Clinical Endoscopy

Shyam Vedantam

2 Articles

No difference in outcomes with 15 mm vs. 20 mm lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy for gastric outlet obstruction: a meta-analysis: Shyam Vedantam, Rahil Shah, Sean Bhalla, Shria Kumar, Sunil Amin; Clin Endosc 2023;56(3):298-307. Published online May 22, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2022.299

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: We compared outcomes between use of 15 vs. 20 mm lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) for gastric outlet obstruction.
Methods
Databases were queried for studies that used LAMS for EUS-GE to relieve gastric outlet obstruction, and a proportional meta-analysis was performed.
Results
Thirteen studies were included. The 15 mm and 20 mm LAMS had pooled technical success rates of 93.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.5%–95.2%) and 92.1% (95% CI, 68.4%–98.4%), clinical success rates of 88.6% (95% CI, 85.4%–91.1%) and 89.6% (95% CI, 79.0%–95.1%), adverse event rates of 11.4% (95% CI, 8.1%–15.9%) and 14.7% (95% CI, 4.4%–39.1%), and reintervention rates of 10.3% (95% CI, 6.7%–15.4%) and 3.5% (95% CI, 1.6%–7.6%), respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in technical success, clinical success, or adverse event rates. An increased need for reintervention was noted in the 15 mm stent group (pooled odds ratio, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.40–9.18; p=0.008).
Conclusions
No differences were observed in the technical, clinical, or adverse event rates between 15 and 20 mm LAMS use in EUS-GE. An increased need for reintervention is possible when using a 15 mm stent compared to when using a 20 mm stent.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Endoscopic gastrointestinal bypass anastomosis using deformable self-assembled magnetic anastomosis rings (DSAMARs) in a pig model
Miaomiao Zhang, Jianqi Mao, Jia Ma, Shuqin Xu, Yi Lyu, Xiaopeng Yan
BMC Gastroenterology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Revealing Insights: A Comprehensive Overview of Gastric Outlet Obstruction Management, with Special Emphasis on EUS-Guided Gastroenterostomy
Dimitrios Ziogas, Thomas Vasilakis, Christina Kapizioni, Eleni Koukoulioti, Georgios Tziatzios, Paraskevas Gkolfakis, Antonio Facciorusso, Ioannis S. Papanikolaou
Medical Sciences.2024; 12(1): 9. CrossRef
Lumen-apposing metal stents: A primer on indications and technical tips
Sridhar Sundaram, Suprabhat Giri, Kenneth Binmoeller
Indian Journal of Gastroenterology.2024; 43(5): 886. CrossRef
Advances in self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions
Dong Kee Jang, Dong Wook Lee, Seong-Hun Kim, Kwang Bum Cho, Sundeep Lakhtakia
Clinical Endoscopy.2024; 57(5): 588. CrossRef
Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: focusing on comparison of endoscopic stenting and surgical gastrojejunostomy
Sun Gyo Lim, Chan Gyoo Kim
Clinical Endoscopy.2024; 57(5): 571. CrossRef
III BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS STATEMENT ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND
Ricardo Rangel de Paula PESSOA, Alexandre Moraes BESTETTI, Victor Lira de OLIVEIRA, Wladimir Campos de ARAUJO, Simone GUARALDI, Rodrigo Roda RODRIGUES SILVA, Francisco Antonio Araujo OLIVEIRA, Maria Sylvia Ierardi RIBEIRO, Fred Olavo Aragão Andrade CARNEI
Arquivos de Gastroenterologia.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The Role of Luminal Apposing Metal Stents on the Treatment of Malignant and Benign Gastric Outlet Obstruction
Mihai Rimbaș, Kar Wai Lau, Giulia Tripodi, Gianenrico Rizzatti, Alberto Larghi
Diagnostics.2023; 13(21): 3308. CrossRef

3,289 View
126 Download
5 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Increased ERCP volume improves cholangiogram interpretation: a new performance measure for ERCP training?: Shyam Vedantam, Sunil Amin, Ben Maher, Saqib Ahmad, Shanil Kadir, Saad Khalid Niaz, Mark Wright, Nadeem Tehami; Clin Endosc 2022;55(3):426-433. Published online February 4, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2021.239

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Cholangiogram interpretation is not used as a key performance indicator (KPI) of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) training, and national societies recommend different minimum numbers per annum to maintain competence. This study aimed to determine the relationship between correct ERCP cholangiogram interpretation and experience.
Methods
One hundred fifty ERCPists were surveyed to appropriately interpret ERCP cholangiographic findings. There were three groups of 50 participants each: “Trainees,” “Consultants group 1” (performed >75 ERCPs per year), and “Consultants group 2” (performed >100 ERCPs per year).
Results
Trainees was inferior to Consultants groups 1 and 2 in identifying all findings except choledocholithiasis outside the intrahepatic duct on the initial or completion/occlusion cholangiogram. Consultants group 1 was inferior to Consultants group 2 in identifying Strasberg type A bile leaks (odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–0.96), Strasberg type B (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74–0.95), and Bismuth type 2 hilar strictures (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69–0.95).
Conclusions
This investigation supports the notion that cholangiogram interpretation improves with increased annual ERCP case volumes. Thus, a higher annual volume of procedures performed may improve the ability to correctly interpret particularly difficult findings. Cholangiogram interpretation, in addition to bile duct cannulation, could be considered as another KPI of ERCP training.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

UK ERCP sedation practices, patient comfort and endoscopist characteristics: National Endoscopy Database (NED) analysis on behalf of the JAG and BSG
David Beaton, Matt Rutter, Linda Sharp, Kofi W Oppong, Bidour Awadelkarim, Simon M Everett, Vikramjit Mitra
Frontline Gastroenterology.2023; 14(5): 384. CrossRef

4,365 View
255 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Author index