Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

Background and study aims Achalasia can be classified as either primary (idiopathic) achalasia or secondary achalasia, which is a consequence of another systemic disease. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an effective and safe treatment for achalasia. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of POEM in patients with Chagasic achalasia compared to idiopathic achalasia. Patients and methods We evaluated POEM procedures performed at a single institution from November 2016 to January 2018. Demographic data, Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, body mass index, post-operative erosive esophagitis, adverse events, length of hospital stay, and procedure-related parameters were analyzed. Results Fifty-one patients underwent POEM as a treatment for achalasia in this period (20 patients with Chagasic and 31 with Idiopathic etiology). The overall clinical success rate was 92.1 %, with no statistical difference between groups (90 % in the Chagasic group vs. 93.5 % in the Idiopathic group, P  = 0.640). Both groups had significant reduction in Eckardt score and in LES pressure, and increase in bodey mass index (BMI) at 1-year follow-up. There was no statistical difference between groups regarding Eckardt score ( P  = 0.439), LES pressure (p = 0.507), BMI ( P  = 0.254), post erosive esophagitis (35 % vs. 38.7 %, P  = 0.789), adverse events (30 % vs. 12 %, P  = 0.163,) length of hospital stay (3.75 days vs. 3.58 days, P  = 0.622), and operative time (101.3 min vs. 99.1 min, P  = 0.840). Conclusion POEM is an effective and safe treatment for patients with achalasia. There is no difference in POEM outcomes for those patients with Chagasic or Idiopathic achalasia.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO. AIM: To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO. METHODS: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS: The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I 2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of -0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I 2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I 2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I 2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I 2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.

RESUMO

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, P = 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.

RESUMO

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.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Objective: Through this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to clarify the differences between these two techniques, thus improving primary success cannulation and reducing complications during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, primarily pancreatitis. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to search for data available up until June2015from the most important databases available in the health field: EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane, LILACS and CENTRAL (via BVS), SCOPUS, the CAPES database (Brazil), and gray literature. Results: Nine randomized clinical trialsincluding2583 people were selected from20,198 studies for meta-analysis. Choledocholithiasis had been diagnosed in mostly (63.8%) of the patients, who were aged an average of 63.15 years. In those patients treated using the guide wire-assisted cannulation technique, provided a significantly lower instance of pancreatitis (RD=0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.05; I2= 45%) and greater primary success cannulation (RD=0.07; 95% CI: 0.03-0.12; I2=12%) than conventional contrast cannulation. Conclusions: The guide wire-assisted technique, when compared to the conventional contrast technique, reduces the risk of pancreatitis and increases primary success cannulation rate. Thus, guide wire-assisted cannulation appears to be the most appropriate first-line cannulation technique

Objetivo: A través de esta revisión sistemática y meta-análisis, nuestro objetivo es aclarar las diferencias entre estas dos técnicas, mejorando así la canulación de éxito primario y reducir las complicaciones durante la colangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica, principalmente la pancreatitis. Métodos: Una búsqueda exhaustiva se realizó para buscar datos disponibles hasta junio de 2015, desde las bases de datos más importantes disponibles en el campo de la salud: EMBASE, MEDLINE (vía PubMed), Cochrane, LILACS y CENTRAL (a través de la BVS), SCOPUS, la base de datos CAPES (Brasil), y la literatura gris. Resultados: Nueve ensayos clínicos aleatorios incluyendo 2583 personas fueron seleccionados de 20198 estudios de meta- análisis. Coledocolitiasis había sido diagnosticada en su mayoría (63,8%) de los pacientes, que tenían entre un promedio de 63,15 años. En los pacientes tratados con la técnica de canulación guiada, proporcionado una instancia significativamente menor de pancreatitis (RD=0,03; IC del 95%: 0,01-0,05; I2=45%) y una mayor canalización de éxito primario (RD=0,07; IC del 95%: 0,03-0.12; I2=12%) que la canulación por contraste. Conclusiones: La técnica canulación con alambre guía, en comparación a la técnica de contraste convencional, reduce el riesgo de pancreatitis y aumenta la tasa de canulación con éxito primario. Por lo tanto, canulación con alambre guía parece ser la técnica de canulación de primera línea y la más adecuada

Assuntos

RESUMO

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.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Among the possible complications of bariatric surgery, fistula and partial dehiscence of the gastric suture are well known. Reoperation often is required but results in significant morbidity. Endoscopic treatment of some bariatric complications is feasible and efficient. METHODS: A modified metallic stent was placed between the gastroaesophageal junction and the alimentary jejunal limb, allowing the passage of a nasoenteric feeding tube into the jejunal limb. RESULTS: Endoscopy showed disruption of nearly the entire staple line at the gastric pouch. The modified stent was placed and allowed wound healing. After 31 days, the stent had migrated and was removed endoscopically. Total closure of the fistula was reported 30 days afterward. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic treatment of some bariatric surgery complications is feasible and has been reported previously. This report presents a case of a serious leakage treated by placement of a self-expandable metal stent to bridge the fistula.

Assuntos