Cryotherapy versus radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus with or without early esophageal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the first-line therapy for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). Therefore, cryotherapy has emerged as an alternative treatment option. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of these two techniques based on the rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) and dysplasia (CE-D). Adverse events and recurrence have also been reported.

METHODS

An electronic search was conducted using the Medline (PubMed), Embase, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases until December 2022. Studies were included comparing cryotherapy and RFA for treating dysplastic BE with or without early esophageal neoplasia. This study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

Three retrospective cohort studies involving 627 patients were included. Of these, 399 patients underwent RFA, and 228 were treated with cryotherapy. There was no difference in CE-IM (risk difference [RD], -0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.25 to 0.19; p=0.78; I2=86%) as well as in CE-D (RD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.09; p=0.64; I2=70%) between the groups. The absolute number of adverse events was low, and there was no difference in the recurrence rate.

CONCLUSION

Cryotherapy and RFA were equally effective in treating dysplastic BE, with or without early esophageal neoplasia.

Efficacy, Feasibility, and Safety of the X-Tack Endoscopic HeliX Tacking System: A Multicenter Experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The application of endoscopic suturing has revolutionized defect closures. Conventional over-the-scope suturing necessitates removal of the scope, placement of the device, and reinsertion. A single channel, single sequence, through-the-scope suturing device has been developed to improve this process. This study aims to describe the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of a through-the-scope suturing device for gastrointestinal defect closure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter study involving 9 centers of consecutive adult patients who underwent suturing using the X-Tack Endoscopic HeliX Tacking System (Apollo Endosurgery). The primary outcomes were technical success and long-term clinical success. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence, and reintervention rates.

RESULTS

In all, 56 patients (mean age 53.8, 33 women) were included. Suturing indications included fistula repair (n=22), leak repair (n=7), polypectomy defect closure (n=12), peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) site closure (n=7), perforation repair (n=6), and ulcers (n=2). Patients were followed at a mean duration of 74 days. Overall technical and long-term clinical success rates were 92.9% and 75%, respectively. Both technical and clinical success rates were 100% for polypectomies, POEM-site closures, and ulcers. Success rates were lower for the repair of fistulas (95.5% technical, 54.5% clinical), leaks (57.1%, 28.6%), and perforations (100%, 66.7%). No immediate adverse events were noted.

CONCLUSION

This novel, through-the-scope endoscopic suturing system, is a safe and feasible method to repair defects that are ≤3 cm. The efficacy of this device may be better suited for superficial defects as opposed to full-thickness defects. Larger defects will need more sutures and probably a double closure technique to provide a reinforcement layer.

Endoscopic vs radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are minimally invasive techniques commonly used for prolonged enteral nutrition. Despite safe, both techniques may lead to complications, such as bleeding, infection, pain, peritonitis, and tube-related complications. The literature is unclear on which technique is the safest.

AIM

To establish which approach has the lowest complication rate.

METHODS

A database search was performed from inception through November 2022, and comparative studies of PEG and PRG were selected following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All included studies compared the two techniques directly and provided absolute values of the number of complications. Studies with pediatric populations were excluded. The primary outcome of this study was infection and bleeding. Pneumonia, peritonitis, pain, and mechanical complications were secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and we used The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I) to analyze the retrospective studies. We also performed GRADE analysis to assess the quality of evidence. Data on risk differences and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included, including two randomized controlled trials and fifteen retrospective cohort studies. The total population was 465218 individuals, with 273493 having undergone PEG and 191725 PRG. The only outcome that showed a significant difference was tube related complications in retrospective studies favoring PEG (95%CI: 0.03 to 0.08; P < 0.00001), although this outcome did not show significant difference in randomized studies (95%CI: -0.07 to 0.04; P = 0.13). There was no difference in the analyses of the following outcomes: infection in retrospective (95%CI: -0.01 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.04; P = 0.44) studies; bleeding in retrospective (95%CI: -0.00 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.02; P = 0.43) studies; pneumonia in retrospective (95%CI: -0.04 to 0.00; P = 0.28) or randomized (95%CI: -0.09 to 0.11; P = 0.39) studies; pain in retrospective (95%CI: -0.05 to 0.02; P < 0.00001) studies; peritonitis in retrospective (95%CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P < 0.0001) studies.

CONCLUSION

PEG has lower levels of tube-related complications (such as dislocation, leak, obstruction, or breakdown) when compared to PRG.

Endoscopic ultrasound artificial intelligence-assisted for prediction of gastrointestinal stromal tumors diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Subepithelial lesions (SELs) are gastrointestinal tumors with heterogeneous malignant potential. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the leading method for evaluation, but without histopathological analysis, precise differentiation of SEL risk is limited. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising aid for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal lesions in the absence of histopathology.

AIM

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of AI-assisted EUS in diagnosing SELs, especially lesions originating from the muscularis propria layer.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. Patients of any sex and > 18 years, with SELs assessed by EUS AI-assisted, with previous histopathological diagnosis, and presented sufficient data values which were extracted to construct a 2 × 2 table. The reference standard was histopathology. The primary outcome was the accuracy of AI for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Secondary outcomes were AI-assisted EUS diagnosis for GIST vs gastrointestinal leiomyoma (GIL), the diagnostic performance of experienced endoscopists for GIST, and GIST vs GIL. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated. The corresponding summary receiver operating characteristic curve and post-test probability were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Eight retrospective studies with a total of 2355 patients and 44154 images were included in this meta-analysis. The AI-assisted EUS for GIST diagnosis showed a sensitivity of 92% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.95; P < 0.01), specificity of 80% (95%CI: 0.75-0.85; P < 0.01), and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.949. For diagnosis of GIST vs GIL by AI-assisted EUS, specificity was 90% (95%CI: 0.88-0.95; P = 0.02) and AUC of 0.966. The experienced endoscopists' values were sensitivity of 72% (95%CI: 0.67-0.76; P < 0.01), specificity of 70% (95%CI: 0.64-0.76; P < 0.01), and AUC of 0.777 for GIST. Evaluating GIST vs GIL, the experts achieved a sensitivity of 73% (95%CI: 0.65-0.80; P < 0.01) and an AUC of 0.819.

CONCLUSION

AI-assisted EUS has high diagnostic accuracy for fourth-layer SELs, especially for GIST, demonstrating superiority compared to experienced endoscopists' and improving their diagnostic performance in the absence of invasive procedures.

Choosing the best endoscopic approach for post-bariatric surgical leaks and fistulas: Basic principles and recommendations

Post-surgical leaks and fistulas are the most feared complication of bariatric surgery. They have become more common in clinical practice given the increasing number of these procedures and can be very difficult to treat. These two related conditions must be distinguished and characterized to guide the appropriate treatment. Leak is defined as a transmural defect with communication between the intra and extraluminal compartments, while fistula is defined as an abnormal communication between two epithelialized surfaces. Traditionally, surgical treatment was the preferred approach for leaks and fistulas and was associated with high morbidity with significant mortality rates. However, with the development of novel devices and techniques, endoscopic therapy plays an increasingly essential role in managing these conditions. Early diagnosis and endoscopic therapy initiation after clinical stabilization are crucial to success since clinical success rates are higher for acute leaks and fistulas when compared to late and chronic leaks and fistulas. Several endoscopic techniques are available with different mechanisms of action, including direct closure, covering/diverting or draining. The treatment should be individualized by considering the characteristics of both the patient and the defect. Although there is a lack of high-quality studies to provide standardized treatment algorithms, this narrative review aims to provide a summary of the current scientific evidence and, based on this data and our extensive experience, make recommendations to help choose the best endoscopic approach for the management of post-bariatric surgical leaks and fistulas.