Dataset Information

Systematic review with meta-analysis: efficacy of balloon-assisted enteroscopy for dilation of small bowel Crohn's disease strictures.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Evidence for endoscopic balloon dilation of small intestinal strictures in Crohn's disease (CD) using balloon-assisted enteroscopy is scarce.

Aim

To evaluate endoscopic balloon dilation for the treatment of small intestinal CD strictures using balloon-assisted enteroscopy.

Methods

Citations in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were systematically reviewed. In a meta-analysis of 18 studies with 463 patients and 1189 endoscopic balloon dilations, technical success was defined as the ability to dilate a stricture. Individual data were also obtained on 218 patients to identify outcome-relevant risk factors.

Results

In the pooled per-study analysis, technical success rate of endoscopic balloon dilation was 94.9%, resulting in short-term clinical efficacy in 82.3% of patients. Major complications occurred in 5.3% of patients. During follow-up, 48.3% of patients reported symptom recurrence, 38.8% were re-dilated and 27.4% proceeded to surgery. On the per-patient-based multivariable analysis, that patients with disease activity in the small intestine had lower short-term clinical efficacy (odds ratio 0.32; 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.73, P = 0.007). Patients with concomitant active disease in the small and/or large intestine had an increased risk to proceed toward surgery (hazard ratio 1.85; 95% confidence interval 1.09-3.13, P = 0.02 and hazard ratio 1.77; 95% confidence interval 1.34-2.34, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Balloon-assisted enteroscopy for dilatation of CD-associated small intestinal strictures has high short-term technical and clinical efficacy and low complication rates. However, up to two-thirds of patients need re-dilation or surgery.

SUBMITTER: Bettenworth D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8052861 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo quantify bowel motility shown on cine MRI using the classical optical flow algorithm and compare it with balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) findings in patients with Crohn's disease (CD).MethodsThis retrospective study included 29 consecutive patients with CD who had undergone MR enterocolonography (MREC) and BAE between March and May 2017. We developed computer software to present motion vector magnitudes between consecutive cine MR images as bowel motility maps via a classical optical flow algorithm using the Horn-Schunck method. Cine MR images were acquired with a balanced steady-state free precession sequence in the coronal direction to capture small bowel motility. The small bowels were divided into three segments. In total, 63 bowel segments were assessed via BAE and MREC. Motility scores on the maps, simplified MR index of activity (sMaRIA), and MREC score derived from a 5-point MR classification were assessed independently by two radiologists and compared with the CD endoscopic index of severity (CDEIS). Correlations were assessed using Spearman's rank coefficient. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of motility score for differentiating CDEIS was calculated; a P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsMotility score was negatively correlated with CDEIS (r = -0.59 [P < 0.001] and -0.54 [P < 0.001]), and the AUCs of motility scores for detecting CDEIS ≥ 3 were 88.2% and 78.6% for observers 1 and 2, respectively. There were no significant differences in the AUC for detecting CDEIS ≥ 3 and CDEIS ≥ 12 between motility and sMaRIA or MREC score.ConclusionThe motility map was feasible for locally quantifying the bowel motility. In addition, the motility score on the map reflected the endoscopic inflammatory activity of each small bowel segment in patients with CD; hence, it could be used as a tool in objectively interpreting cine MREC to predict inflammatory activity in CD.

Project description:ObjectiveThe use of minimally invasive endoluminal treatment for urethral strictures has been a subject for debate for several decades. The aim of this study was to review and discuss the safety, efficacy and factors influencing the clinical application of balloon dilation for the treatment of male urethral strictures.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesEmbase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus were searched for publications published before 17 July 2022.Study selectionTwo independent researchers screened and assessed the results, and all clinical studies on balloon dilation for the treatment of urethral strictures in men were included.Data extraction and synthesisThe success rate, rate of adverse events, International Prostate Symptom Scores, maximum uroflow (Qmax) and postvoid residual urine volume were the main outcomes. Stata V.14.0 was used for statistical analysis.ResultsFifteen studies with 715 patients were ultimately included in this systematic review. The pooled results of eight studies showed that the reported success rate of simple balloon dilation for male urethral strictures was 67.07% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55.92% to 77.36%). The maximum urinary flow rate at 3 months (risk ratio [RR]= 2.6510, 95% CI: 1.0681 to 4.2338, p<0.01) and the maximum urinary flow rate at 1 year (RR= 1.6637, 95% CI: 1.1837 to 2.1437, p<0.05) were significantly different after dilation. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that balloon dilation is superior to optical internal urethrotomy or direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) (RR= 1.4754, 95% CI: 0.7306 to 2.9793, p=0.278).ConclusionBalloon dilation may be an intermediate step before urethroplasty and is a promising alternative therapy to simple dilation and DVIU. The balloon is a promising drug delivery tool, and paclitaxel drug-coated balloon dilation is effective in reducing retreatment rates in patients with recurrent anterior urethral strictures. The aetiology, location, length, previous treatment of urethral stricture may be associated with the efficacy of balloon dilation.Prospero registration numberCRD42022334403.

Project description:Several studies have evaluated the utility of double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and capsule endoscopy (CE) for patients with small-bowel disease showing inconsistent results. The aim of this study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of overtube-assisted enteroscopy (OAE) as well as the diagnostic concordance between OAE and CE for small-bowel polyps and tumors.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in which the results of OAE were compared with the results of CE for the evaluation of small-bowel polyps and tumors. When data for surgically resected lesions were available, the histopathological results of OAE and surgical specimens were compared. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of small-bowel polyps and tumors were analyzed. Secondarily, the rates of diagnostic concordance and discordance between OAE and CE were calculated.There were 15 full-length studies with a total of 821 patients that met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were as follows: 0.89 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.84 - 0.93), with heterogeneity χ(2) = 41.23 (P = 0.0002) and inconsistency (I (2)) = 66.0 %; 0.97 (95 %CI 0.95 - 0.98), with heterogeneity χ(2) = 45.27 (P = 0.07) and inconsistency (I (2)) = 69.1 %; 16.61 (95 %CI 3.74 - 73.82), with heterogeneity Cochrane's Q = 225.19 (P < 0.01) and inconsistency (I (2)) = 93.8 %; and 0.14 (95 %CI 0.05 - 0.35), with heterogeneity Cochrane's Q = 81.01 (P < .01) and inconsistency (I (2)) = 82.7 %, respectively. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) curve was constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.97.OAE is an accurate test for the detection of small-bowel polyps and tumors. OAE and CE have a high diagnostic concordance rate for small-bowel polyps and tumors. This study was registered in the PROSPERO international database (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) with the study number CRD42015016000.