Search

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has surfaced as an effective endoscopic treatment modality for achalasia cardia (AC). Promising results in short- and mid-term follow-up studies have increased the use of POEM for the management of AC. POEM can be safely performed in an endoscopy suit, and major adverse events (AEs) are uncommon. AEs encountered during POEM or during the perioperative period principally include insufflation-related AEs, mucosal injuries, bleeding, pain, and aspiration pneumonia. Most insufflation-related AEs do not require an active intervention and therefore should not be considered as AEs in the true sense. When management of AEs is required, most intraoperative AEs can be managed at the same time without untoward consequences. Occurrences of AEs lessen after completion of the learning curve. However, experience alone does not ensure "zero" incidence of AEs, and early recognition remains essential. Postoperative AEs, like leaks, delayed bleeding, and delayed mucosal perforations, may pose special challenges for diagnosis and management. There is no standardized classification system for grading the severity of AEs associated with POEM, resulting in wide variation in their reported occurrences. Uniform reporting of AEs is not only crucial to comprehensively analyze the safety of POEM but also for comparison with other established treatment modalities like Heller's myotomy. GERD is an important long-term AE after POEM. Unlike the perioperative AEs, little is known regarding the intraoperative or patient-related factors that influence the occurrence of post-POEM GERD. Large prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required to determine the procedural factors associated with GERD after POEM., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Aims: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative procedure after failed ERCP. However, limited data on the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD are available. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and to evaluate transduodenal (TD) and transgastric (TG) approaches., Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched to identify relevant studies published in the English language for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Data from eligible studies were combined to calculate the cumulative technical success rate (TSR), functional success rate (FSR), and adverse-event rate of EUS-BD and the pooled odds ratio of TSR, FSR, and adverse-event rate of the TD approach when compared with the TG approach., Results: Forty-two studies with 1192 patients were included in this study, and the cumulative TSR, FSR, and adverse-event rate were 94.71%, 91.66%, and 23.32%, respectively. The common adverse events associated with EUS-BD were bleeding (4.03%), bile leakage (4.03%), pneumoperitoneum (3.02%), stent migration (2.68%), cholangitis (2.43%), abdominal pain (1.51%), and peritonitis (1.26%). Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis for comparative evaluation of TD and TG approaches for EUS-BD. Compared with the TG approach, the pooled odds ratio of the TSR, FSR, and adverse-event rate of the TD approach were 1.36 (95% CI, .66-2.81; P > .05), .84 (95% CI, .50-1.42; P > .05), and .61 (95% CI, .36-1.03; P > .05), respectively, which indicated no significant difference in the TSR, FSR, and adverse-event rate between the 2 groups., Conclusions: Although it is associated with significant morbidity, EUS-BD is an effective alternative procedure for relieving biliary obstruction. There was no significant difference between the TD and TG approaches for EUS-BD., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is feasible as a treatment for early gastric cancer, it requires great skill to perform and may place patients at increased risk of a number of complications, including perforation and aspiration pneumonia., Objective: To investigate the incidence of "silent" free air without endoscopic perforation and aspiration pneumonia detected by CT after ESD and risk factors for the development of these 2 conditions., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: Single academic center., Patients: This study involved 87 patients with a total of 91 malignancies., Intervention: All patients underwent chest and abdominal CT and blood biochemistry analysis before and 1 day after ESD., Main Outcome Measurements: The incidence of silent free air and aspiration pneumonia after ESD and the related risk factors., Results: Silent free air was identified in 37.3% of patients without perforation. Tumor location (the upper portion of the stomach), the presence of a damaged muscular layer during ESD, and procedure time, but not specimen size, were significantly associated with silent free air (P = .006, P = .04, P = .02, and P = .53, respectively). According to the receiver-operating characteristic analysis, the resulting cutoff value of the procedure time for silent free air was 105 minutes (67.7% sensitivity, 65.4% specificity). Only procedure time (≥ 105 minutes) was an independent predictor of silent free air development (odds ratio 3.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-8.64; P = .02). On the other hand, aspiration pneumonia was seen in 6.6% of patients. Silent free air and aspiration pneumonia did not affect hospitalization., Limitations: Single center and small number of patients., Conclusions: Silent free air is frequently observed after ESD, and longer procedure time (≥ 105 minutes) was an independent risk factor for silent free air. However, silent free air and aspiration pneumonia detected by CT are not associated with clinically significant complications., (Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: PEG is a widely used method for providing nutritional support. Although pneumoperitoneum is a known finding after PEG placement, its true incidence is subject to debate. Small retrospective studies have found varied rates of free air after PEG placement., Patients: There were a total of 65 patients., Objective: To assess the true incidence of pneumoperitoneum and its clinical significance., Design: Prospective study., Setting: Long Island Jewish Medical Center., Interventions: We obtained upright and anterior-posterior chest radiographs of 65 patients within 3 hours after PEG placement. Type of PEG tube, gauge of the needle used, number of sticks, and indications were recorded. The presence of pneumoperitoneum on the initial chest film was considered to be a positive finding. After a positive result, a repeat chest film was obtained 72 hours later to determine whether there was progression or resolution of the free air. Patients enrolled in the study were also monitored clinically for evidence of peritonitis., Main Outcome: Of the 65 patients who underwent PEG placement, 13 developed a pneumoperitoneum on the initial chest radiograph; there was complete resolution of pneumoperitoneum at 72 hours in 10 of the 13 patients. In 3 patients, the free air persisted but was of no clinical significance., Measurements: The free air was quantified by measuring the height of the air column under the diaphragm and was graded with a scoring system (0, no air; 1, small; 2, moderate; 3, large)., Results: Eleven patients who underwent PEG died during the hospitalization; none of the deaths were related to the PEG placement or pneumoperitoneum. The other 54 patients were discharged to a skilled nursing facility. No patients in the study had clinical evidence of peritonitis. There were no adverse events, ie, infection or bleeding, associated with the PEG placement in any of the patients., Conclusions: Our data suggest that pneumoperitoneum after PEG placement is common and, in the absence of clinical symptoms, is of no clinical significance and does not warrant any further intervention.