BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) against the combined treatment of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and propranolol in managing patients with cirrhosis diagnosed with portal vein thrombosis (PVT).
METHODS: A literature search from inception to September 2023 was performed using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus. Independent screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. The main measured outcomes were the incidence and recurrence of variceal bleeding (VB), hepatic encephalopathy, and overall survival.
RESULTS: A total of 5 studies were included. For variceal eradication, there was initially no significant difference between the groups; however, after sensitivity analysis, a significant effect emerged (risk ratio [RR], 1.55; P < .0001). TIPS was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of VB (RR, 0.34; P < .0001) and a higher probability of remaining free of VB in the first 2 years after the procedure (first year: RR, 1.41; P < .0001; second year: RR, 1.58; P < .0001). TIPS significantly reduced the incidence of death due to acute GI bleeding compared with EBL + propranolol (RR, 0.37; P = .05).
CONCLUSIONS: TIPS offers a comprehensive therapeutic advantage over the combined EBL and propranolol regimen, especially for patients with cirrhosis with PVT. Its efficacy in variceal eradication, reducing rebleeding, and mitigating death risks due to acute GI bleeding is evident.

UNASSIGNED: Endoscopic treatments are increasingly being offered for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Three procedures have similar concepts and techniques: antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS), antireflux mucosal ablation (ARMA), and antireflux band ligation (ARBL); we have collectively termed them antireflux mucosal intervention (ARMI). Here, we systematically reviewed the clinical outcomes and technical aspects.
UNASSIGNED: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to October 2021. The primary outcome was the clinical success rate. The secondary outcomes were acid exposure time, DeMeester score, need for proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), endoscopic findings, and adverse events.
UNASSIGNED: Fifteen studies were included. The pooled clinical success rate was 73.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 69%-78%) overall, 68.6% (95% CI = 62.2%-74.4%) with ARMS, 86.7% (95% CI = 78.7%-91.9%) with ARMA, and 76.5% (95% CI = 65%-85.1%) with ARBL. ARMI resulted in significantly improved acid exposure time, DeMeester score, and degree of hiatal hernia. Furthermore, 10% of patients had dysphagia requiring endoscopic dilatation after ARMS or ARMA, and ARMS was associated with a 2.2% perforation rate. By contrast, no bleeding, perforation, or severe dysphagia was noted with ARBL. Severe hiatal hernia (Hill grade III) may predict treatment failure with ARMA.
UNASSIGNED: The three ARMI procedures were efficacious and safe for PPI-refractory GERD. ARMA and ARBL may be preferred over ARMS because of fewer adverse events and similar efficacy. Further studies are necessary to determine the optimal technique and patient selection.

OBJECTIVE: Argon plasma coagulation (APC) is the most commonly used endoscopic treatment for gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE). Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) has emerged as an alternative therapy. Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of APC and EBL for the treatment of GAVE. This is the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on this topic.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed using electronic databases to identify RCTs comparing APC and EBL for the treatment of GAVE following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.
RESULTS: Four RCTs were included, with a total of 204 patients. EBL was related to higher endoscopic eradication rates risk difference [RD], 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.14, 0.44]; I2=0%) and less bleeding recurrence than APC (RD, 0.29; 95% CI [0.15, 0.44]; I2=0%). Patients treated with EBL required fewer blood transfusions (mean difference [MD], 1.49; 95% CI [0.28, 2.71]; I2=96%) and hospitalizations (MD, 0.29; 95% CI [0.19, 0.39]; I2=0%). The number of sessions required for the obliteration of lesions was higher with APC. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: EBL is superior to APC in the treatment of GAVE in terms of endoscopic eradication rates, recurrence of bleeding, and transfusion requirements.

OBJECTIVE: Either clipping or band ligation will become the most common endoscopic treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). Rebleeding is a significant clinical outcome of CDB, but there is no cumulative evidence comparing reduction of short-term and long-term rebleeding between them. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine which endoscopic treatment is more effective to reduce recurrence of CDB.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of the databases PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase was performed through December 2019. Main outcomes were early and late rebleeding rates, defined as bleeding within 30 days and 1 year of endoscopic therapy for CDB. Initial hemostasis, need for transcatheter arterial embolization, or surgery were also assessed. Overall pooled estimates were calculated.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria, and a total of 790 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of early rebleeding was significantly lower for band ligation than clipping (0.08 vs 0.19; heterogeneity test, P = 0.012). The pooled prevalence of late rebleeding was significantly lower for band ligation than clipping (0.09 vs 0.29; heterogeneity test, P = 0.024). No significant difference of initial hemostasis rate was noted between the two groups. Pooled prevalence of need for transcatheter arterial embolization or surgery was significantly lower for band ligation than clipping (0.01 vs 0.02; heterogeneity test, P = 0.031). There were two cases with colonic diverticulitis due to band ligation but none in clipping.
CONCLUSIONS: Band ligation therapy was more effective compared with clipping to reduce recurrence of colonic diverticular hemorrhage over short-term and long-term durations.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current reported efficacy and the mortality rate of SEMS treatment in uncontrolled bleeding patients.
BACKGROUND: Esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) represents a life threatening pathology. Despite the adequate pharmacologic and endoscopic treatment, continuous or recurrent bleeding, named as uncontrolled bleeding, occurs in 10-20% of cases. A new removable, covered, and self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) was proposed to control the variceal bleeding.
METHODS: The study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1989-present) and SCOPUS (1989-present) databases. The last search was run on 01 July 2015.
RESULTS: Nine studies (period range=2002-2015) met the inclusion criteria and were included in quantitative analysis. High rate of SEMS efficacy in controling acute bleeding was observed, with a reported percentage ranging from 77.7 to 100%. In 10% to 20% of patients, re-bleeding occurred with SEMS in situ. Stent deployment was successful in 77.8% to 100% of patients while 11 to 36.5% of patients experienced stent migration.
CONCLUSIONS: SEMS could be effective and safe in control EVB and can be proposed as a reliable option to ballon tamponed for patient stabilization and as a bridging to other therapeutic approach.