Insufficient etiological workup of COVID-19-associated acute pancreatitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2) infection, mostly causing respiratory symptoms, is also known to affect the gastrointestinal tract. Several case reports hypothesize that SARS-CoV-2 could be an etiological factor in acute pancreatitis(AP).AIM To assess all the available evidence in the literature relating to coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) and AP.METHODS We performed a systematic review of the available literature on the topic. The systematic search was conducted on 15 May 2020 on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus with a search key using the terms "amylase," "lipase," "pancr*," "COVID-19" and synonyms. Due to the low quality and poor comparability of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed.RESULTS Six case reports and two retrospective cohorts were included, containing data on eleven COVID-19 patients with AP. Five patients had AP according to the Atlanta classification. Other publications did not provide sufficient information on the diagnostic criteria. Most cases were considered SARS-CoV-2-induced, while several established etiological factors were not investigated. We were able to identify other possible causes in most of them.CONCLUSION We strongly highlight the need for adherence to the guidelines during a diagnostic and etiological workup, which could alter therapy.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on esophagectomies in esophageal cancer:The superiority of minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND Previous meta-analyses,with many limitations,have described the beneficial nature of minimal invasive procedures.AIM To compare all modalities of esophagectomies to each other from the results of randomized controlled trials(RCTs)in a network meta-analysis(NMA).METHODS We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE,EMBASE,Reference Citation Analysis(https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/)and CENTRAL databases to identify RCTs according to the following population,intervention,control,outcome(commonly known as PICO):P:Patients with resectable esophageal cancer;I/C:Transthoracic,transhiatal,minimally invasive(thoracolaparoscopic),hybrid,and robot-assisted esophagectomy;O:Survival,total adverse events,adverse events in subgroups,length of hospital stay,and blood loss.We used the Bayesian approach and the random effects model.We presented the geometry of the network,results with probabilistic statements,estimated intervention effects and their 95% confidence interval(CI),and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank the interventions.RESULTS We included 11 studies in our analysis.We found a significant difference in postoperative pulmonary infection,which favored the minimally invasive intervention compared to transthoracic surgery(risk ratio 0.49;95%CI:0.23 to 0.99).The operation time was significantly shorter for the transhiatal approach compared to transthoracic surgery(mean difference-85 min;95%CI:-150 to-29),hybrid intervention(mean difference-98 min;95%CI:-190 to-9.4),minimally invasive technique(mean difference-130 min;95%CI:-210 to-50),and robot-assisted esophagectomy(mean difference-150 min;95%CI:-240 to-53).Other comparisons did not yield significant differences.CONCLUSION Based on our results,the implication of minimally invasive esophagectomy should be favored.

Prophylactic transcatheter arterial embolization reduces rebleeding in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Despite the improvement in the endoscopic hemostasis of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding(NVUGIB),rebleeding remains a major concern.AIM To assess the role of prophylactic transcatheter arterial embolization(PTAE)added to successful hemostatic treatment among NVUGIB patients.METHODS We searched three databases from inception through October 19th,2020.Randomized controlled trials(RCTs)and observational cohort studies were eligible.Studies compared patients with NVUGIB receiving PTAE to those who did not get PTAE.Investigated outcomes were rebleeding,mortality,reintervention,need for surgery and transfusion,length of hospital(LOH),and intensive care unit(ICU)stay.In the quantitative synthesis,odds ratios(ORs)and weighted mean differences(WMDs)were calculated with the random-effects model and interpreted with 95%confidence intervals(CIs).RESULTS We included a total of 3 RCTs and 9 observational studies with a total of 1329 patients,with 486 in the intervention group.PTAE was associated with lower odds of rebleeding(OR=0.48,95%CI:0.29–0.78).There was no difference in the 30-d mortality rates(OR=0.82,95%CI:0.39–1.72)between the PTAE and control groups.Patients who underwent PTAE treatment had a lower chance for reintervention(OR=0.48,95%CI:0.31–0.76)or rescue surgery(OR=0.35,95%CI:0.14–0.92).The LOH and ICU stay was shorter in the PTAE group,but the difference was non-significant[WMD=-3.77,95%CI:(-8.00)–0.45;WMD=-1.33,95%CI:(-2.84)–0.18,respectively].CONCLUSION PTAE is associated with lower odds of rebleeding and any reintervention in NVUGIB.However,further RCTs are needed to have a higher level of evidence.