RESUMO
SUMMARY INTRODUCTION: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel procedure for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Our aim was to evaluate the outcomes of this technique in our initial experience. METHODS: Patients with GOO from our institute were included. Technical success was defined as the successful creation of a gastroenterostomy. Clinical success was defined as the ability to tolerate a soft diet after the procedure. We assessed adverse events and diet tolerance 1 month after the procedure. RESULTS: Three patients were included. Technical and clinical success was achieved in all cases. There were no adverse events and good diet tolerance was observed 1 month after the procedure in the included patients. CONCLUSION: EUS-GE is a promising treatment for patients with GOO.
RESUMO INTRODUÇÃO: A gastroenterostomia ecoguiada é um novo procedimento para paliação da obstrução maligna gastroduodenal. Nosso objetivo foi avaliar os resultados dessa técnica em nossa experiência inicial. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos pacientes com obstrução maligna gastroduodenal de nossa instituição. O sucesso técnico foi definido como a realização adequada de uma gastroenterostomia. O sucesso clínico foi definido como boa aceitação de dieta pastosa durante a internação. Os eventos adversos e a aceitação alimentar foram avaliados um mês após o procedimento. RESULTADOS: Três pacientes foram incluídos. Os sucessos técnico e clínico foram alcançados em todos os casos. Não houve eventos adversos e a aceitação alimentar permaneceu adequada um mês após o procedimento nos pacientes incluídos. CONCLUSÃO: O EUS-GE é um tratamento promissor para pacientes com obstrução maligna gastroduodenal.
Assuntos
Humanos , Gastroenterostomia , Endossonografia , Brasil , Stents , Obstrução da Saída Gástrica/cirurgia , Obstrução da Saída Gástrica/etiologia , Obstrução da Saída Gástrica/diagnóstico por imagem , Centros de Atenção TerciáriaRESUMO
Our aim in this study was to compare the efficiency of 25G versus 22G needles in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions by EUS-FNA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were identified in five databases using an extensive search strategy. Only randomized trials comparing 22G and 25G needles were included. The results were analyzed by fixed and random effects. A total of 504 studies were found in the search, among which 4 randomized studies were selected for inclusion in the analysis. A total of 462 patients were evaluated (233: 25G needle/229: 22G needle). The diagnostic sensitivity was 93% for the 25G needle and 91% for the 22G needle. The specificity of the 25G needle was 87%, and that of the 22G needle was 83%. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.57 for the 25G needle and 4.26 for the 22G needle. The area under the sROC curve for the 25G needle was 0.9705, and it was 0.9795 for the 22G needle, with no statistically significant difference between them (p=0.497). Based on randomized studies, this meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference between the 22G and 25G needles used during EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions.