American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention strategies: summary and recommendations

1. Download : Download high-res image (386KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Coexistence of alcohol-related pancreatitis and alcohol-related liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundAvailable estimates of coexistent alcohol-related pancreatitis (ALP) and alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) vary widely, and factors that determine coexistent disease are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review of published literature with the primary aim to generate robust estimates for coexistent alcohol-related chronic pancreatitis (ACP) and alcohol-related cirrhosis (ALC).MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases from inception until February 2018. Studies included were those in English-language, sample size ≥25 and allowed calculation of the coexistent disease. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model approach.ResultsTwenty-nine (including 5 autopsy studies) of 2000 eligible studies met inclusion criteria. Only 6.9% included patients were female. Fifteen studies enabled calculation of ACP in ALC, and 11 for ALC in ACP. Pooled prevalence of ACP in ALC was 16.2% (95% CI 10.4–24.5) overall, and 15.5% (95% CI 8.0–27.7) when data were limited to clinical studies. Corresponding prevalence for ALC in ACP was 21.5% (95% CI 12.0–35.6) and 16.9% (95% CI 11.5–24.3), respectively. There was significant heterogeneity among studies (I² – 65–92%). Pooled prevalence for ALP in ALD or ALD in ALP in clinical studies were 15.2% and 39%, respectively. None of the studies reported outcomes in patients with coexistent disease.ConclusionA sizeable fraction of patients with ACP or ALC have coexistent disease. Future studies should define the prevalence of coexistent disease in women and minority populations, and the consequences of coexistent disease on clinical presentation and short- and long-term outcomes.     

American Society of Echocardiography Algorithm for Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation: Comparison With CMR

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) algorithm for assessing mitral regurgitation (MR) to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and left ventricular (LV) remodeling following mitral intervention.BackgroundThe ASE recommends integrating multiple echocardiographic parameters for assessing MR. The ASE guidelines include an algorithm that weighs the parameters and highlights those considered indicative of definitely mild or definitely severe MR.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 152 (age 62 ± 13 years; 59% male) patients with degenerative MR who underwent ASE algorithm-guided echocardiographic and CMR grading of MR severity. Using the ASE algorithm, patients were graded as definitely mild, grade I, grade II, grade III, grade IV, or definitely severe MR. CMR MR volume was graded as mild (<30 mL), grade II moderate (30-44 mL), grade III moderate (45-59 mL), or severe (≥60 mL). A subgroup of 63 patients underwent successful mitral intervention, of whom 48 had postintervention CMR.ResultsOnly 52% of patients with definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm had severe MR by CMR, and 10% had mild MR by CMR. There was an increase in post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling with worsening MR severity using CMR (P < 0.0001) but not the ASE algorithm (P = 0.07). Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling and definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not.ConclusionsIn patients with degenerative MR, agreement between CMR and the ASE algorithm was suboptimal. Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling, whereas definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not. These findings suggest an important role for CMR in surgical decision making in degenerative MR. (Comparison Study of Echocardiography and Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment of Mitral and Aortic Regurgitation; NCT04038879)     

Lactated Ringer's vs normal saline for acute pancreatitis: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionRecent studies have evaluated and compared the efficacy of normal saline (NS) and lactated Ringer's (LR) in reducing the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) and improving outcomes such as length of stay, the occurrence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), ICU admission and mortality. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the available studies to assess the impact of these fluids on outcomes secondary to AP.MethodsWe systematically searched the following databases: PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science through February 8th, 2021 to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. Random effects model using DerSimonian-Laird approach was employed and risk ratios (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively.Results6 studies (4 RCTs and 2 cohort studies) with 549 (230 in LR and 319 in NS) were included. The overall mortality (RR: 0.73, CI: 0.31–1.69) and SIRS at 24 h (RR: 0.69, CI: 0.32–1.51) was not significantly different. The overall ICU admission was lower in LR group compared to NS group (RR: 0.43, CI: 0.22–0.84). Subgroup analysis of RCTs demonstrated lower length of hospital stay for LR group compared to NS group (MD: 0.77 days, CI: 1.44 –0.09 days).ConclusionOur study demonstrated that LR improved outcomes (ICU admission and length of stay) in patients with AP compared to NS. There was no difference in rate of SIRS development and mortality between LR and NS treatments.     

Underwater versus conventional EMR for colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis

1. Download : Download high-res image (324KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Aspirin for primary prevention: Is this the end of the road?

Aspirin is one of the oldest and most commonly used cardiovascular drugs. Despite there being high-quality evidence supporting the use of aspirin for patients with known cardiovascular disease, a definitive consensus regarding its use for patients at risk for cardiovascular disease (and without established cardiovascular disease) has never been reached. Many randomized control trials have produced conflicting results, and consequently, society guidelines have issued differring recommendations. Three major trials were published in 2018, which supplement the existing data on aspirin's role in primary prevention and provide further guidance on this contentious issue. This article reviews the history of aspirin through the last two decades, with special emphasis on these new trials.