Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy for benign and malignant gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Thomas R McCarty | Rajat Garg | Christopher C Thompson | Tarun Rustagi
Endoscopy international open | 2019

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic procedure designed to facilitate sustained luminal patency in patients with gastric outlet obstruction. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-GE for treatment of gastric outlet obstruction. Methods  Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed through April 2019. Patients with benign and malignant gastric outlet obstruction were included. Measured outcomes included: immediate technical and clinical success as well as rate of serious adverse events (AEs). Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran Q test and I 2 statistics. Publication bias was ascertained by funnel plot and Egger regression testing. Results  A total of five studies (n = 199 patients; 45.73 % male) were included in this study. Four retrospective studies and one prospective study were analyzed. Mean age of patients that underwent the EUS-GE procedure was 64.52 ± 1.37 years with a pooled mean follow-up period of 4.32 ± 1.65 months. In 21 % of patients (n = 43), gastric outlet obstruction was due to benign causes. Immediate technical success was 92.90 % (95 % CI; 88.26 - 95.79; I 2  = 0.00 %) and reported in all studies. The clinical success rate of EUS-GE was 90.11 % (95 % CI; 84.64 - 93.44; I 2  = 0.00 %). Serious AEs occurred in 5.61 % (95 % CI; 2.87 - 10.67; I 2  = 1.67 %) of cases and were related to peritonitis, perforation, bleeding, and abdominal pain. Re-intervention rate was 11.43 % (95 % CI; 7.29 - 17.46; I 2  = 17.38 %). Conclusions  EUS-GE appears to provide an effective and safe minimally invasive alternative for treatment of benign and malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

Pubmed ID: 31673620

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


EMBASE (tool)

RRID:SCR_001650

Comprehensive international bibliographic biomedical database that enables users to track and retrieve precise information on drugs and diseases from pre-clinical studies to searches on critical toxicological information. It contains bibliographic records with citations, abstracts and indexing derived from biomedical articles in peer reviewed journals, and is especially strong in its coverage of drug and pharmaceutical research. Embase can help with everything from clinical trials research to pharmacovigilance and is updated online daily and weekly. Its broad biomedical scope covers the following areas: * Drug therapy and research, including pharmaceutics, pharmacology and toxicology * Clinical and experimental (human) medicine * Basic biological science relevant to human medicine * Biotechnology and biomedical engineering, including medical devices * Health policy and management, including pharmacoeconomics * Public, occupational and environmental health, including pollution control * Veterinary science, dentistry, and nursing The Embase Application Programming Interface supports export, RSS feeds, and integration services, making it possible to share data with a wide range of systems.

View all literature mentions

PubMed (tool)

RRID:SCR_004846

Public bibliographic database that provides access to citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full-text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites. PubMed citations and abstracts include fields of biomedicine and health, covering portions of life sciences, behavioral sciences, chemical sciences, and bioengineering. Provides access to additional relevant web sites and links to other NCBI molecular biology resources. Publishers of journals can submit their citations to NCBI and then provide access to full-text of articles at journal web sites using LinkOut.

View all literature mentions

Cochrane Library (tool)

RRID:SCR_013000

Contains data to inform healthcare decision-making from Cochrane and other systematic reviews, clinical trials, and more. Cochrane reviews bring you the combined results of the worlds best medical research studies, and are recognized as the gold standard in evidence-based health care. Consists of a regularly updated collection of evidence-based medicine databases, including The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. This database includes systematic reviews of healthcare interventions that are produced and disseminated by The Cochrane Collaboration. It is published on a monthly basis and made available both on CD-ROM and the Internet. The review abstracts are available to browse and search free of charge on this website. The Cochrane Library Users'' Group (CLUG) provides a forum for discussion of usability, readability, searchability, and formatting issues related to the use of The Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Collaboration is an international not-for-profit and independent organization, dedicated to making up-to-date, accurate information about the effects of healthcare readily available worldwide. Funded by John Wiley and Sons Limited. The individual entities of The Cochrane Collaboration are funded by a large variety of governmental, institutional and private funding sources, and are bound by organisation-wide policy limiting uses of funds from corporate sponsors.

View all literature mentions