Abstract

BACKGROUND The apheresis technique is increasingly used in patients with hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis (HTGP), while its role in this context is still not well established. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of an apheresis therapy compared to usual care in such a patient population. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases up to July 10, 2021. Studies were included if they focused on HTGP treated with or without apheresis technique. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess the quality of the included studies. The primary outcome was the mortality rate. We also explored the heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and publication bias. RESULTS Sixteen observational studies with 1476 adults were included. The overall quality of included studies was moderate. Despite better TG level reduction with apheresis therapy (mean difference [MD], 12.27 mmol/L, 95% CI, 3.74 to 20.81; I(2) = 78%; P = 0.005), use of apheresis did not reduce the mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.59; P = 0.95) compared with usual care. This result was further confirmed by sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis. The length of stay in hospital (MD, 0.96 days; 95% CI, - 1.22 to 3.14; I(2) = 70%; P = 0.39) and most complications were similar between the groups, while hospital cost was significantly higher in the apheresis group. CONCLUSIONS The apheresis technique did not decrease the mortality in HTGP patients compared with usual care. Until the results of high-quality RCTs are known, these findings do not support the routine use of the apheresis technique in such a patient population.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP) induced by hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) remains controversial with regard to plasmapheresis vs conventional treatment. We reviewed relevant articles to explore the efficacy of plasmapheresis in the management of HTG-induced AP. METHODS We systematically reviewed studies that compared plasmapheresis with conventional treatment for HTG-induced AP using three databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, as well as relevant references. The primary outcomes were 24 h triglyceride reduction rate and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS A total of 791 articles were retrieved. Finally, 15 observational studies (1080 participants) were included, most of which were historical cohort studies. Compared with conventional treatment, plasmapheresis assisted in the reduction of serum triglyceride (TG) levels in the first 24 h after hospital admission (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17 to 0.99; P = 0.005). However, it resulted in increased hospitalization costs (thousand yuan) (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 24.32; 95% CI: 12.96 to 35.68; P < 0.001). With regard to in-hospital mortality, although the mortality rate in the plasmapheresis group was higher than that in the conventional treatment group (relative risk [RR]: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.03 to 2.94; P = 0.038), the result was disturbed by confounding factors as per the subgroup and sensitivity analysis, as well as trial sequential analysis (TSA). No significant differences were found in other outcomes, including systematic complications, local complications, the requirement for surgery, and hospitalization duration. CONCLUSION The effect of plasmapheresis in HTG-induced AP is not superior to that of conventional treatment, even resulting in a greater economic burden to patients and health care system. High quality randomized control trials are required to obtain a more a definitive understanding of this issue.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The goal of treatment in ulcerative colitis (UC) is to induce and maintain remission. The addition of granulocyte and monocyte apheresis (GMA) to conventional therapy may be a promising therapeutic alternative. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of GMA as an adjunctive therapy. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS We searched four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for randomised or minimised controlled trials which discussed the impact of additional GMA therapy on clinical remission induction and clinical remission maintenance compared with conventional therapy alone. Primary outcomes were clinical remission induction and maintenance, secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and steroid-sparing effect. ORs with 95% CIs were calculated. Trial Sequential Analyses were performed to adjusts for the risk of random errors in meta-analyses. RESULTS A total of 11 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. GMA was clearly demonstrated to induce and maintain clinical remission more effectively than conventional therapy alone (598 patients: OR: 1.93, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.91, p=0.002, I(2)=0.0% for induction; 71 patients: OR: 8.34, 95% CI 2.64 to 26.32, p<0.001, I(2)=0.0% for maintenance). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of AEs (OR: 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.50, p=0.135, I(2)=84.2%). CONCLUSION GMA appears to be more effective as an adjunctive treatment in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with UC than conventional therapy alone. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42019134050.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Inflammatory bowel disease affects approximately seven million people globally. Iron deficiency anaemia can occur as a common systemic manifestation, with a prevalence of up to 90%, which can significantly affect quality of life, both during periods of active disease or in remission. It is important that iron deficiency anaemia is treated effectively and not be assumed to be a normal finding of inflammatory bowel disease. The various routes of iron administration, doses and preparations present varying advantages and disadvantages, and a significant proportion of people experience adverse effects with current therapies. Currently, no consensus has been reached amongst physicians as to which treatment path is most beneficial. OBJECTIVES The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the interventions for the treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in people with inflammatory bowel disease. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two other databases on 21st November 2019. We also contacted experts in the field and searched references of trials for any additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness and safety of iron administration interventions compared to other iron administration interventions or placebo in the treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in inflammatory bowel disease. We considered both adults and children, with studies reporting outcomes of clinical, endoscopic, histologic or surgical remission as defined by study authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment of included studies. We expressed dichotomous and continuous outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS We included 11 studies (1670 randomised participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies compared intravenous iron sucrose vs oral iron sulphate (2 studies); oral iron sulphate vs oral iron hydroxide polymaltose complex (1 study); oral iron fumarate vs intravenous iron sucrose (1 study); intravenous ferric carboxymaltose vs intravenous iron sucrose (1 study); erythropoietin injection + intravenous iron sucrose vs intravenous iron sucrose + injection placebo (1 study); oral ferric maltol vs oral placebo (1 study); oral ferric maltol vs intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (1 study); intravenous ferric carboxymaltose vs oral iron sulphate (1 study); intravenous iron isomaltoside vs oral iron sulphate (1 study); erythropoietin injection vs oral placebo (1 study). All studies compared participants with CD and UC together, as well as considering a range of disease activity states. The primary outcome of number of responders, when defined, was stated to be an increase in haemoglobin of 20 g/L in all but two studies in which an increase in 10g/L was used. In one study comparing intravenous ferric carboxymaltose and intravenous iron sucrose, moderate-certainty evidence was found that intravenous ferric carboxymaltose was probably superior to intravenous iron sucrose, although there were responders in both groups (150/244 versus 118/239, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 9). In one study comparing oral ferric maltol to placebo, there was low-certainty evidence of superiority of the iron (36/64 versus 0/64, RR 73.00, 95% CI 4.58 to 1164.36). There were no other direct comparisons that found any difference in the primary outcomes, although certainty was low and very low for all outcomes, due to imprecision from sparse data and risk of bias varying between moderate and high risk. The reporting of secondary outcomes was inconsistent. The most common was the occurrence of serious adverse events or those requiring withdrawal of therapy. In no comparisons was there a difference seen between any of the intervention agents being studied, although the certainty was very low for all comparisons made, due to risk of bias and significant imprecision due to the low numbers of events. Time to remission, histological and biochemical outcomes were sparsely reported in the studies. None of the other secondary outcomes were reported in any of the studies. An analysis of all intravenous iron preparations to all oral iron preparations showed that intravenous administration may lead to more responders (368/554 versus 205/373, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31, NNTB = 11, low-certainty due to risk of bias and inconsistency). Withdrawals due to adverse events may be greater in oral iron preparations vs intravenous (15/554 versus 31/373, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.74, low-certainty due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose probably leads to more people having resolution of IDA (iron deficiency anaemia) than intravenous iron sucrose. Oral ferric maltol may lead to more people having resolution of IDA than placebo. We are unable to draw conclusions on which of the other treatments is most effective in IDA with IBD (inflammatory bowel disease) due to low numbers of studies in each comparison area and clinical heterogeneity within the studies. Therefore, there are no other conclusions regarding the treatments that can be made and certainty of all findings are low or very low. Overall, intravenous iron delivery probably leads to greater response in patients compared with oral iron, with a NNTB (number needed to treat) of 11. Whilst no serious adverse events were specifically elicited with any of the treatments studied, the numbers of reported events were low and the certainty of these findings very low for all comparisons, so no conclusions can be drawn. There may be more withdrawals due to such events when oral is compared with intravenous iron delivery. Other outcomes were poorly reported and once again no conclusions can be made as to the impact of IDA on any of these outcomes. Given the widespread use of many of these treatments in practice and the only guideline that exists recommending the use of intravenous iron in favour of oral iron, research to investigate this key issue is clearly needed. Considering the current ongoing trials identified in this review, these are more focussed on the impact in specific patient groups (young people) or on other symptoms (such as fatigue). Therefore, there is a need for studies to be performed to fill this evidence gap.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent which is licensed in the management of haemorrhage associated with trauma. It has been suggested that tranexamic acid may be able to play a role in upper GI bleeding. However, there is currently no recommendation to support this. AIM: The aim of this study was to synthesise available evidence of the effect of TXA on upper GI bleeding. METHODS AND MATERIALS A systematic review was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant studies. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to determine the risk ratio of primary and secondary outcomes pertaining to the use of TXA in upper GI bleeding. RESULTS A total of 8 studies were included in this systematic review. The total number of patients in all studies was 12994 including 4550 females (35%) and 8444 males (65%). The mean age of participants in 6 of the studies was 59.3; however the mean age for either intervention or placebo group was not reported in two of the studies. All studies reported on the effect of TXA on mortality, and the risk ratio was 0.95; however, with the 95% CI ranging from 0.80 to 1.13, this was not statistically significant. 6 of the studies reported on rebleeding rate, the risk ratio was 0.64, and with a 95% CI ranging from 0.47 to 0.86, this was statistically significant. 3 of the studies reported on the risk of adverse thromboembolic events, and the risk ratio was 0.93; however, the 95% CI extended from 0.62 to 1.39 and so was not statistically significant. 7 of the studies reported on the need for surgery, and the risk ratio was 0.59 and was statistically significant with a 95% CI ranging from 0.38 to 0.94. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the use of TXA in upper GI bleeding appears to have a beneficial effect in terms of decreasing the risk of re-bleeding and decreasing the need for surgery. However, we could not find a statistically significant effect on need for blood transfusions, risk of thromboembolic events, or effect on mortality. Future randomised controlled trials may elucidate these outcomes.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Current guidelines recommend intravenous (IV) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). We aimed to compare the efficacy of oral and IV administration of PPIs in PUB. METHODS We performed a systematic search in 4 databases for randomized controlled trials, which compared the outcomes of oral PPI therapy with IV PPI therapy for PUB. The primary outcomes were 30-day recurrent bleeding and 30-day mortality. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, while weighted mean differences (WMDs) with CI were calculated for continuous outcomes in meta-analysis. The protocol was registered a priori onto PROSPERO (CRD42020155852). RESULTS A total of 14 randomized controlled trials reported 1,951 peptic ulcer patients, 977 and 974 of which were in the control and intervention groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between oral and IV administration regarding 30-day rebleeding rate (OR = 0.96, CI: 0.65-1.44); 30-day mortality (OR = 0.70, CI: 0.35-1.40); length of hospital stay (WMD = -0.25, CI: -0.93 to -0.42); transfusion requirements (WMD = -0.09, CI: -0.07 to 0.24); need for surgery (OR = 0.91, CI: 0.40-2.07); further endoscopic therapy (OR = 1.04, CI: 0.56-1.93); and need for re-endoscopy (OR = 0.81, CI: 0.52-1.28). Heterogeneity was negligible in all analysis, except for the analysis on the length of hospitalization (I2 = 82.3%, P = 0.001). DISCUSSION Recent evidence suggests that the oral administration of PPI is not inferior to the IV PPI treatment in PUB after endoscopic management, but further studies are warranted.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Interpretation of capsule endoscopy images or movies is operator-dependent and time-consuming. As a result, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been applied to enhance the efficacy and accuracy of the review process. Two previous meta-analyses reported the diagnostic performance of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage in capsule endoscopy. However, insufficient systematic reviews have been conducted, which cannot determine the real diagnostic validity of CAD models. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage using wireless capsule endoscopic images. METHODS We conducted core databases searching for studies based on CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers or hemorrhage using capsule endoscopy and presenting data on diagnostic performance. Systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS Overall, 39 studies were included. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers (or erosions) were .97 (95% confidence interval, .95-.98), .93 (.89-.95), .92 (.89-.94), and 138 (79-243), respectively. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of hemorrhage (or angioectasia) were .99 (.98-.99), .96 (.94-0.97), .97 (.95-.99), and 888 (343-2303), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed robust results. Meta-regression showed that published year, number of training images, and target disease (ulcers vs erosions, hemorrhage vs angioectasia) was found to be the source of heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected. CONCLUSIONS CAD models showed high performance for the optical diagnosis of gastrointestinal ulcer and hemorrhage in wireless capsule endoscopy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is useful for cardiac assessment and intraoperative monitoring. However, the safety of TEE in cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices has remained uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to determine the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding after TEE in patients with varices. The secondary objectives are to compare the bleeding risks between patients with and without varices; and to determine the incidences of TEE-related esophageal perforation and mortality. METHODS Systematic literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database using the terms "Transesophageal echocardiography", "Varices", "Bleeding", and related terms. Articles describing the incidence of post-TEE bleeding in patients with varices were included. Non-English articles were excluded. Risk of bias and level of evidence were assessed through validated scales. Pooled weighted incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding and risk difference in bleeding were calculated with a random effects model. RESULTS 569 articles were identified initially, and 10 articles (comprising of 908 patients) were included. The incidence of post-TEE bleeding in patients with varices was 0.84% (95% CI 0.34%-1.56%). When stratified by TEE indication, the pooled incidence of bleeding was 0.68% (95% CI 0.11%-1.63%) in intraoperative TEE; and 1.03% (95% CI 0.23%-2.29%) in diagnostic TEE. No cases of esophageal perforation or mortality were reported. Six studies included a comparator group of patients without varices, and the bleeding risk was comparable between patients with and without varices (risk difference 0.26%; 95% CI -0.80%-1.32%; I2=0%, p=0.88). Eight studies had moderate or high risk of bias, and overall level of evidence was low. CONCLUSION TEE appears to be associated with low gastrointestinal bleeding incidence in patients with gastroesophageal varices. Nonetheless, results should be treated with caution due to bias and low level of evidence. Large-scale high-quality studies will be required to confirm the safety of TEE in patients with gastroesophageal varices.

Abstract

Background and study aims  There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of hemostatic powders in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). We aimed to provide a pooled estimate of their effectiveness and safety based on the current literature. Patients and methods  Literature review was based on computerized bibliographic search of the main databases through to December 2020. Immediate hemostasis, rebleeding rate, adverse events, and mortality were the outcomes of the analysis. Pooled effects were calculated using a random-effects model. Results  A total of 9 studies with 194 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Immediate hemostasis was achieved in 95 % of patients (95 % confidence interval [CI] 91.6 %-98.5 %), with no difference based on treatment strategy or bleeding etiology. Pooled 7- and 30-day rebleeding rates were 10.9 % (95 %CI 4.2 %-17.6 %) and 14.3 % (95 %CI 7.3 %-21.2 %), respectively. Need for embolization and surgery were 1.7 % (95 %CI 0 %-3.5 %) and 2.4 % (95 %CI 0.3 %-4.6 %), respectively. Overall, two patients (1.9 %, 95 %CI 0 %-3.8 %) experienced mild abdominal pain after powder application, and three bleeding-related deaths (2.3 %, 95 %CI 0.2 %-4.3 %) were registered in the included studies. Conclusion  Novel hemostatic powders represent a user-friendly and effective tool in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding.

Abstract

Background: Peptic ulcer disease is common with a lifetime prevalence in the general population of 5-10% and an incidence of 0.1-0.3% per year. Despite a sharp reduction in incidence and rates of hospital admission and mortality over the past 30 years, complications are still encountered in 10-20% of these patients. Peptic ulcer disease remains a significant healthcare problem, which can consume considerable financial resources. Management may involve various subspecialties including surgeons, gastroenterologists, and radiologists. Successful management of patients with complicated peptic ulcer (CPU) involves prompt recognition, resuscitation when required, appropriate antibiotic therapy, and timely surgical/radiological treatment. Methods: The present guidelines have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. To create these guidelines, a panel of experts was designed and charged by the board of the WSES to perform a systematic review of the available literature and to provide evidence-based statements with immediate practical application. All the statements were presented and discussed during the 5th WSES Congress, and for each statement, a consensus among the WSES panel of experts was reached. Conclusions: The population considered in these guidelines is adult patients with suspected complicated peptic ulcer disease. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of complicated peptic ulcer from a collaboration of a panel of experts and are intended to improve the knowledge and the awareness of physicians around the world on this specific topic. We divided our work into the two main topics, bleeding and perforated peptic ulcer, and structured it into six main topics that cover the entire management process of patients with complicated peptic ulcer, from diagnosis at ED arrival to post-discharge antimicrobial therapy, to provide an up-to-date, easy-to-use tool that can help physicians and surgeons during the decision-making process.