No abstract

Background and study aims Transoral outlet reduction (TORe) is an endoscopic procedure used in patients with weight gain post Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TORe with a full-thickness suturing device for treating patients with weight regain after RYGB. Patients and methods We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, Google-Scholar, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases (earliest inception to March 2020). The primary outcomes assessed were technical success, absolute weight loss (AWL) and percent of total weight loss (% TWL) at 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. The secondary outcomes assessed were pooled rate of adverse events (AEs), adverse event subtypes and association of size of gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) and percent TWL. Results Thirteen studies on 850 patients were included. The pooled rate of technical success was 99.89 %. The absolute weight loss (kg) at 3, 6, and 12 months was 6.14, 10.15, and 7.14, respectively. The percent TWL at 3, 6, and 12 months was 6.69, 11.34, and 8.55, respectively. The pooled rate of AE was 11.4 % with abdominal pain being the most common adverse event. The correlation coefficient (r) was –0.11 between post TORe GJA size and weight loss at 12 months. Conclusion TORe is an endoscopic procedure that is safe and technically feasible for post RYGB with weight gain.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Pancreatic duct stones can lead to significant abdominal pain for patients. Per oral pancreatoscopy (POP)-guided intracorporal lithotripsy is being increasingly used for the management of main pancreatic duct calculi (PDC) in chronic pancreatitis. POP uses two techniques: Electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) and laser lithotripsy (LL). Data on the safety and efficacy are limited for this procedure. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with a primary aim to calculate the pooled technical and clinical success rates of POP. The secondary aim was to assess pooled rates of technical success, clinical success for the two individual techniques, and adverse event rates. AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of POP, EHL and LL for management of PDC in chronic pancreatitis. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Google Scholar and Web of Science databases (from 1999 to October 2019) to identify studies with patient age greater than 17 and any gender that reported on outcomes of POP, EHL and LL. The primary outcome assessed involved the pooled technical success and clinical success rate of POP. The secondary outcome included the pooled technical success and clinical success rate for EHL and LL. We also assessed the pooled rate of adverse events for POP, EHL and LL including a subgroup analysis for the rate of adverse event subtypes for POP: Hemorrhage, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP), perforation, abdominal pain, fever and infections. Technical success was defined as the rate of clearing pancreatic duct stones and clinical success as the improvement in pain. Random-effects model was used for analysis. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was calculated using the Cochran Q statistical test and I 2 statistics. Publication bias was ascertained, qualitatively by visual inspection of funnel plot and quantitatively by the Egger test. RESULTS A total of 16 studies including 383 patients met the inclusion criteria. The technical success rate of POP was 76.4% (95%CI: 65.9-84.5; I 2 = 64%) and clinical success rate was 76.8% (95%CI: 65.2-85.4; I 2 = 66%). The technical success rate of EHL was 70.3% (95%CI: 57.8-80.3; I 2 = 36%) and clinical success rate of EHL was 66.5% (95%CI: 55.2-76.2; I 2 = 19%). The technical success rate of LL was 89.3% (95%CI: 70.5-96.7; I 2 = 70%) and clinical success rate of LL was 88.2% (95%CI: 66.4-96.6; I 2 = 77%). The incidence of pooled adverse events for POP was 14.9% (95%CI: 9.2-23.2; ...

No abstract