-
Cureus Aug 2021Recently, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) without submucosal injection was introduced as a new replacement for conventional EMR (CEMR) and was reported to... (Review)
Review
Recently, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) without submucosal injection was introduced as a new replacement for conventional EMR (CEMR) and was reported to be useful for resecting large colonic polyps. Here, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of these two methods by a systematic review and meta-analysis. We comprehensively searched multiple databases until July 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UEMR with CEMR. The primary outcomes were the proportion of R0 resection and mean procedure time, and the secondary outcomes were the proportion of en bloc resection and all adverse events. Three reviewers independently searched for articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. This study was registered in www.protocols.io (Protocol Integer ID: 40849). We included six RCTs (1,374 polyps). We judged that a meta-analysis was not available, and the data were summarized narratively for the proportion of R0 resection. Regarding procedure time, UEMR likely resulted in a large reduction (mean difference = -64.3 seconds; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -122.5 to -6.0 seconds; I = 86%; moderate certainty of evidence). UEMR likely resulted in a large increase in en bloc resection (odds ratio = 1.85; 95% CI = 1.15 to 2.98; I = 60%; moderate certainty of evidence). Percentages of adverse events were 0-17% with CEMR and 0-16% with UEMR. In summary, UEMR might have higher efficacy than CEMR in the endoscopic resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, with likely a large reduction in procedure time.
PubMed: 34540484
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.17261 -
Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2019To assess the association between MUC expression levels in colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues and prognosis and investigate the associations between MUC expression levels... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association between MUC expression levels in colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues and prognosis and investigate the associations between MUC expression levels and CRC clinicopathological characteristics.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception through September 13, 2019, to identify studies investigating the association between MUC expression levels in CRC tissues and prognosis. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratio (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate associations between MUC expression levels and prognosis or clinicopathological characteristics, respectively. The heterogeneity between studies was assessed by the values, whereas the likelihood of publication bias was assessed by Egger's linear regression and Begg's rank correlation test.
RESULTS
Among 33 included studies ( = 6032 patients), there were no associations between combined MUC phenotype expression levels and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS)/relapse-free survival (RFS) in patients with CRC. In subgroup analyses, the upregulated MUC1 expression (HR = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.29-1.74; < 0.00001) was associated with poor OS. However, the upregulated MUC2 expression (HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.79; < 0.00001) was associated with better OS. Furthermore, a high level of MUC1 expression (HR = 1.99; 95% CI, 0.99-3.99; = 0.05) was associated with shorter DFS/RFS. However, patients with a low level of MUC2 tumors showed better DFS/RFS than patients with a high level of MUC2 tumors (HR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.04; = 0.08; = 0.0.009, = 67%) and MUC5AC expression (HR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.82; = 0.003) was associated with longer DFS/RFS. In addition, a high level of MUC1 expression was associated with CRC in the rectum, deeper invasion, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, advanced tumor stage, and lymphatic invasion. A high level of MUC2 expression had a protective effect. High secretion of MUC5AC is associated with colon cancer compared with rectal cancer.
CONCLUSION
The protein expression of MUC1 might be a poor biomarker in colorectal cancer and might play a role in tumor transformation and metastasis. However, the protein expression of MUC2 expression might have a protective effect. Furthermore, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of large patients are needed to confirm the results.
PubMed: 31933627
DOI: 10.1155/2019/2391670 -
International Journal of Surgery Case... 2020Colonic volvulus is defined as a torsion of a part of the colon causing large bowel obstruction by strangulation which may lead to ischemia and then necrosis. The...
INTRODUCTION
Colonic volvulus is defined as a torsion of a part of the colon causing large bowel obstruction by strangulation which may lead to ischemia and then necrosis. The synchronous occurrence of a sigmoid colon and transverse colon volvulus is exceptional. We describe a case of synchronous sigmoid and transverse volvulus in a patient with a qualitative systematic review of this condition.
PRESENTATION OF THE CASE
This is a 74-year-old patient with a history of chronic constipation, who consulted for bowel obstruction. Plain abdominal radiography showed diffuse gas distension of the colon with the absence of rectal gas. An exploratory laparotomy was performed and showed sigmoid colon volvulus associated with synchronous transverse colon volvulus without bowel necrosis. A left hemicolectomy with loop colostomy was performed. The restoration of bowel continuity was done 3 weeks. The post-operative course was uneventful.
DISCUSSION
The occurrence of a simultaneous sigmoid and transverse colonic volvulus is an exceptional situation. Due to the rarity of this clinical entity, the literature concerning its description is sparse and the treatment options are poorly codified. There are no guidelines in the treatment and a tailored approach should be used for each patient.
CONCLUSION
The dual location of strangulation makes this situation a major surgical emergency with a high risk of gangrene and septic shock. Colectomy with delayed anastomosis should be preferred in the treatment.
PubMed: 32979829
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2020.09.027 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2022This systematic review was aimed to address the prevalence and causes of intestinal obstruction in Ethiopia.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review was aimed to address the prevalence and causes of intestinal obstruction in Ethiopia.
METHODS
Systematic searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, African Journals Online, HINARI, and other supplementary sources, including Google Scholar. We conducted methodological quality assessments for the articles by employing a critical appraisal checklist of Joanna Briggs Institute.
RESULTS
The reported prevalence of intestinal obstruction in Ethiopia ranges from 18.6% to 50.7% among patients with acute abdomen. However, the prevalence varies from 4.3% to 34.6% among total surgical admissions. The leading causes of small intestinal obstruction were small bowel volvulus, intussusception, and adhesion. Sigmoid volvulus was the most commonly reported cause of large intestine obstruction, followed by colonic cancer.
CONCLUSION
The highest reported prevalence of intestinal obstruction in Ethiopia was 50.7% among patients with acute abdomen and 34.6% among surgical admissions. Small intestine volvulus and sigmoid volvulus were the common causes of small and large bowel obstructions, respectively. Therefore, clinicians have to consider the common causes during the diagnosis and management of intestinal obstruction.
PubMed: 35371487
DOI: 10.1177/20503121221083207 -
European Journal of Epidemiology May 2015Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have large economic impact at multiple levels. To systematically review the literature investigating the economic impact of NCDs... (Review)
Review
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have large economic impact at multiple levels. To systematically review the literature investigating the economic impact of NCDs [including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD)] on macro-economic productivity. Systematic search, up to November 6th 2014, of medical databases (Medline, Embase and Google Scholar) without language restrictions. To identify additional publications, we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field. Randomized controlled trials, cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, ecological studies and modelling studies carried out in adults (>18 years old) were included. Two independent reviewers performed all abstract and full text selection. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or consulting a third reviewer. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a predesigned data collection form. Main outcome measure was the impact of the selected NCDs on productivity, measured in DALYs, productivity costs, and labor market participation, including unemployment, return to work and sick leave. From 4542 references, 126 studies met the inclusion criteria, many of which focused on the impact of more than one NCD on productivity. Breast cancer was the most common (n = 45), followed by stroke (n = 31), COPD (n = 24), colon cancer (n = 24), DM (n = 22), lung cancer (n = 16), CVD (n = 15), cervical cancer (n = 7) and CKD (n = 2). Four studies were from the WHO African Region, 52 from the European Region, 53 from the Region of the Americas and 16 from the Western Pacific Region, one from the Eastern Mediterranean Region and none from South East Asia. We found large regional differences in DALYs attributable to NCDs but especially for cervical and lung cancer. Productivity losses in the USA ranged from 88 million US dollars (USD) for COPD to 20.9 billion USD for colon cancer. CHD costs the Australian economy 13.2 billion USD per year. People with DM, COPD and survivors of breast and especially lung cancer are at a higher risk of reduced labor market participation. Overall NCDs generate a large impact on macro-economic productivity in most WHO regions irrespective of continent and income. The absolute global impact in terms of dollars and DALYs remains an elusive challenge due to the wide heterogeneity in the included studies as well as limited information from low- and middle-income countries.
Topics: Adult; Chronic Disease; Cost of Illness; Delivery of Health Care; Employment; Global Health; Health Expenditures; Humans; Income; Internationality; Male; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Sickness Impact Profile
PubMed: 25837965
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-015-0026-5 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Sep 2009To evaluate the proportion of successful complete cure en-bloc resections of large colorectal polyps achieved by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To evaluate the proportion of successful complete cure en-bloc resections of large colorectal polyps achieved by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).
METHODS
Studies using the EMR technique to resect large colorectal polyps were selected. Successful complete cure en-bloc resection was defined as one piece margin-free polyp resection. Articles were searched for in Medline, Pubmed, and the Cochrane Control Trial Registry, among other sources.
RESULTS
An initial search identified 2620 reference articles, from which 429 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Data was extracted from 25 studies (n = 5221) which met the inclusion criteria. All the studies used snares to perform EMR. Pooled proportion of en-bloc resections using a random effect model was 62.85% (95% CI: 51.50-73.52). The pooled proportion for complete cure en-bloc resections using a random effect model was 58.66% (95% CI: 47.14-69.71). With higher patient load (> 200 patients), this complete cure en-bloc resection rate improves from 44.19% (95% CI: 24.31-65.09) to 69.17% (95% CI: 51.11-84.61).
CONCLUSION
EMR is an effective technique for the resection of large colorectal polyps and offers an alternative to surgery.
Topics: Colonic Polyps; Colorectal Neoplasms; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Gastric Mucosa; Humans; Precancerous Conditions
PubMed: 19750569
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.15.4273 -
Pain Research & Management 2022The dose of intrathecal morphine is important because of its narrow therapeutic range. Due to a compounding error, pharmacy-compounded, ready-to-use syringes contained... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The dose of intrathecal morphine is important because of its narrow therapeutic range. Due to a compounding error, pharmacy-compounded, ready-to-use syringes contained 1 mg ml morphine instead of the intended 50 mcg ml. Six patients consequently received this twenty-fold dose. This study aims to describe the serious adverse events in these six patients and a systematic review is added to describe the characteristics of serious adverse events after intrathecal morphine.
METHODS
A retrospective case series described all six patients that received the erroneous morphine intrathecally for analgesia after laparoscopic segmental colonic resections. The patients' charts were reviewed for the occurrence, timing, duration and management of adverse events, the vital signs at the night after surgery, and length of hospital stay. A systematic review investigated characteristics of serious adverse events after intrathecal morphine in a perioperative setting.
RESULTS
Four patients had a serious adverse event, which was respiratory depression combined with somnolence ( = 3) and hypotension ( = 1). The review yielded 63 cases with serious adverse events, predominantly somnolence and/or respiratory depression. The onset occurred between 2 and 24 hours after injection. The severity of symptoms varied and life-threatening respiratory depression only occurred after a dose >900 mcg or when potentiating medication was used. Naloxone did not affect analgesia. No prolonged sequalae occurred.
CONCLUSION
This study reveals that respiratory depression and somnolence are the predominant serious adverse events after intrathecal morphine in a perioperative setting and demonstrated a large variation in the presentation of symptoms.
Topics: Analgesia; Humans; Injections, Spinal; Morphine; Naloxone; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35311036
DOI: 10.1155/2022/4567192 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2014Surgery remains a mainstay of treatment for malignant tumours; however, surgical manipulation leads to a significant systemic release of tumour cells. Whether these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgery remains a mainstay of treatment for malignant tumours; however, surgical manipulation leads to a significant systemic release of tumour cells. Whether these cells lead to metastases is largely dependent on the balance between aggressiveness of the tumour cells and resilience of the body. Surgical stress per se, anaesthetic agents and administration of opioid analgesics perioperatively can compromise immune function and might shift the balance towards progression of minimal residual disease. Regional anaesthesia techniques provide perioperative pain relief; they therefore reduce the quantity of systemic opioids and of anaesthetic agents used. Additionally, regional anaesthesia techniques are known to prevent or attenuate the surgical stress response. In recent years, the potential benefit of regional anaesthesia techniques for tumour recurrence has received major attention and has been discussed many times in the literature. In preparing this review, we aimed to summarize the current evidence systematically and comprehensively.
OBJECTIVES
To establish whether anaesthetic technique (general anaesthesia versus regional anaesthesia or a combination of the two techniques) influences the long-term prognosis for individuals with malignant tumours.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 12), PubMed (1950 to 15 December 2013), EMBASE (1974 to 15 December 2013), BIOSIS (1926 to 15 December 2013) and Web of Science (1965 to 15 December 2013). We handsearched relevant websites and conference proceedings and reference lists of cited articles. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials that investigated the effects of general versus regional anaesthesia on the risk of malignant tumour recurrence in patients undergoing resection of primary malignant tumours. Comparisons of interventions consisted of (1) general anaesthesia alone versus general anaesthesia combined with one or more regional anaesthetic techniques; (2) general anaesthesia combined with one or more regional anaesthetic techniques versus one or more regional anaesthetic techniques; and (3) general anaesthesia alone versus one or more regional anaesthetic techniques. Primary outcomes included (1) overall survival, (2) progression-free survival and (3) time to tumour progression.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently scanned the titles and abstracts of identified reports and extracted study data.All primary outcome variables are time-to-event data. If the individual trial report provided summary statistics with odds ratios, relative risks or Kaplan-Meier curves, extracted data enabled us to calculate the hazard ratio using the hazard ratio calculating spreadsheet. To assess risk of bias, we used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies with a total of 746 participants. All studies included adult patients undergoing surgery for primary tumour resection. Two studies enrolled male and female participants undergoing major abdominal surgery for cancer. One study enrolled male participants undergoing surgery for prostate cancer, and one study male participants undergoing surgery for colon cancer. Follow-up time ranged from nine to 17 years. All four studies compared general anaesthesia alone versus general anaesthesia combined with epidural anaesthesia and analgesia. All four studies are secondary data analyses of previously conducted prospective randomized controlled trials.Of the four included studies, only three contributed to the outcome of overall survival, and two each to the outcomes of progression-free survival and time to tumour progression. In our meta-analysis, we could not find an advantage for either study group for the outcomes of overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.24) and progression-free survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38). For progression-free survival, the level of inconsistency was high. Pooled data for time to tumour progression showed a slightly favourable outcome for the control group (general anaesthesia alone) compared with the intervention group (epidural and general anaesthesia) (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.25).Quality of evidence was graded low for overall survival and very low for progression-free survival and time to tumour progression. The outcome of overall survival was downgraded for serious imprecision and serious indirectness. The outcomes of progression-free survival and time to tumour progression were also downgraded for serious inconsistency and serious risk of bias, respectively.Reporting of adverse events was sparse, and data could not be analysed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Currently, evidence for the benefit of regional anaesthesia techniques on tumour recurrence is inadequate. An encouraging number of prospective randomized controlled trials are ongoing, and it is hoped that their results, when reported, will add evidence for this topic in the near future.
Topics: Abdominal Neoplasms; Adult; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, Combined; Colonic Neoplasms; Disease Progression; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 25379840
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008877.pub2 -
Surgical Endoscopy Oct 2021Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective, safe, and minimally invasive treatment for large lateral spreading and sessile polyps. The reported high... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective, safe, and minimally invasive treatment for large lateral spreading and sessile polyps. The reported high recurrence rate of approximately 20% is however one of the major drawbacks. Several endoscopic interventions have been suggested to reduce recurrence rates. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of endoscopic interventions targeting the EMR margin to reduce recurrence rates.
METHODS
We searched in PubMed and Ovid for studies comparing recurrence rates after interventions targeting the EMR margin with standard EMR. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate at the first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1) assessed histologically or macroscopically. For the meta-analysis, risk ratios (RRs) were calculated and pooled using a random effects model. The secondary outcome was post-procedural complication rates.
RESULTS
Six studies with a total of 1335 lesions were included in the meta-analysis. The techniques performed in the intervention group targeting the resection margin were argon plasma coagulation, snare tip soft coagulation, extended EMR, and precutting EMR. The interventions reduced the adenoma recurrence rate with more than 50%, resulting in a pooled RR of 0.37 (95% CI 0.18, 0.76) comparing the intervention group with the control groups. Overall post-procedural complication rates did not increase significantly in the intervention arm (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.65, 2.58).
CONCLUSION
Interventions targeting the EMR margin decrease recurrence rates and may not result in more complications.
Topics: Colonic Polyps; Colonoscopy; Colorectal Neoplasms; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34076765
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08574-z -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology May 2021The inflammatory biomarker "C-reactive protein to albumin ratio (CAR)" has been reported to significantly correlate to a variety of human cancers. However, there are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUNDS
The inflammatory biomarker "C-reactive protein to albumin ratio (CAR)" has been reported to significantly correlate to a variety of human cancers. However, there are conflicting results regarding the prognostic value of CAR in colorectal cancer. Previous studies mainly assessed patients in Eastern countries, so their findings may not be applicable to the Western population. Therefore, this updated meta-analysis aimed to investigate the prognostic value of pre-treatment CAR and outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search for eligible literature until October 31, 2020, using PubMed and Embase databases. Studies assessing pre-treatment CAR and outcomes of colorectal cancer were included. Outcome measures included overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and clinicopathological features. The pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as effective values.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies involving 6329 patients were included in this study. The pooled results indicated that a high pre-treatment CAR was associated with poor overall survival (HR 2.028, 95% CI 1.808-2.275, p < 0.001) and poor disease-free survival/progression-free survival (HR 1.768, 95% CI 1.321-2.365, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed a constant prognostic value of the pre-treatment CAR despite different study regions, sample size, cancer stage, treatment methods, or the cut-off value used. We also noted a correlation between high pre-treatment CAR and old age, male sex, colon cancer, advanced stage (III/IV), large tumor size, poor differentiation, elevated carcinoembryonic antigen levels, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and the modified Glasgow prognostic score.
CONCLUSIONS
High pre-treatment CAR was associated with poor overall survival, disease-free survival, and progression-free survival in colorectal cancer. It can serve as a prognostic marker for colorectal cancer in clinical practice.
Topics: C-Reactive Protein; Colonic Neoplasms; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Prognosis; Serum Albumin
PubMed: 33933070
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-021-02253-y