Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

OPEN ACCESS

Author index

Page Path
HOME > Browse Articles > Author index
Search
Dushyant Singh Dahiya 4 Articles
Endoscopic versus surgical management for colonic volvulus hospitalizations in the United States
Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Abhilash Perisetti, Hemant Goyal, Sumant Inamdar, Amandeep Singh, Rajat Garg, Chin-I Cheng, Mohammad Al-Haddad, Madhusudhan R. Sanaka, Neil Sharma
Clin Endosc 2023;56(3):340-352.   Published online April 17, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2022.166
Graphical AbstractGraphical Abstract AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Background
/Aims: Colonic volvulus (CV), a common cause of bowel obstruction, often requires intervention. We aimed to identify hospitalization trends and CV outcomes in the United States.
Methods
We used the National Inpatient Sample to identify all adult CV hospitalizations in the United States from 2007 to 2017. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and inpatient outcomes were highlighted. Outcomes of endoscopic and surgical management were compared.
Results
From 2007 to 2017, there were 220,666 CV hospitalizations. CV-related hospitalizations increased from 17,888 in 2007 to 21,715 in 2017 (p=0.001). However, inpatient mortality decreased from 7.6% in 2007 to 6.2% in 2017 (p<0.001). Of all CV-related hospitalizations, 13,745 underwent endoscopic intervention, and 77,157 underwent surgery. Although the endoscopic cohort had patients with a higher Charlson comorbidity index, we noted lower inpatient mortality (6.1% vs. 7.0%, p<0.001), mean length of stay (8.3 vs. 11.8 days, p<0.001), and mean total healthcare charge ($68,126 vs. $106,703, p<0.001) compared to the surgical cohort. Male sex, increased Charlson comorbidity index scores, acute kidney injury, and malnutrition were associated with higher odds of inpatient mortality in patients with CV who underwent endoscopic management.
Conclusions
Endoscopic intervention has lower inpatient mortality and is an excellent alternative to surgery for appropriately selected CV hospitalizations.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Navigating Abdominal Volvulus: A Comprehensive Review of Management Strategies
    Simran Chauhan, Raju K Shinde, Yashraj Jain
    Cureus.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Clinicopathological Features of Elderly Patients with Colonic Volvulus
    Mehmet Onur Gul, Selda Oğuz Aşlayan, Kadir Çorbacı, Aytaç Selman, Emre Berat Akçay, Oğuzhan Sunamak, Cebrail Akyüz
    European Journal of Therapeutics.2024; 30(3): 303.     CrossRef
  • Incidental Sigmoid Volvulus after a Ground-level Fall: An Unusual Case Report
    Ziya Karimov, Elchin Shirinov, Gunay Huseynova, Mirhuseyn Mammadov, Meltem Songür Kodik
    Caucasian Medical Journal.2023; 1(3): 36.     CrossRef
  • Colonic Volvulus
    Samantha L. Savitch, Calista M. Harbaugh
    Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • 2,236 View
  • 151 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 4 Crossref
Close layer
Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States: what does the future hold?
Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Vinay Jahagirdar, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Muhammad Aziz, Chin-I Cheng, Sumant Inamdar, Madhusudhan R. Sanaka, Mohammad Al-Haddad
Clin Endosc 2022;55(6):826-828.   Published online November 3, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2022.283
PDFPubReaderePub
  • 1,838 View
  • 116 Download
Close layer
Radiation Proctitis and Management Strategies
Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Asim Kichloo, Faiz Tuma, Michael Albosta, Farah Wani
Clin Endosc 2022;55(1):22-32.   Published online November 18, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2020.288
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Radiotherapy (RT) is a treatment modality that uses high-energy rays or radioactive agents to generate ionizing radiation against rapidly dividing cells. The main objective of using radiation in cancer therapy is to impair or halt the division of the tumor cells. Over the past few decades, advancements in technology, the introduction of newer methods of RT, and a better understanding of the pathophysiology of cancers have enabled physicians to deliver doses of radiation that match the exact dimensions of the tumor for greater efficacy, with minimal exposure of the surrounding tissues. However, RT has numerous complications, the most common being radiation proctitis (RP). It is characterized by damage to the rectal epithelium by secondary ionizing radiation. Based on the onset of signs and symptoms, post-radiotherapy RP can be classified as acute or chronic, each with varying levels of severity and complication rates. The treatment options available for RP are limited, with most of the data on treatment available from case reports or small studies. Here, we describe the types of RT used in modern-day medicine and radiation-mediated tissue injury. We have primarily focused on the classification, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, treatment strategies, complications, and prognosis of RP.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Concurrent rectal perforation and obstruction following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer: A case report
    Tahmineh Tahouri, Sahand Hedayati Omami, Maryam Hosseini, Ehsanollah Rahimi-Movaghar
    International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2024; 116: 109337.     CrossRef
  • Endoscopic resection of residual rectal neoplasia after definitive chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer
    Robert Klimkowski, Jakub Krzyzkowiak, Nastazja Dagny Pilonis, Krzysztof Bujko, Michal F. Kaminski
    Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology.2024; 68: 101896.     CrossRef
  • Radiation injuries of organs and tissues: mechanisms of occurrence, methods of prevention and treatment: A review
    Daiana A. Balaeva, Denis S. Romanov, Oxana P. Trofimova, Zarina Z. Gadzhibabaeva, Yury Yu. Gorchak, Garia A. Gariaev
    Journal of Modern Oncology.2024; 25(4): 504.     CrossRef
  • Interventions for Managing Late Gastrointestinal Symptoms Following Pelvic Radiotherapy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    H. Berntsson, A. Thien, D. Hind, L. Stewart, M. Mahzabin, W.S. Tung, M. Bradburn, M. Kurien
    Clinical Oncology.2024; 36(5): 318.     CrossRef
  • Intestinal microecological transplantation for a patient with chronic radiation enteritis: A case report
    Lin Wang, Yan Li, Yu-Jing Zhang, Li-Hua Peng
    World Journal of Gastroenterology.2024; 30(19): 2603.     CrossRef
  • Intrarectal formalin treatment for haemorrhagic radiation‐induced proctopathy: efficacy and safety
    Darina Kohoutova, Ana Wilson, Caroline Gee, Ramy Elhusseiny, Linda Wanders, David Cunningham
    Colorectal Disease.2024; 26(5): 932.     CrossRef
  • Emodin ameliorates acute radiation proctitis in mice by regulating AKT/MAPK/NF-κB/VEGF pathways
    Jinsheng Gao, Yousong Li, Jiaohua Chen, Wen Feng, Jianchen Bu, Zixuan Lu, Jiandong Wang
    International Immunopharmacology.2024; 132: 111945.     CrossRef
  • Protocolo diagnóstico de la rectitis (proctitis)
    C. Iniesta Cavero, L. Menchén-Viso
    Medicine - Programa de Formación Médica Continuada Acreditado.2024; 14(8): 468.     CrossRef
  • Administration of modified Gegen Qinlian decoction for hemorrhagic chronic radiation proctitis: A case report and review of literature
    Shao-Yong Liu, Liu-Ling Hu, Shi-Jun Wang, Zhong-Li Liao
    World Journal of Clinical Cases.2023; 11(5): 1129.     CrossRef
  • A Retrospective Single-Arm Cohort Study in a Single Center of Radiofrequency Ablation in Treatment of Chronic Radiation Proctitis
    Chien-En Tang, Kung-Chuan Cheng, Kuen-Lin Wu, Hong-Hwa Chen, Ko-Chao Lee
    Life.2023; 13(2): 566.     CrossRef
  • Survivorship in Early-Stage Rectal Cancer Patients Who Have Received Combined Modality Therapy
    Saboor E. Randhawa, Laura Tenner
    Clinical Colorectal Cancer.2023; 22(4): 375.     CrossRef
  • A Systematic Review of Population-Based Studies of Chronic Bowel Symptoms in Cancer Survivors following Pelvic Radiotherapy
    Adam Biran, Iakov Bolnykh, Ben Rimmer, Anthony Cunliffe, Lisa Durrant, John Hancock, Helen Ludlow, Ian Pedley, Colin Rees, Linda Sharp
    Cancers.2023; 15(16): 4037.     CrossRef
  • The effectiveness of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for managing radiation-induced proctitis – results of a 10-year retrospective cohort study
    António Moreira Monteiro, Diogo Alpuim Costa, Virgínia Mareco, Carla Espiney Amaro
    Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Chinese clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of radiation‐induced rectal injury
    Hui Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Shuanghu Yuan
    Precision Radiation Oncology.2023; 7(4): 237.     CrossRef
  • Progress in multidisciplinary treatment of hemorrhagic radiation proctitis
    Qiulian Li, Guangjie Liao
    Annals of Oncology Research and Therapy.2022; 2(1): 10.     CrossRef
  • 7,176 View
  • 561 Download
  • 13 Web of Science
  • 15 Crossref
Close layer
Cold snare polypectomy versus cold endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Vishali Moond, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Sheza Malik, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Babu P. Mohan, Daryl Ramai, Michele McGinnis, Deepak Madhu, Mohammad Bilal, Aasma Shaukat, Saurabh Chandan
Received April 3, 2024  Accepted April 28, 2024  Published online June 5, 2024  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.081
AbstractAbstract PubReaderePub
Background
/Aims: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is routinely performed for small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm). However, challenges include insufficient resection depth and immediate bleeding, hindering precise pathological evaluation. We aimed to compare the outcomes of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with that of CSP for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm, using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods
Multiple databases were searched in December 2023 for RCTs reporting outcomes of CSP versus CEMR for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm in size. Our primary outcomes were rates of complete and en-bloc resections, while our secondary outcomes were total resection time (seconds) and adverse events, including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and perforation.
Results
The complete resection rates did not significantly differ (CSP, 91.8% vs. CEMR 94.6%), nor did the rates of en-bloc resection (CSP, 98.9% vs. CEMR, 98.3%) or incomplete resection (CSP, 6.7% vs. CEMR, 4.8%). Adverse event rates were similarly insignificant in variance. However, CEMR had a notably longer mean resection time (133.51 vs. 91.30 seconds).
Conclusions
Our meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that while both CSP and CEMR are equally safe and effective for resecting small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps, the latter is associated with a longer resection time.
  • 0 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
Close layer
TOP