Journal of clinical gastroenterology最新文献

Background and aims: IgG4 pancreaticobilliary disease (IgG4-PBD) typically shows a rapid improvement with glucocorticoid treatment, yet most patients experience a recurrence. Rituximab (RTX) has emerged as a hopeful approach to prevent relapses in IgG4-PBD. Nevertheless, there is a lack of data on the efficacy and safety of RTX in IgG4-PBD. In this study, we aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the pooled efficacy of RTX in this patient population.

Methods: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Embase, were searched (in March 2024) using specific terms for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of RTX in IgG4 pancreatic biliary disease. Outcomes of interest were relapse, remission, partial remission rates, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model. I2% heterogeneity was used to assess the heterogeneity.

Results: Twelve studies were included in the study (257 patients). The pooled rate of complete remission was 68% (54% to 80%), I2 =53%, respectively. The pooled relapse rate was 23% (13% to 36%), I2=64%. The pooled rate of total adverse events was 21% (12% to 35%), I2=52%. The pooled partial remission rate is 16% (7% to 32%), I2=25%. The pooled rate of complete and partial remission was 81% (66% to 90%), I2=75%. The pooled infusion reaction and infection were 12% (7% to 18%), I2=0% and 14% (8% to 22%), I2=16%, respectively.

Conclusion: RTX therapy appears effective in inducing and maintaining remission of pancreaticobiliary disease with a low rate of side effects. RTX presents as a promising treatment option for patients grappling with recurrent or unresponsive IgG4-related ailments. In addition, RTX emerges as an attractive alternative for individuals intolerant to steroids or experiencing IgG4-related disease relapses. Future studies comparing RTX with other immunomodulators will offer deeper insights into relapse factors and elucidate the appropriateness of utilizing this maintenance treatment following the initial flare.

Objective: We aimed to assess the hospital frailty risk score on the inpatient mortality, morbidity, and health care resource utilization among endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related hospitalizations.

Background: Data regarding the inpatient mortality, morbidity, and health care resource utilization of ERCP among frail individuals remain limited.

Materials and methods: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we compared the odds of inpatient mortality and morbidity of ERCP-related hospitalizations among individuals with low frailty scores, intermediate frailty scores (IFSs), and high frailty scores (HFSs).

Results: Overall, 776,025 ERCP-related hospitalizations were recorded from 2016 to 2020. 552,045 had a low frailty score, whereas 217,875 had an IFS, and 6105 had an HFS. Frail individuals had a 5-fold increase in mortality [IFS: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.81, 95% CI: 3.77-6.14; HFS: aOR = 4.62, 95% CI: 2.48-8.63]. An IFS was associated with a 24% increase in post-ERCP pancreatitis (aOR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.11-1.41), a 3-fold increase in post-ERCP bleeding (aOR = 2.59, 95% CI: 1.82-3.67), and a 2-fold increase in post-ERCP duct perforation (aOR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.38-2.64). Frail individuals experienced higher odds of in-hospital morbidity, including secondary sepsis, respiratory failure, acute kidney injury, cerebrovascular accidents, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism.

Conclusions: In summary, our study presents strong evidence in support of using the hospital frailty risk score as an index to predict mortality and morbidity during ERCP-related hospitalizations. Additional caution is warranted in the management of frail individuals undergoing ERCP.

Background and objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a viable alternative in cases with failed ERCP transpapillary drainage (ERCP-TPD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD for primary biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO).

Methods: We searched Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD in DMBO, from inception until September 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical success and secondary endpoints included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events.

Results: Eight studies (815 patients, 56.1% male) were included in this analysis. Indications for biliary drainage were pancreatic carcinoma (75.1%), followed by cholangiocarcinoma (10.1%). Clinical success was comparable between EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.40; P=0.32). Technical success was similar between the 2 groups (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 0.83-5.25; P=0.12). There was a trend toward fewer adverse events in the EUS-BD group (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40-1.07; P=0.09), with significantly lower odds of post-procedure pancreatitis (OR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; P=0.001).

Conclusion: EUS-BD is comparable to ERCP for primary biliary drainage in DMBO patients with shorter procedural time and a significantly reduced risk of post-procedure pancreatitis.

Background: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions intended to encourage question-asking by patients and enhance patient-physician communication. To date, an EoE-specific QPL has not been developed for EoE patients.

Aim: To develop a preliminary QPL specific to adults with EoE by incorporating input from international esophageal experts.

Methods: Sixteen experts were invited to generate QPL content through a modified Delphi (RAND/University of California, Los Angeles, CA) method consisting of 2 rounds of independent ratings. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "what general questions should patients ask when being seen for EoE?" and "what questions do I not hear patients asking but given my experience, I believe they should be asking?" In round 2, experts rated each question on a 5-point Likert scale, and responses rated as "essential" or "important" (determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥ 4.0) were accepted for the EoE QPL.

Results: Ten esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Round 1 generated 100 questions. Questions were combined and modified to reduce redundancy, yielding 57 questions. After round 2, 51 questions (85%) were accepted for inclusion (median value ≥ 4.0) in the final QPL. Questions were then divided into 4 themes based on disease domains: (1) "What is EoE?," (2) "Treatment Options," (3) "Follow-up Surveillance and Long-term Risks," and (4) "Allergy and Genetic Testing." The largest number of questions covered was "What is EoE?" (16/51 or 31%). Questions with the highest agreement median (5.0) included examples such as "what should I do if I get a food impaction?" and "what are the treatment options?"

Conclusion: This is the first preliminary EoE QPL developed in the field of medicine. We hope implementation enhances effective patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask relevant questions that experts prioritized. Future studies will aim to modify this communication tool by incorporating patient perspectives.

Objective: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by vascular ectasias accounting for 4% of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeds, which can range from occult bleeds to severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In turn, GAVE can lead to severe morbidity and recurrent hospitalization. Current endoscopic treatments for GAVE include argon plasma coagulation (APC), endoscopic band ligation (EBL), and radiofrequency ablation. With this significant burden in mind, a systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of various modalities in the treatment of GAVE.

Methods: All studies that involved adults and children with endoscopic characteristics of GAVE undergoing treatment with APC, EBL, radiofrequency ablation, or a combination of 2 treatment modalities were included.

Results: There was no statistical difference in the rate of adverse events and the number of red blood cell transfusions across all 3 groups (APC, EBL, and APC + EBL). However, statistical differences were noted for outcomes of bleeding recurrence, length of hospitalization, and change in hemoglobin status. EBL exhibited a significant decrease in bleeding recurrence when compared with APC. Moreover, shorter hospitalization stays were seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC, and a beneficial change in hemoglobin status was also more often seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC.

Conclusions: Based on this study, EBL was found to have superior efficacy when compared with APC for the treatment of GAVE; however, there was no significant difference in rates of adverse events between APC, EBL, and combination therapy.

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are interventions used to relieve biliary obstruction. The utility of ERCP compared with PTBD is not fully understood from a utilization outcome standpoint. Our study compares readmission rates and hospitalization outcomes in ERCP and PTBD.

Methods: Using the National Readmission Database (NRD) 2016 to 2020, we identified all patients with an ERCP or PTBD completed during admission. The study cohort was first analyzed by 3 weighted study arms including those admitted with cholangitis, biliary/pancreatic malignancy, and choledocholithiasis. Second, we analyzed the cohort by a 1:1, unweighted propensity match. The primary outcome was 30 day, 90 day, and 6 month readmission. Secondary outcomes were readmission/overall mortality, cost, and length of stay. Outcomes were analyzed using multivariate analysis.

Results: A total of 621,735 admissions were identified associated with 589,796 ERCP and 31,939 PTBD. In the propensity matched cohort, PTBD had a higher readmission rate at 30 days (20.38% vs. 13.71% P<0.0001), 90 days (14.63% vs. 13.14%, P<0.0001) but lower rate at 6 months (8.50% vs. 9.67%, P=0.0003). Secondary outcomes included increased PTBD-associated hospital length of stay (9.01 d vs. 6.74 d, P<0.0001), hospitalization cost ($106,947.97 vs. $97,602.25, P<0.0001), and overall mortality (6.86% vs. 4.35%, P<0.0001). No major differences were found for mortality among readmissions at 30 days (7.19% vs. 6.88%, P=0.5382), 90 day (6.82% vs. 6.51%, P=0.5612), and 6 months (5.08% vs. 5.91%, P=0.1744).

Conclusions: ERCP demonstrated superior results compared with PTBD for readmission rates, length of stay and overall mortality. For failed ERCP cases, emerging data for Endoscopic ultrasound guided-biliary drainage (EUS-BD) offers potential over PTBD and may provide additional options for the future in tertiary referral centers with experience.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) exist for the management of antithrombotic agents in the periendoscopic period; however, their methodological qualities vary. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool has been validated for the assessment of the methodological quality of CPGs; however, its reproducibility has not been assessed. The goal of this study was to assess the reproducibility of the AGREE II tool for CPGs published within the last 6 years for the management of antithrombotic agents in the periendoscopic period.

Study: A systematic search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed to identify eligible CPGs published between January 1, 2016 and April 14, 2022. The quality of the CPG was independently assessed by 6 reviewers using the AGREE II instrument. The reproducibility was summarized as weighted κ statistic and intraclass correlation coefficient using the SPSS statistical analysis package.

Results: The search yielded 343 citations with 7 CPGs from Europe, Asia, and the United States included in the critical appraisal. The overall mean weighted κ score across all guidelines was 0.300 (range, 0.093 to 0.384) indicating a fair agreement. The overall intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.462 (range, 0.175 to 0.570) for single measures and 0.837 (range, 0.560 to 0.888) for average measures indicating moderate reliability.

Conclusions: Our study shows only a fair overall interobserver agreement in the methodological quality of the included CPGs. The results suggest the need for education and training of CPG raters to enhance the application of the AGREE II tool to improve its reproducibility.

Background: In 2021, a nation-wide screening program for colorectal cancer (CRC) was step-wise implemented in Region Örebro County (RÖC) for patients aged 60 to 74 years, utilizing the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to refer patients for colonoscopy. Concurrently, the standardized care course for colorectal cancer (SCC-CRC), initiated in 2016, employs a fast-track pathway for patients with alarm symptoms to undergo colonoscopy. This study compares CRC screening colonoscopies with SCC-CRC colonoscopies in RÖC among patients aged 60 to 67 years.

Methods: An initial analysis of the Swedish colorectal screening cohort was combined with a retrospective cohort study, analyzing data from 307 CRC screening patients and 441 age-matched SCC-CRC patients in RÖC. Data included demographics, colonoscopy participation rates, and pathology findings. Statistical analyses compared outcomes between the 2 groups.

Results: Among the screening group, 2% tested positive for FIT, with an 86% colonoscopy participation rate (N=9296). In RÖC, 266 screening patients underwent colonoscopy, with 10% diagnosed with CRC, compared with 20% in the SCC-CRC group. In addition, 39% of the screening group in RÖC were diagnosed with advanced adenomas, versus 15% in the SCC-CRC group.

Conclusions: Screening participation was high, with effectiveness aligning with international counterparts. The SCC-CRC pathway excels in diagnosing CRC among symptomatic patients, while the nationwide screening program is effective in early detection of CRC and advanced adenomas. underscoring the importance of integrating and optimizing both approaches within the Swedish health care system to optimize CRC prevention and management.

Background: Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the esophagus triggered by food and aeroallergens. There is a need for noninvasive biomarkers that reliably detect EoE in patients with cardinal symptoms and predict treatment response to reduce endoscopic evaluations.

Study: Nonasthmatic patients 18 years or above with suspected or diagnosed EoE, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and control individuals with indication for endoscopy were enrolled prospectively between November 2020 and May 2022. Participants underwent body plethysmography with fractionated exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) level measurement. Besides, serum and fecal biomarkers were measured by ELISA. A follow-up examination was scheduled after treatment initiation in patients with active EoE.

Results: The median FeNO level in active EoE (20 ppb) was higher compared with GERD (15 ppb, P=0.038) and control individuals (14 ppb, P=0.046). Median FeNO did not significantly differ in EoE patients who underwent follow-up assessment after treatment response (20 ppb vs. 18 ppb, P=0.771). Serum EDN, ECP, and the absolute eosinophil blood count (AEC) were elevated in active EoE compared with control individuals but not compared with GERD except for AEC. Serum EDN, ECP and AEC decreased in EoE in remission at follow-up assessment. None of the fecal biomarkers was elevated in active EoE or during treatment.

Conclusions: Assessment of FeNO may have diagnostic value in differentiating patients with active EoE from non-EoE patients but is not a suitable marker for monitoring disease activity. Serum EDN, ECP, TARC, and AEC levels are emerging as potential candidates for monitoring disease activity in EoE.

Background: The risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (mACRN) in young adults with advanced lesions at baseline colonoscopy is not well defined.

Aims: To examine the risk for (mACRN) in adults <50 years old who had advanced neoplasia (AN) at baseline colonoscopy and determine factors associated with mACRN in these patients.

Method: Patients 18 to 49 years of age with ≥1 AN [tubular adenoma (TA) ≥10 mm or with villous features or high-grade dysplasia (HGD), sessile serrated lesion (SSL) ≥10 mm or with dysplasia, traditional serrated adenoma (TSA)] on baseline colonoscopy between 2011 and 2021 who had surveillance colonoscopy >6 months after their baseline examination were included. Outcomes were assessed based on age at baseline colonoscopy, <45 years versus 45 to 49 years, and by follow-up colonoscopy findings: (1) normal, (2) nonadvanced neoplasia (NAN), and (3) AN.

Results: Three hundred sixty-six patients with AN underwent ≥1 surveillance colonoscopy: 310 (84.7%) <45 years versus 56 (15.3%) 45 to 49 years. The mean follow-up time was longer for the <45-year-olds versus the 45 to 49-year-olds (43±26.4 vs. 28.4±12.8 mo respectively, P<0.001). The absolute risk of mACRN was 13.5% in the <45 age group versus 16.1% in the 45 to 49 age group, P=0.28. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates of mACRN were comparable for patients <45 and 45 to 49 years old: 10% (95% CI: 10% to 42%) versus 20% (95% CI: 7% to 15%), P=0.065. BMI was the only risk factor associated with mACRN OR 1.045 [95% CI (1.001 to 1.09)].

Conclusions: In our cohort of patients <50 years old with AN at baseline, mACRN occurred at a similar rate to that reported by guidelines in 50 years and older, suggesting that current recommended post polypectomy surveillance is appropriate for this age group. BMI was independently associated with mACRN. Future studies should examine how weight management in patients with high BMI mitigates the recurrence of advanced neoplasia.