Diogo Moura

Effectiveness of intragastric balloon for obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials ☆

BACKGROUND Obesity has become a worldwide epidemic, and many methods are currently used to reduce obesity. This systematic review shows the effectiveness of the intragastric balloon (IGB) method compared to the sham/diet (s/d) method. OBJECTIVE To demonstrate the effectiveness of the IGB method compared to the s/d method. SETTING Hospital das Clinicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, Public Hospital. METHODS After searching MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Lilacs, Scopus, and CINAHL, only enrolled randomized control trials comparing IGB/diet with s/d were analyzed. For qualitative analysis, 12 studies were selected, and 9 of these were acceptable for quantitative analysis. RESULTS The IGB/diet is more effective than s/d when comparing body mass index (BMI) loss with a mean difference of 1.1 kg/m(2) by the Students t test and 1.41 kg/m(2) by the meta-analysis, with significant differences in both. It is also more effective in weight loss (WL), with a mean difference of 2 kg by the Students t test and 3.55 kg by the meta-analysis. In the qualitative analysis of % excess WL (%EWL), the mean %EWL is 14.0% in favor of the IGB group compared to the s/d group by the Students t test; however, no significant difference was found between these groups by quantitative analysis. CONCLUSION Based on randomized control trial data alone, IGB>400 mL is more effective than sham/diet in achieving BMI loss, WL, and %EWL.

Endoscopy vs surgery in the treatment of early gastric cancer: Systematic review.

AIM To report a systematic review, establishing the available data to an unpublished 2a strength of evidence, better handling clinical practice. METHODS A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, LILACS, Scopus and CINAHL databases. Information of the selected studies was extracted on characteristics of trial participants, inclusion and exclusion criteria, interventions (mainly, mucosal resection and submucosal dissection vs surgical approach) and outcomes (adverse events, different survival rates, mortality, recurrence and complete resection rates). To ascertain the validity of eligible studies, the risk of bias was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The analysis of the absolute risk of the outcomes was performed using the software RevMan, by computing risk differences (RD) of dichotomous variables. Data on RD and 95%CIs for each outcome were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel test and inconsistency was qualified and reported in χ(2) and the Higgins method (I (2)). Sensitivity analysis was performed when heterogeneity was higher than 50%, a subsequent assay was done and other findings were compiled. RESULTS Eleven retrospective cohort studies were selected. The included records involved 2654 patients with early gastric cancer that filled the absolute or expanded indications for endoscopic resection. Three-year survival data were available for six studies (n = 1197). There were no risk differences (RD) after endoscopic and surgical treatment (RD = 0.01, 95%CI: -0.02-0.05, P = 0.51). Five-year survival data (n = 2310) showed no difference between the two groups (RD = 0.01, 95%CI: -0.01-0.03, P = 0.46). Recurrence data were analized in five studies (1331 patients) and there was no difference between the approaches (RD = 0.01, 95%CI: -0.00-0.02, P = 0.09). Adverse event data were identified in eight studies (n = 2439). A significant difference was detected (RD = -0.08, 95%CI: -0.10--0.05, P < 0.05), demonstrating better results with endoscopy. Mortality data were obtained in four studies (n = 1107). There was no difference between the groups (RD = -0.01, 95%CI: -0.02-0.00, P = 0.22). CONCLUSION Three-, 5-year survival, recurrence and mortality are similar for both groups. Considering complication, endoscopy is better and, analyzing complete resection data, it is worse than surgery.

Endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

BackgroundPeptic ulcer represents the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Endoscopic therapy can reduce the risks of rebleeding, continued bleeding, need for surgery, and mortality. The objective of this review is to compare the different modalities of endoscopic therapy.MethodsStudies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, LILACS, DARE, and CINAHL. We selected randomized clinical trials that assessed contemporary endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The outcomes evaluated were: initial hemostasis, rebleeding rate, need for surgery, and mortality. The possibility of publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots. An additional analysis was made, including only the higher-quality trials.ResultsTwenty-eight trials involving 2988 patients were evaluated. Injection therapy alone was inferior to injection therapy with hemoclip and with thermal coagulation when evaluating rebleeding and the need for emergency surgery. Hemoclip was superior to injection therapy in terms of rebleeding; there were no statistically significant differences between hemoclip alone and hemoclip with injection therapy. There was considerable heterogeneity in the comparisons between hemoclip and thermal coagulation. There were no statistically significant differences between thermal coagulation and injection therapy, though their combination was superior, in terms of rebleeding, to thermal coagulation alone.ConclusionsInjection therapy should not be used alone. Hemoclip is superior to injection therapy, and combining hemoclip with an injectate does not improve hemostatic efficacy above hemoclip alone. Thermal coagulation has similar efficacy as injection therapy; combining these appears to be superior to thermal coagulation alone. Therefore, we recommend the application of hemoclips or the combined use of injection therapy with thermal coagulation for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding.

Factors associated with complications or failure of endoscopic balloon dilation of anastomotic stricture secondary to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery

INTRODUCTION Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is a commonly used technique of bariatric surgery. One of the most important complications is gastrojejunal anastomotic stricture. Endoscopic balloon dilation appears to be well tolerated and effective, but well-designed randomized, controlled trials have not yet been conducted. OBJECTIVE Identify factors associated with complications or failure of endoscopic balloon dilation of anastomotic stricture secondary to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. SETTING Gastrointestinal endoscopy service, university hospital, Brazil. METHODS The records of 64 patients with anastomotic stricture submitted to endoscopic dilation with hydrostatic balloon dilation were reviewed. Information was collected on gastric pouch length, anastomosis diameter before dilation, number of dilation sessions, balloon diameter at each session, anastomosis diameter after the last dilation session, presence of postsurgical complications, endoscopic complications, and outcome of dilation. Comparisons were made among postsurgical and endoscopic complications; number of dilations, balloon diameter; anastomosis diameter before dilation; and dilation outcome. RESULTS Success of dilation treatment was 95%. Perforation was positively and significantly associated with the number of dilation sessions (P = .03). Highly significant associations were found between ischemic segment and perforation (P<.001) and between ischemic segment and bleeding (P = .047). Ischemic segment (P = .02) and fistula (P = .032) were also associated with dilation failure. CONCLUSION Ischemic segment and fistula were found to be important risk factors for balloon dilation failure. The greater the number of dilation sessions, the greater the number of endoscopic complications.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasound for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aims: There are no systematic reviews comparing the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-based brush cytology and forceps biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) for the diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture; so in this revision, we will compare ERCP against EUS-FNA for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture. Design: A systematic review was conducted of comparative studies (prospective or retrospective) analyzing EUS and ERCP for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture. Materials and Methods: The databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, LILACS, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched for studies dated previous to November 2014. We identified three prospective studies comparing EUS-FNA and ERCP for the diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture and five prospective studies comparing EUS-FNA with the same diagnosis of the other three studies. All patients were subjected to the same gold standard method. We calculated study variables (sensitivity, specificity, prevalence, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy) and performed a meta-analysis using the Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software. Results: A total of 294 patients were included in the analysis. The pretest probability for malignant biliary stricture was 76.66%. The mean sensitivities of ERCP and EUS-FNA for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture were 49% and 75%, respectively; the specificities were 96.33% and 100%, respectively. The posttest probabilities positive predictive value (98.33% and 100%, respectively) and negative predictive value (34% and 47%, respectively) were determined. The accuracies were 60.66% and 79%, respectively. Conclusion: We found that EUS-FNA was superior to ERCP with brush cytology and forceps biopsy for diagnosing malignant biliary strictures. However, a negative EUS-FNA or ERCP test may not exclude malignant biliary stricture because both have low negative posttest probabilities.

Efficacy and Safety of Stents in the Treatment of Fistula After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Fistula development is a serious complication after bariatric surgery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of fistula closure and complications associated with endoscopic stent treatment of fistulas, developed after bariatric surgeries, particularly Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and gastric sleeve (GS). Studies involving patients with fistula after RYGB or GS and those who received stent treatment only were selected. The analyzed outcomes were overall success rate of fistula closure, mean number of stents per patient, mean stent dwelling time, and procedure-associated complications. Current evidence from identified studies demonstrates that, in selected patients, endoscopic stent treatment of fistulas after GS or RYGB can be safe and effective.

Percutaneous endoscopic versus surgical gastrostomy in patients with benign and malignant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To compare the complications and mortality related to gastrostomy procedures performed using surgical and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy techniques, this review covered seven studies. Five of these were retrospective and two were randomized prospective studies. In total, 406 patients were involved, 232 of whom had undergone percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and 174 of whom had undergone surgical gastrostomy. The analysis was performed using Review Manager. Risk differences were computed using a fixed-effects model and forest and funnel plots. Data on risk differences and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the Mantel-Haenszel test. There was no difference in major complications in retrospective (95% CI (-0.11 to 0.10)) or randomized (95% CI (-0.07 to 0.05)) studies. Regarding minor complications, no difference was found in retrospective studies (95% CI (-00.17 to 0.09)), whereas a difference was observed in randomized studies (95% CI (-0.25 to -0.02)). Separate analyses of retrospective and randomized studies revealed no differences between the methods in relation to mortality and major complications. Moreover, low levels of minor complications were observed among endoscopic procedures in randomized studies, with no difference observed compared with retrospective studies.

Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-0591-2883.].

Endoscopic dual therapy for giant peptic ulcer hemorrhage

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common condition with an incidence of 40−150 cases per 100000 inhabitants per year [1, 2]. Peptic ulcer represents the most common cause of UGIB and dual therapy seems to be the best treatment [3]. Chronic ulcerated lesions have a greater chance of severe bleeding and may lead to shock within a few minutes [3–5]. Often, owing to lesion size and the presence of fibrosis, the use of endoscopic clips is not possible and other methods are necessary for dual treatment. To illustrate this, we describe the case of a patient with UGIB caused by a chronic peptic ulcer with active bleeding, which re-bled just after the first endoscopic treatment. We propose a waiting period of a few minutes after achieving initial hemostasis in order to check for rebleeding, especially in cases with a high risk of rebleeding (▶Video1). Video 1 Dual therapy with electrocoagulation and epinephrine injection was performed for active bleeding of a chronic giant peptic ulcer located in the incisura angularis. Owing to the size of the ulcer and the presence of fibrosis, endoscopic clips would not be successful. The importance of review time after the first therapy is emphasized in order to check for rebleeding.

Comparison between endoscopic sphincterotomy vs endoscopic sphincterotomy associated with balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

AIM To compare gallstones removal rate and incidence of bleeding, pancreatitis, use of mechanical lithotripsy, cholangitis and perforation between isolated sphincterotomy vs sphincterotomy associated with balloon dilation of papilla in choledocholithiasis through the meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. METHODS We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. Literature search was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MedLine, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and EMBASE database platforms in July 2017. The manual search included references of retrieved articles. We extracted data focusing on outcomes: The primary endpoint was the stones removal rate; Secondary endpoints were rates of pancreatitis, bleeding, use of mechanical lithotripsy (ML), perforation and cholangitis. RESULTS Eleven RCTs with 1824 patients were included. EST was associated with more post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) bleeding [FE RD-0.02, CI (-0.03, -0.00), I2 = 33%, P = 0.05] and more need of mechanical lithotripsy in general [RE RD-0.16, CI (-0.25, -0.06), I2 = 90%, P = 0.002] and in subgroup analysis of stones greater than 15 mm [RE RD-0.20, CI (-0.38, -0.02), I2 = 82%, P = 0.003]. Incidence of pancreatitis [FE RD-0.01, CI (-0.03, 0.01), I2 = 0, P = 0.36], cholangitis [FE RD-0.00, CI (-0.01, 0.01), I2 =0, P = 0.97] and perforation [FE RD-0.01, CI (-0.01, 0.00), I2 = 0, P = 0.23] was similar between the groups as well as similar stone removal rates in general [FE RD-0.01, CI (-0.01, 0.04), I2 = 0, P = 0.23] and pooled analysis of stones greater than 15 mm [FE RD-0.02, CI (-0.02, 0.07), I2 = 11%, P = 0.31]. CONCLUSION Through meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials we found that isolated sphincterotomy was associated with more post-ERCP bleeding and more need for mechanical lithotripsy. However, there was no statistical difference in the stone removal rate between isolated sphincterotomy and sphincterotomy associated with balloon dilation in the approach to remove gallstones.