ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#We compared outcomes between use of 15 vs. 20 mm lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) for gastric outlet obstruction. @*Methods@#Databases were queried for studies that used LAMS for EUS-GE to relieve gastric outlet obstruction, and a proportional meta-analysis was performed. @*Results@#Thirteen studies were included. The 15 mm and 20 mm LAMS had pooled technical success rates of 93.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.5%–95.2%) and 92.1% (95% CI, 68.4%–98.4%), clinical success rates of 88.6% (95% CI, 85.4%–91.1%) and 89.6% (95% CI, 79.0%–95.1%), adverse event rates of 11.4% (95% CI, 8.1%–15.9%) and 14.7% (95% CI, 4.4%–39.1%), and reintervention rates of 10.3% (95% CI, 6.7%–15.4%) and 3.5% (95% CI, 1.6%–7.6%), respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in technical success, clinical success, or adverse event rates. An increased need for reintervention was noted in the 15 mm stent group (pooled odds ratio, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.40–9.18; p=0.008). @*Conclusions@#No differences were observed in the technical, clinical, or adverse event rates between 15 and 20 mm LAMS use in EUS-GE. An increased need for reintervention is possible when using a 15 mm stent compared to when using a 20 mm stent.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#Cholangiogram interpretation is not used as a key performance indicator (KPI) of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) training, and national societies recommend different minimum numbers per annum to maintain competence. This study aimed to determine the relationship between correct ERCP cholangiogram interpretation and experience. @*Methods@#One hundred fifty ERCPists were surveyed to appropriately interpret ERCP cholangiographic findings. There were three groups of 50 participants each: “Trainees,” “Consultants group 1” (performed >75 ERCPs per year), and “Consultants group 2” (performed >100 ERCPs per year). @*Results@#Trainees was inferior to Consultants groups 1 and 2 in identifying all findings except choledocholithiasis outside the intrahepatic duct on the initial or completion/occlusion cholangiogram. Consultants group 1 was inferior to Consultants group 2 in identifying Strasberg type A bile leaks (odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–0.96), Strasberg type B (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74–0.95), and Bismuth type 2 hilar strictures (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69–0.95). @*Conclusions@#This investigation supports the notion that cholangiogram interpretation improves with increased annual ERCP case volumes. Thus, a higher annual volume of procedures performed may improve the ability to correctly interpret particularly difficult findings. Cholangiogram interpretation, in addition to bile duct cannulation, could be considered as another KPI of ERCP training.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#Bisphosphonates are increasingly recognized for their anti-neoplastic properties, which are the result of their action on the mevalonate pathway. Our primary aim was to investigate the association between bisphosphonate use and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Since statins also act on the mevalonate pathway, we also investigated the effect of the combined use of bisphosphonates and statins on survival. @*Methods@#The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry (SEER)-Medicare linked database was used to identify patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2007 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier models were used to examine the association between survival with bisphosphonate use alone and in combination with statins within 1 year prior to the diagnosis of PDAC. Propensity score matching analysis and Cox-proportional hazard models were used to determine the association between overall survival with bisphosphonate use alone and combined with statins, after adjusting for relevant confounders, such as the Charlson comorbidity index score, stage, treatment, sociodemographic characteristics, and propensity score. @*Results@#In total, 13,639 patients with PDAC were identified, and 1,203 (8.82%) used bisphosphonates. There was no difference in the mean survival duration between bisphosphonate users (7.27 months) and nonusers (7.25 months, p=0.61). After adjustment for confounders, bisphosphonate use was still not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.08; p=0.96). Combined bisphosphonate and statin use was also not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.07; p=0.48) after adjustment for confounders. @*Conclusions@#Our findings suggest that the use of bisphosphonates, whether alone or in combination with statins, does not confer a survival advantage in patients with PDAC.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#Bisphosphonates are increasingly recognized for their anti-neoplastic properties, which are the result of their action on the mevalonate pathway. Our primary aim was to investigate the association between bisphosphonate use and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Since statins also act on the mevalonate pathway, we also investigated the effect of the combined use of bisphosphonates and statins on survival. @*Methods@#The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry (SEER)-Medicare linked database was used to identify patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2007 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier models were used to examine the association between survival with bisphosphonate use alone and in combination with statins within 1 year prior to the diagnosis of PDAC. Propensity score matching analysis and Cox-proportional hazard models were used to determine the association between overall survival with bisphosphonate use alone and combined with statins, after adjusting for relevant confounders, such as the Charlson comorbidity index score, stage, treatment, sociodemographic characteristics, and propensity score. @*Results@#In total, 13,639 patients with PDAC were identified, and 1,203 (8.82%) used bisphosphonates. There was no difference in the mean survival duration between bisphosphonate users (7.27 months) and nonusers (7.25 months, p=0.61). After adjustment for confounders, bisphosphonate use was still not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.08; p=0.96). Combined bisphosphonate and statin use was also not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.07; p=0.48) after adjustment for confounders. @*Conclusions@#Our findings suggest that the use of bisphosphonates, whether alone or in combination with statins, does not confer a survival advantage in patients with PDAC.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Options for the endoscopic management of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) include transmural drainage (TM) alone, transpapillary drainage (TP) alone, or a combination of both drainage method (CD). There have been conflicting reports about the best method. This study performed a meta-analysis to determine whether CD presents an added clinical benefit over TM. METHODS: The included studies compared TM with CD and reported clinical success for both methods. A random-effects model was used to determine the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the following outcomes: technical success, clinical success, complications, and recurrence. RESULTS: Nine studies involving a combined total of 604 drainage procedures—373 TMs (62%) and 231 CDs (38%)—were included. CD showed no additional benefit over TM in terms of technical success (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.37–3.37; p=0.85), clinical success (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.65–1.89; p=0.70), recurrence (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.53–4.21; p=0.45), or complications (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.61–2.18; p=0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic duct (PD) stenting provides no additional clinical benefit for the TM of PFCs (particularly pseudocysts). Patients undergoing the TM of symptomatic pseudocysts may not require endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP).
Subject(s)
Humans , Drainage , Endoscopy , Methods , Odds Ratio , Pancreatic Ducts , Pancreatic Pseudocyst , Recurrence , StentsABSTRACT
Survival from pancreatic cancer remains poor. Conventional treatment has resulted in only marginal improvements in survival compared with survival in the previous several decades. Thus, considerable interest has emerged regarding the potential use of common pharmaceutical agents as chemopreventative and chemotherapeutic options. Aspirin, metformin, statins, β-blockers, and bisphosphonates have biologically plausible mechanisms to inhibit pancreatic neoplasia, whereas dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors may promote it. Regardless, real-world epidemiological data remain inconclusive. This review examines the hypotheses, evidence, and current state of the literature for each of these medications and their potential roles in the prevention and treatment of pancreatic cancer.