not with gemfibrozil, though difference between the two subgroups was not significant. Meta-analysis of data from trials where nitrate mediated dilation (NMD) was available did not suggest a significant change in NMD following treatment with fibrates. The results of this meta-analysis suggest that fibrates may exert beneficial effects on endothelial function, even over a short-term treatment course.
Topics: Blood Flow Velocity; Brachial Artery; Cardiovascular Diseases; Dyslipidemias; Endothelium, Vascular; Fibric Acids; Humans; Hypolipidemic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regional Blood Flow; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vasodilation; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 27320045
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2016.06.011 -
The European Respiratory Journal Dec 2017Paediatric airway endoscopy is accepted as a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure, with an expanding number of indications and applications in children. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
Paediatric airway endoscopy is accepted as a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure, with an expanding number of indications and applications in children. The aim of this European Respiratory Society task force was to produce a statement on interventional bronchoscopy in children, describing the evidence available at present and current clinical practice, and identifying areas deserving further investigation. The multidisciplinary task force panel performed a systematic review of the literature, focusing on whole lung lavage, transbronchial and endobronchial biopsy, transbronchial needle aspiration with endobronchial ultrasound, foreign body extraction, balloon dilation and occlusion, laser-assisted procedures, usage of airway stents, microdebriders, cryotherapy, endoscopic intubation, application of drugs and other liquids, and caregiver perspectives. There is a scarcity of published evidence in this field, and in many cases the task force had to resort to the collective clinical experience of the committee to develop this statement. The highlighted gaps in knowledge underline the need for further research and serve as a call to paediatric bronchoscopists to work together in multicentre collaborations, for the benefit of children with airway disorders.
Topics: Advisory Committees; Balloon Occlusion; Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid; Bronchoscopy; Child; Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration; Europe; Foreign Bodies; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Societies, Medical
PubMed: 29242258
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00901-2017 -
Biomedicines Feb 2022(1) Background: Over the last decade, misuse and diversion of medications has appeared to be increasingly concerning phenomena, including a range of different molecules.... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Over the last decade, misuse and diversion of medications has appeared to be increasingly concerning phenomena, including a range of different molecules. As current knowledge on the abuse of centrally acting anticholinergics is limited, the aim of the present study is to review the relevant published data, focusing on the following molecules: benztropine, biperiden, scopolamine, orphenadrine, and benzhexol/trihexyphenidyl (THP). (2) Methods: A systematic literature review was carried out using Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Research methods were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021257293). (3) Results: A total of 48 articles, including case reports, surveys, and retrospective case series analyses, were included. Most articles focused on benzhexol/THP ( = 25), and benztropine ( = 4). The routes of administration were mostly oral, and macrodoses together concomitant illicit drugs, e.g., cocaine, have been recorded. Toxidromes included both physical (e.g., tachycardia, tachypnoea, dilatated pupils, dry skin, urinary retention, ataxia, etc.) and psychiatric symptoms (e.g., anxiety, agitation, delirium, etc.). Fatal outcomes were very rare but reported. (4) Conclusion: Results from the present study show that anticholinergic misusing issues are both widespread worldwide and popular. Considering the potential adverse effects associated, healthcare professionals should be vigilant and monitor eventual misusing issues.
PubMed: 35203563
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10020355 -
AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2017The safety and efficacy of standard poststent angioplasty in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement have not been well-established. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKROUND
The safety and efficacy of standard poststent angioplasty in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement have not been well-established.
PURPOSE
We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stent placement and analyzed outcomes of standard-versus-selective poststent angioplasty.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Web of Science was performed for studies published between January 2000 and January 2015.
STUDY SELECTION
We included studies with >30 patients describing standard or selective poststent angioplasty during carotid artery stent placement.
DATA ANALYSIS
A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the following outcomes: periprocedural stroke/TIA, procedure-related neurologic/cardiovascular morbidity/mortality, bradycardia/hypotension, long-term stroke at last follow-up, long-term primary patency, and technical success.
DATA SYNTHESIS
We included 87 studies with 19,684 patients with 20,378 carotid artery stenoses. There was no difference in clinical ( = .49) or angiographic outcomes ( = .93) in carotid artery stent placement treatment with selective or standard poststent balloon angioplasty. Both selective and standard poststent angioplasty groups had a very high technical success of >98% and a low procedure-related mortality of 0.9%. There were no significant differences between both groups in the incidence of restenosis ( = .93) or procedure-related complications ( = .37).
LIMITATIONS
No comparison to a patient group without poststent dilation could be performed.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in angiographic and clinical outcomes among series that performed standard poststent angioplasty and those that performed poststent angioplasty in only select patients.
Topics: Aged; Angioplasty, Balloon; Carotid Stenosis; Female; Humans; Male; Patient Selection; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28302610
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5103 -
Neurogastroenterology and Motility Jul 2019One of the most used treatments for achalasia is pneumatic dilation of the lower esophageal sphincter to improve esophageal emptying. Multiple treatment protocols have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
One of the most used treatments for achalasia is pneumatic dilation of the lower esophageal sphincter to improve esophageal emptying. Multiple treatment protocols have been described with a varying balloon size, number of dilations, inflation pressure, and duration. We aimed to identify the most efficient and safe treatment protocol.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on pneumatic dilation in patients with primary achalasia. Clinical remission was defined as an Eckardt score ≤3 or adequate symptom reduction measured with a similar validated questionnaire. We compared the clinical remission rates and occurrence of complications between different treatment protocols.
RESULTS
We included 10 studies with 643 patients. After 6 months, dilation with a 30-mm or 35-mm balloon gave comparable mean success rates (81% and 79%, respectively), whereas a series of dilations up to 40 mm had a higher success rate of 90%. Elective additional dilation in patients with insufficient symptom resolution was somewhat more effective than performing a predefined series of dilations: 86% versus 75% after 12 months. Perforations occurred most often during initial dilations, and significantly more often using a 35-mm balloon than a 30-mm balloon (3.2 vs 1.0%); P = 0.027. A subsequent 35-mm dilation was safer than an initial dilation with 35 mm (0.97% vs 9.3% perforations), P = 0.0017.
CONCLUSIONS
The most efficient and safe method of dilating achalasia patients is a graded approach starting with a 30-mm dilation, followed by an elective 35-mm dilation and 40 mm when there is insufficient symptom relief.
Topics: Catheterization; Dilatation; Esophageal Achalasia; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower; Humans
PubMed: 30697952
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13548 -
Medicine Apr 2017Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disorder of the esophagus characterized by mucosal eosinophilic infiltration. Topical glucocorticoids are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disorder of the esophagus characterized by mucosal eosinophilic infiltration. Topical glucocorticoids are considered standard line of treatment, whereas endoscopic dilations are performed for patients presenting with treatment-resistant disease or manifestations of dysphagia and/or food impactions. Efficacy and safety of esophageal dilation in these patients are currently unclear.
AIMS
Primary outcomes were to evaluate the efficacy, adverse events, and mortality rates of endoscopic esophageal dilation in patients with EoE.
METHODS
STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:: Studies that reported the use of esophageal dilation in EoE patients were included in this meta-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 statement. Clinical improvement was defined as patient-reported symptom relief noted by the authors of individual studies. The symptoms were assessed on various nonstandardized, however, relevant questionnaires that were deemed appropriate by the senior authors of individual studies.
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 491 reference articles, in which 39 articles were selected and reviewed. Data were extracted from 14 studies (N = 1607) using esophageal dilation for EoE management, which met the inclusion criterion. Mean age of patients was 41years. Pooled patients included 75% males. The pooled proportion of patients that showed clinical improvement with esophageal dilations, after the median follow-up period of 12 months, was 84.95%. No procedure-related deaths were noted. The pooled proportion of patients with post procedural esophageal perforation, chest pain, hospitalization, deep mucosal tear (involving muscularis propria), small mucosal tear, and hemorrhage were 0.61%, 0.06%, 0.74%, 4.04%, 22.32%, and 0.38% respectively. I (inconsistency) was 0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0-49.8) and Egger: bias was 0.06 (95% CI = -0.30 to 0.42).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with conformed diagnosis of EoE, endoscopic esophageal dilation seems to be an effective and safe treatment option. Majority patients with chest pain and deep mucosal tears did not require hospitalization and symptoms were self-limiting.
Topics: Dilatation; Eosinophilic Esophagitis; Esophagoscopy; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28383396
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005877