Notesdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb108/eb108e1225c6a34726896a3a71243e18df6f7721" alt="what is notes.io? What is notes.io?"
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
Background and study aims Because superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) are relatively rare, studies evaluating the outcomes of endoscopic resection (ER) for SNADETs are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the clinical validity of ER for SNADETs. Patients and methods The study participants included 163 consecutive patients (108 men; mean age, 61.5 ± 11.3 years) with 171 SNADETs, excluding patients with familial adenomatous polyposis resected by ER, at Hiroshima University Hospital between May 2005 and September 2016. Clinicopathological features and the outcomes of ER for 171 cases were retrospectively analyzed. Additionally, the prognosis of 135 patients with more than 12 months' follow-up was analyzed. Results Mean diameter of SNADETs was 10.7 ± 7.2 mm. Most of the SNADET cases were classified as category 3 (71 %, 121/171), but some were category 5 (2 %, 3/171). En bloc resection rates were 93 % (146/157), 100 % (7/7), and 86 % (6/7) in endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), polypectomy, and in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) cases, respectively. Complete resection rates were 90 % (141/157), 100 % (7/7), and 71 % (5/7) in EMR, polypectomy, and ESD cases, respectively. Emergency surgery was performed in two patients with intraoperative perforation and in two with delayed perforation without artificial ulcer bed closure after ER. Since endoscopic closure of ulcer by clipping was performed, delayed perforation has not occurred. Local recurrence occurred in 1.2 %, but no metastasis to lymph nodes or other organs occurred after ER. No patient died of primary SNADETs. Conclusion Our data supported the clinical validity of ER for SNADETs. However, delayed perforation should be given much attention.Background and study aims The aims of this study was to document the clinical and training relevance of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) teleguidance (as a clinical model for applied telemedicine) with health economic modeling methodologies. Methods Probabilities and consequences of complications after ERCP performed by either a novice-trainee or supported through teleguidance (TM) by an expert formed the basis of the health economic model. Results The main clinical and economic outcomes originated from the base case scenario representing a low-volume center. check details In the cohort the patient age was 62 years, 58 % were females, the expert was doing ≥ 250 ERCPs per year and 50 for the novice-trainee. The expert knowledge transferred was set to 50 % and the average complexity grade to 1.98. Given a willingness to pay threshold of 56,180 USD/ quality-adjusted life years (QALY), the probability of cost-effectiveness of TM assistance was 98.9 %. The probability of a QALY gain for patients having an ERCP, to which was added TM, was 91.6 %. Adding TM saved on an average 111.2 USD (95 % CI 959 to 1021 SEK) per patient, and remained cost-effective basically insensitive to the level of willingness to pay. Conclusion Teleguidance during an ERCP procedure has the potential to be the prefered option in many low- to medium-volume hospitals. The main mechanisms behind these effects are positive impact on several adverse patient outcomes, QALY increase, and decreased costs. TM should be considered for integration into future teaching curriculums in advanced upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.Background and study aims Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) allows for treatment of epithelial and sub-epithelial lesions (SELs) unsuitable to conventional resection techniques. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of clip-assisted method for non-exposed EFTR using FTRD or over-the-scope clip of gastrointestinal tumors. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of histologic complete resection (R0). Secondary outcomes of interest were the rate of enbloc resection, FTR, adverse events, and post-EFTR surgery. Random-effects model was used to calculate pooled estimates and generate forest plots. Results Eighteen studies with 730 patients and 733 lesions were included in the analyses. Indications for EFTR were difficult/residual colorectal adenoma, adenoma at a diverticulum or appendiceal orifice and early cancer (n = 634), colorectal SELs (n = 42), and upper gastrointestinal lesions (n = 51), other colonic lesions (n = 6). Median size of lesions was 13.5 mm. link2 There were 22 failed EFTR attempts. Pooled overall R0 resection rate was 82 % (95 % CI 75, 89). The pooled overall FTR rate was 83 % (95 % CI 77, 89). The pooled overall enbloc resection rate was 95 (95 % CI 92, 96). The pooled estimates for perforation and bleeding were less then 0.1 % and 2 %, respectively. Following EFTR, a total of 110 patients underwent surgery for any reason [pooled rate 7 % (95 % 2, 14). The pooled rates for post-EFTR surgery due to invasive cancer, for non-curative endoscopic resection and for adverse events were 4 %, less then 0.1 % and less then 0.1 %, respectively. No mortality related to EFTR was noted. Conclusions EFTR appears to be safe and effective for gastrointestinal lesions that are not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection. This technique should be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected cases.Background and study aims Refractory and recurrent esophageal variceal (EV) bleeding can be life threatening. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used as a "bridge" therapy. However, their role in the treatment protocol is not established due to paucity in data. Methods We searched multiple databases from inception through May 2019 to identify studies that reported on SEMS and TIPS in refractory EV hemorrhage. Our primary goals were to analyze and compare the pooled all-cause mortality, immediate bleeding control and rebleeding rates. Results Five hundred forty-seven patients from 21 studies were analyzed (SEMS 12 studies, 176 patients; TIPS 9 studies, 398 patients). The pooled rate of all-cause mortality with SEMS was 43.6 % (95 % CI 28.6-59.8, I 2 = 38) and with TIPS was 27.9 % (95 % CI 16.3-43.6, I 2 = 91). The pooled rate of immediate bleeding control with SEMS was 84.5 % (95 % CI 74-91.2, I 2 = 40) and with TIPS was 97.9 % (95 % CI 87.7-99.7, I 2 = 0). The pooled rate of rebleeding with SEMS was 19.4 % (95 % CI 11.9-30.4, I 2 = 32) and with TIPS was 8.8 % (95 % CI 4.8-15.7, I 2 = 40). Conclusion Use of SEMS in refractory EV hemorrhage demonstrates acceptable immediate bleeding control with good technical success rate. Mortality and rebleeding rates were lesser with TIPS, however, its superiority and/ or inferiority cannot be validated due to limitations in the comparison methodology.Background and study aims Endoscopic stent placement is used for palliative management of unresectable malignant hilar obstruction, which could be achieved by either unilateral or bilateral stent insertion. Materials and methods A literature search was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of metallic biliary stent placement in patients with malignant hilar obstruction. Weighted pooled rates (WPR) along with 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) were calculated to determine and compare outcomes including technical and functional success, early and late adverse events, post procedure cholangitis, and stent occlusion between two groups. Results A total of 21 studies with 1292 patients were included. WPR of technical success was significantly higher in the unilateral group (97 %, 95 %CI 93 -98 %) vs. bilateral group (89 %, 95 %CI 84 -92 %) ( P = 0.0.003). WPR for functional success in the unilateral and bilateral groups were 96 % (95 %CI 91 -98 %) and 94 % (95 %CI 91 -97 %), respectively ( P = 0.48). The rate of early and late complications was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion In patients with unresectable malignant hilar obstruction, unilateral and bilateral metallic stenting techniques are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety.Background and study aims Endoscopic drainage of walled-off necrosis and subsequent endoscopic necrosectomy has been shown to be an effective step-up management strategy in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. One of the limitations of this endoscopic approach however, is the lack of dedicated and effective instruments to remove necrotic tissue. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and clinical outcome of the EndoRotor, a novel automated mechanical endoscopic tissue resection tool, in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Methods Patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis in need of endoscopic necrosectomy after initial cystogastroscopy, were treated using the EndoRotor. Procedures were performed under conscious or propofol sedation by six experienced endoscopists. Technical feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes were evaluated and scored. Operator experience was assessed by a short questionnaire. Results Twelve patients with a median age of 60.6 years, underwent a total of 27 procedures for removal of infected pancreatic necrosis using the EndoRotor. Of these, nine patients were treated de novo. Three patients had already undergone unsuccessful endoscopic necrosectomy procedures using conventional tools. The mean size of the walled-off cavities was 117.5 ± 51.9 mm. An average of two procedures (range 1 - 7) per patient was required to achieve complete removal of necrotic tissue with the EndoRotor. No procedure-related adverse events occurred. Endoscopists deemed the device to be easy to use and effective for safe and controlled removal of the necrosis. Conclusions Initial experience with the EndoRotor suggests that this device can safely, rapidly, and effectively remove necrotic tissue in patients with (infected) walled-off pancreatic necrosis.Background and study aims EUS-FNA has suboptimal accuracy in diagnosing gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors (SETs). EUS-guided 22-gauge fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) and single-incision with needle knife (SINK) were proposed to increase accuracy of diagnosis. This study aimed to prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety of EUS-FNB with SINK in patients with upper gastrointestinal SETs. Patients and methods All adult patients referred for EUS evaluation of upper gastrointestinal SETs ≥ 15 mm in size were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomized to undergo EUS-FNB or SINK. Lesions were sampled with a 22-gauge reverse beveled core needle in the EUS-FNB group and by a conventional needle-knife sphincterotome and biopsy forceps in the SINK group. Patients were blinded to the technique used. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, histological yield and procedure duration. Study enrollment was terminated early due to poor recruitment. link3 Results A total of 56 patients (31 male (55.37 %); mean age, 67.41 ± 12.70 years) were randomized to either EUS-FNB (n = 26) or SINK (n = 30). Technical success was 96.15 % and 96.66 %, respectively. The majority of lesions were gastrointestinal stromal tumors (51.78 %). No significant difference was found between EUS-FNB and SINK in terms of diagnostic accuracy for a malignant or benign disease (76 % vs. 89.28 %, respectively; P = 0.278). The rate of adverse events (none severe) was also comparable (7.69 % vs. 10 %, respectively; P = 1.0) including two abdominal pain episodes in the EUS-FNB group compared to two delayed bleeding (one requiring hospitalization and radiologic embolization) and 1 abdominal pain in the SINK group. Conclusion EUS-FNB and SINK are equally effective techniques for upper gastrointestinal SETs sampling. SINK can be associated with mild to moderate delayed bleeding.
Website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/pi3k-hdac-inhibitor-i.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team