EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a developing modality in the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with several technical approaches, including the direct and balloon-assisted ...techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the direct with the balloon-assisted modality while further defining the role of EUS-GE in GOO.
This multicenter, retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent EUS-GE with the direct or balloon-assisted technique for GOO (January 2014 to October 2016). The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were success (ability to tolerate at least a full fluid diet), procedure time, and rate/severity of adverse events (AEs).
A total of 74 patients (44.6% women; mean age 63.0 ± 11.7 years) underwent EUS-GE for GOO (direct gastroenterostomy, n = 52; balloon-assisted gastroenterostomy, n = 22). GOO was of malignant and benign etiology in 66.2% and 33.8% of patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 94.2% of the direct and 90.9% of the balloon-assisted approach (P = .63). Mean procedure time was shorter with the direct technique (35.7 ± 32.1 minutes vs 89.9 ± 33.3 minutes, P < .001). The clinical success rate was 92.3% for the direct technique and 90.9% for the balloon-assisted modality (P = 1.00), with a mean time to oral intake of 1.32 ± 2.76 days. The AE rate was 6.8% with only 1 severe AE noted. Rate of AEs, postprocedure length of stay, need for reintervention, and survival were similar between the 2 groups.
EUS-GE is effective and safe in the management of GOO. The direct technique may be the preferred method given its shorter procedure time when compared with the balloon-assisted approach. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Background and Aims
Spastic esophageal disorders (SEDs) include spastic achalasia (type III), diffuse esophageal spasm (DES), and nutcracker/jackhammer esophagus (JH). Per-oral endoscopic myotomy ...(POEM) has demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of achalasia. Recently, POEM has been indicated for the treatment of SEDs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the clinical success and safety of POEM in SEDs.
Methods
We searched several databases from 01/01/2007 to 01/10/2016 to identify studies (with five or more patients) on POEM for the treatment of SEDs. Weighted pooled rates (WPRs) for clinical success and adverse events (AEs) were calculated for all SEDs. Clinical success was defined as Eckardt scores of ≤3 and/or improvement in severity of dysphagia based on achalasia disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaire. The WPRs for clinical success and AEs were analyzed using fixed- or random-effects model based on heterogeneity. The proportionate difference in clinical success and post-procedure adverse event rates among individual types of SEDs was also calculated.
Results
A total of eight observational studies with 179 patients were included in the final analysis. Two studies were of good quality and six were of fair quality based on the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool. The WPR with 95% confidence interval (CI) for cumulative clinical success of POEM in all SEDs was 87% (78, 93%),
I
2
= 37%. The total number of patients for individual disorders, i.e., type III achalasia, JH, and DES, was 116, 37, and 18, respectively. The WPRs for clinical success of POEM for type III achalasia, DES, and JH were 92, 88, and 72%, respectively. Proportion difference of WPR for clinical success was significantly higher for type III achalasia in comparison with JH (20%,
P
= 0.01). The WPR with 95% CI for AEs of POEM in all SEDs was 14% (9, 20%),
I
2
= 0%. The WPRs for post-procedure adverse events for type III achalasia, DES, and JH were 11, 14, and 16%, respectively. There was no difference in safety of POEM among individual SEDs.
Conclusion
POEM is an effective and safe therapeutic modality for the treatment of spastic esophageal disorders.
In patients with persistent symptoms after Heller myotomy (HM), treatment options include repeat HM, pneumatic dilation, or peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ...POEM in patients with achalasia with prior HM vs without prior HM.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 180 patients with achalasia who underwent POEM at 13 tertiary centers worldwide, from December 2009 through September 2015. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with prior HM (HM group, exposure; n = 90) and those without prior HM (non-HM group; n = 90). Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt scores to 3 or less. Adverse events were graded according to criteria set by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technical success, clinical success, and rates of adverse events were compared between groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 8.5 months.
POEM was technically successful in 98% of patients in the HM group and in 100% of patients in the non-HM group (P = .49). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the HM group had a clinical response to POEM (81%) than in the non-HM group (94%; P = .01). There were no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the groups (8% in the HM group vs 13% in the non-HM group; P = .23). Symptomatic reflux and reflux esophagitis after POEM were comparable between groups.
POEM is safe and effective for patients with achalasia who were not treated successfully by prior HM. Although the rate of clinical success in patients with prior HM is lower than in those without prior HM, the safety profile of POEM is comparable between groups.
Background and Aims Endoscopic management of post-Whipple pancreatic adverse events (AEs) with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (e-ERP) is associated with high failure ...rates. EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) has shown promising results; however, no comparative data have been done for these 2 modalities. The goal of this study is to compare EUS-PDD with e-ERP in terms of technical success (PDD through dilation/stent), clinical success (improvement/resolution of pancreatic-type symptoms), and AE rates in patients with post-Whipple anatomy. Methods This is an international multicenter comparative retrospective study at 7 tertiary centers (2 United States, 2 European, 2 Asian, and 1 South American). All consecutive patients who underwent EUS-PDD or e-ERP between January 2010 and August 2015 were included. Results In total, 66 patients (mean age, 57 years; 48% women) and 75 procedures were identified with 40 in EUS-PDD and 35 in e-ERP. Technical success was achieved in 92.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 20% of procedures in the e-ERP group (OR, 49.3; P < .001). Clinical success (per patient) was attained in 87.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 23.1% in the e-ERP group (OR, 23.3; P < .001). AEs occurred more commonly in the EUS-PDD group (35% vs 2.9%, P < .001). However, all AEs were rated as mild or moderate. Procedure time and length of stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusions EUS-PDD is superior to e-ERP in post-Whipple anatomy in terms of efficacy with acceptable safety. As such, EUS-PDD should be considered as a potential first-line treatment in post-pancreaticoduodenectomy anatomy when necessary expertise is available.
Abstract
Background and study aims
EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel procedure that potentially offers long-lasting luminal patency without the risk of tumor ingrowth/overgrowth. This ...study compared the clinical success, technical success, adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay (LOHS) and symptom recurrence in EUS-GE versus SGJ.
Methods
This was a multicenter international retrospective comparative study of EUS-GE and SGJ in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) who underwent either EUS-GE or SGJ. EUS-GE was performed using lumen apposing metal stents.
Results
A total of 93 patients with malignant GOO treated with either EUS-GE (n = 30) or SGJ (n = 63) were identified. Peritoneal carcinomatosis was present in 13 (43 %) patients in the EUS-GE group and 7 (11 %) patients in the SGJ group (
P
< 0.001). Although the technical success rate was significantly higher in the SGJ group as compared to the EUS-GE group (100 % vs. 87 %,
P
= 0.009), the clinical success rate was not different (90 % vs. 87 %,
P
= 0.18, OR 0.8, 95 %CI 0.44 – 7.07). The rate of AEs was lower in the EUS-GE group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16 % vs 25 %,
P
= 0.3). The mean LOHS was similar in the EUS-GE group compared to SGJ (
P
= 0.35). The rate of recurrent GOO was not different between the two groups (3 % vs. 14 %,
P
= 0.08). Similarly, the mean time to reintervention was similar (88 days vs. 121 days,
P
= 0.83).
Conclusions
EUS-GE is associated with equivalent efficacy and safety as compared to surgical GJ. This is the first comparative trial between both techniques and suggests EUS-GE as a non-inferior but less invasive alter to surgery.
Treatment of hepatitis C infection has evolved dramatically since 2011. Previous conventional therapy with interferon and ribavirin used to have a low sustained virological response rate of less than ...40%. In the new direct-acting antiviral therapy era, a sustained virological response can be achieved in more than 90% of cases.
We report a rare case of severe reversible acute rhabdomyolysis in a 31-year-old Saudi male patient with very long-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency and chronic hepatitis C infection. The patient was clinically asymptomatic with no signs of decompensated liver disease. The patient received new direct-acting antiviral agents: sofosbuvir and daclatasvir. Fourteen days after initiation of direct-acting antiviral agents, the patient was found to have asymptomatic rhabdomyolysis. His creatine kinase peaked at 2572 IU/l, and he was treated conservatively; the direct-acting antiviral agents were discontinued and within 7 days, the patient's creatine kinase levels normalized.
This case highlights possible direct-acting antiviral agent-induced rhabdomyolysis in a patient with very-long-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, presumably through alteration of mitochondrial membrane potential. Further studies are required to assess the possible impact and associations.
Background and Aims Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has shown promising safety and efficacy in short-term studies. However, long-term follow-up data are very limited. The aims of this study were ...to assess (1) clinical outcome of patients with a minimum post-POEM follow-up of 2 years and (2) factors associated with long-term clinical failure after POEM. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed that included all consecutive patients with achalasia who underwent POEM with a minimum follow-up of 2 years at 10 tertiary-care centers. Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt score to 3 or lower. Results A total of 205 patients (45.8% men; mean age, 49 years) were followed for a median of 31 months (interquartile range, 26-38 months). Of these, 81 patients (39.5%) had received previous treatment for achalasia before POEM. Clinical success was achieved in 98% (185/189), 98% (142/144), and 91% (187/205) of patients with follow-up within 6 months, at 12 months, and ≥24 months, respectively. Of 185 patients with clinical response at 6 months, 11 (6%) experienced recurrent symptoms at 2 years. History of previous pneumatic dilation was associated with long-term treatment failure (odds ratio, 3.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-9.23). Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 8.2% of patients and only 1 patient required surgical intervention. Abnormal esophageal acid exposure and reflux esophagitis were documented in 37.5% and 18% of patients, respectively. However, these rates are simply a reference number among a very selective group of patients. Conclusions POEM is safe and provides high initial clinical success and excellent long-term outcomes. Among patients with confirmed clinical response within 6 months, 6% had recurrent symptoms by 2 years.
PDF
