eus引导下胃肠造口术与置入肠内支架患者胃排空的比较分析:先导分析。

IF 2.2 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2025-05-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2586-6153
Sridhar Sundaram, Ameya Puranik, Akhil Mahajan, Kiran Mane, Rahul Puri, Aditya Kale, Prachi Patil, Shaesta Mehta
{"title":"eus引导下胃肠造口术与置入肠内支架患者胃排空的比较分析:先导分析。","authors":"Sridhar Sundaram, Ameya Puranik, Akhil Mahajan, Kiran Mane, Rahul Puri, Aditya Kale, Prachi Patil, Shaesta Mehta","doi":"10.1055/a-2586-6153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Previous studies show that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is better than enteral stents (ESs) in terms of clinical success and need for reintervention in the long term. Gastric atony and stent placement across a tumor can lead to poor gastric emptying after ES placement. We aimed to compare gastric emptying across ES and EUS-GE to assess the benefit of EUS-GE over ES in the short-term.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>In this pilot study, patients who underwent ES or EUS-GE for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction were included. A gastric emptying study was performed 2 weeks after the procedure after consumption of a semisolid test-meal (Indian porridge) labelled with Tc-Sulphur. The primary outcome was gastric emptying t1/2 between ES and EUS-GE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty patients were included in this study (21 ES, 19 EUS-GE; mean age 54 years, 27 males). EUS-GE had a faster emptying t1/2 as compared with ES (72 mins vs 118 mins) ( <i>P</i> = 0.02). Abnormal emptying was seen in fewer patients undergoing EUS-GE (5.3% vs 47.6% [ES]; <i>P</i> = 0.004). Clinical success at 2 weeks and reintervention at 6 months was no different.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EUS-GE was associated with better gastric emptying compared with ES, suggesting a benefit that may translate into clinical benefit even in the short term.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a25866153"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12090976/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of gastric emptying between patients undergoing EUS-guided gastroenterostomy and enteral stent placement: Pilot analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sridhar Sundaram, Ameya Puranik, Akhil Mahajan, Kiran Mane, Rahul Puri, Aditya Kale, Prachi Patil, Shaesta Mehta\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2586-6153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Previous studies show that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is better than enteral stents (ESs) in terms of clinical success and need for reintervention in the long term. Gastric atony and stent placement across a tumor can lead to poor gastric emptying after ES placement. We aimed to compare gastric emptying across ES and EUS-GE to assess the benefit of EUS-GE over ES in the short-term.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>In this pilot study, patients who underwent ES or EUS-GE for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction were included. A gastric emptying study was performed 2 weeks after the procedure after consumption of a semisolid test-meal (Indian porridge) labelled with Tc-Sulphur. The primary outcome was gastric emptying t1/2 between ES and EUS-GE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty patients were included in this study (21 ES, 19 EUS-GE; mean age 54 years, 27 males). EUS-GE had a faster emptying t1/2 as compared with ES (72 mins vs 118 mins) ( <i>P</i> = 0.02). Abnormal emptying was seen in fewer patients undergoing EUS-GE (5.3% vs 47.6% [ES]; <i>P</i> = 0.004). Clinical success at 2 weeks and reintervention at 6 months was no different.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EUS-GE was associated with better gastric emptying compared with ES, suggesting a benefit that may translate into clinical benefit even in the short term.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"a25866153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12090976/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2586-6153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2586-6153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与研究目的:既往研究表明,超声内镜引导下的胃肠造口术(EUS-GE)在临床成功率和长期再干预需求方面均优于肠内支架(ESs)。胃张力和支架在肿瘤上放置可导致ES放置后胃排空不良。我们的目的是比较ES和EUS-GE的胃排空,以评估EUS-GE在短期内优于ES的益处。患者和方法:在这项初步研究中,接受ES或EUS-GE治疗胃出口梗阻的患者被纳入研究对象。在食用标有tc -硫的半固体试验餐(印度粥)后2周进行胃排空研究。主要终点是ES和EUS-GE之间的胃排空t1/2。结果:40例患者纳入本研究(21例ES, 19例EUS-GE;平均年龄54岁,男性27人)。与ES相比,EUS-GE的排空时间更快(72分钟vs 118分钟)(P = 0.02)。接受EUS-GE的患者排空异常较少(5.3% vs 47.6%);P = 0.004)。2周的临床成功和6个月的再次干预没有区别。结论:与ES相比,EUS-GE与更好的胃排空相关,表明这种益处即使在短期内也可能转化为临床益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of gastric emptying between patients undergoing EUS-guided gastroenterostomy and enteral stent placement: Pilot analysis.

Background and study aims: Previous studies show that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is better than enteral stents (ESs) in terms of clinical success and need for reintervention in the long term. Gastric atony and stent placement across a tumor can lead to poor gastric emptying after ES placement. We aimed to compare gastric emptying across ES and EUS-GE to assess the benefit of EUS-GE over ES in the short-term.

Patients and methods: In this pilot study, patients who underwent ES or EUS-GE for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction were included. A gastric emptying study was performed 2 weeks after the procedure after consumption of a semisolid test-meal (Indian porridge) labelled with Tc-Sulphur. The primary outcome was gastric emptying t1/2 between ES and EUS-GE.

Results: Forty patients were included in this study (21 ES, 19 EUS-GE; mean age 54 years, 27 males). EUS-GE had a faster emptying t1/2 as compared with ES (72 mins vs 118 mins) ( P = 0.02). Abnormal emptying was seen in fewer patients undergoing EUS-GE (5.3% vs 47.6% [ES]; P = 0.004). Clinical success at 2 weeks and reintervention at 6 months was no different.

Conclusions: EUS-GE was associated with better gastric emptying compared with ES, suggesting a benefit that may translate into clinical benefit even in the short term.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信