Diagnostic Yield of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy in Comparison to Percutaneous Liver Biopsy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) compared to percutaneous liver biopsy (PC-LB) remains uncertain. METHODS: Our data consist of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-LB to PC-LB, found through a literature search via PubMed/Medline and Embase. The primary outcome was sample adequacy, whereas secondary outcomes were longest and total lengths of tissue specimens, diagnostic accuracy, and number of complete portal tracts (CPTs). RESULTS: Sample adequacy did not significantly differ between EUS-LB and PC-LB (risk ratio [RR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-2.38; p = 0.65), with very low evidence quality and inadequate sample size as per trial sequential analysis (TSA). The two techniques were equivalent with respect to diagnostic accuracy (RR: 1; CI: 0.95-1.05; p = 0.88), mean number of complete portal tracts (mean difference: 2.29, -4.08 to 8.66; p = 0.48), and total specimen length (mean difference: -0.51, -20.92 to 19.9; p = 0.96). The mean maximum specimen length was significantly longer in the PC-LB group (mean difference: -3.11, -5.51 to -0.71; p = 0.01), and TSA showed that the required information size was reached. CONCLUSION: EUS-LB and PC-LB are comparable in terms of diagnostic performance although PC-LB provides longer non-fragmented specimens.

Optimisation of COVID-19 diagnostic pathways in acute hospital admissions to prevent nosocomial transmission.

INTRODUCTION: In the management of acute hospital admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic, safe patient cohorting depends on robust admission diagnostic strategies. It is essential that screening strategies are sensitive and rapid, to prevent nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 and maintain patient flow. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all COVID-19 positive and suspected cases at our institution screened by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between 4 April and 28 June 2020. Using RT-PCR positivity within 7 days as our reference standard, we assessed sensitivity and net-benefit of three admission screening strategies: single admission RT-PCR, composite admission RT-PCR and CXR and repeat RT-PCR with 48 h. RESULTS: RT-PCR single-test sensitivity was 91.5% (87.8%-94.4%) versus 97.7% (95.4%-99.1%) (p = 0.025) for RT-PCR/CXR composite testing and 95.1% (92.1%-97.2%) (p = 0.03) for repeated RT-PCR. Net-benefit was 0.83 for single RT-PCR versus 0.89 for RT-PCR/CXR and 0.87 for repeated RT-PCR at 0.02% threshold probability. CONCLUSION: The RT-PCR/CXR composite testing strategy was highly sensitive when screening patients at the point of hospital admission. Real-world sensitivity of this approach was comparable to repeat RT-PCR testing within 48 h; however, faster facilitating improved patient flow.

Recent advances in the management of large and complex colonic polyps.

The endoscopic management of large colonic polyps is a rapidly changing field. Rapid evolution in endoscopic techniques and skills has resulted in diminishing the role of surgery in the management of larger and complex polyps. This is resulting in organ preservation for many who otherwise would have undergone surgery. However, it also poses new challenges. This article reviews these new advances and the developments which are overcoming these difficulties.