No abstract

Clinical trials evaluating the protective effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) have yielded inconclusive results. Our objective was to conduct a meta-analysis of the data to date to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rectal NSAIDs for PEP prophylaxis. We did a systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect method because of the absence of significant heterogeneity in the included trials. Seven randomized, controlled trials involving 2133 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that rectal NSAIDs decreased the overall incidence of PEP (risk ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.57; P < 0.01). The number needed to treat was 11. The NSAID prophylaxis also decreased the incidence of moderate to severe PEP (risk ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.63; P < 0.01). The number needed to treat was 34. No differences of the adverse events attributable to NSAIDs were observed. In conclusion, prophylactic use of rectal NSAIDs reduces the incidence and severity of PEP. There is neither a difference in efficacy between rectal indomethacin and diclofenac nor a difference in efficacy between the timing of administration of rectal NSAIDs, that is, immediate pre-ERCP and post-ERCP.

BACKGROUND Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders (FGIDs) are among the most common outpatient diagnoses in pediatric primary care and gastroenterology. There is limited data on the inpatient burden of childhood FGIDs in the U.S. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inpatient admission rate, length of stay, and associated costs related to FGIDs from 1997–2009. METHODS We analyzed the Kids’ Inpatient Sample Database (KID) for all subjects in which constipation (ICD-9 codes: 564.0–564.09), abdominal pain (ICD-9 codes: 789.0–789.09), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (ICD-9 code: 564.1), abdominal migraine (ICD-9 code:346.80 and 346.81)dyspepsia (ICD-9 code: 536.8) or fecal incontinence (ICD-codes: 787.6–787.63) was the primary discharge diagnosis from 1997–2009. The KID is the largest publicly available all-payer inpatient database in the U.S., containing data from 2–3 million pediatric hospital stays yearly. KEY RESULTS From 1997–2009, the number of discharges with a FGID primary diagnosis increased slightly from 6,348,537 to 6,393,803. The total mean cost per discharge increased significantly from $6115 to $18,058 despite the length of stay remaining relatively stable. Constipation and abdominal pain were the most common FGID discharge diagnoses. Abdominal pain and abdominal migraine discharges were most frequent in the 10–14 year age group. Constipation and fecal incontinence discharges were most frequent in the 5–9 year age group. IBS discharge was most common for the 15–17 year age group. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES Hospitalizations and associated costs in childhood FGIDs have increased in number and cost in the U.S. from 1997–2009. Further studies to determine optimal methods to avoid unnecessary hospitalizations and potentially harmful diagnostic testing are indicated.

Purpose Errors in cancer diagnosis are likely the most harmful and expensive types of diagnostic errors. We reviewed the literature to understand the prevalence, origins, and prevention of errors in cancer diagnosis, focusing on common cancers for which early diagnosis offers clear benefit (melanoma and cancers of the breast, colon, and lung). Methods We searched the Cochrane Library and PubMed from 1966 until April 2007 for publications that met our review criteria and manually searched references of key publications. Our search yielded 110 studies, of which nine were prospective studies and the remaining were retrospective studies. Results Errors in cancer diagnosis were not uncommon in autopsy studies and were associated with significant harm and expense in malpractice claims. Literature on prevalence was scant. For each type of cancer, we classified preventable errors according to their origins in patient-physician encounters in the clinic setting, diagnostic test or procedure performance, pathologic confirmation of diagnosis, follow-up of patient or test result, or patient-related delays. Conclusion The literature reflects advanced knowledge of contributory factors and prevention for diagnostic errors related to the performance of procedures and imaging tests and emerging understanding of pathology errors. However, prospective studies are few, as are studies of diagnostic errors arising from the clinical encounter and patient follow-up. Future research should examine further the system and cognitive problems that lead to the many contributory factors we identified, and address interdisciplinary interventions to prevent errors in cancer diagnosis.

Background and aim: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are new techniques capable of providing deep enteroscopy. Results of individual studies comparing these techniques have not been able to identify a superior strategy. Our aim was to systematically pool all available studies to compare the efficacy and safety of DBE with SBE for evaluation of the small bowel.Methods: Databases were searched, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The main outcome measures were complete small-bowel visualization, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and complication rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan version 5.2). Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on the absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. We used the χ2 and I2 test to assess heterogeneity between trials. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Results: Four prospective, randomized, controlled trials with a total of 375 patients were identified. DBE was superior to SBE for visualization of the entire small bowel [pooled RR = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.19–0.73; P = 0.004)]. DBE and SBE were similar in ability to provide diagnosis [pooled RR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.77–1.17; P = 0.62)]. There was no significant difference between DBE and SBE in therapeutic yield [pooled RR = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.59–1.04; P = 0.09)] and complication rate [pooled RR = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28–4.22); P = 0.91].Conclusions: DBE was superior to SBE with regard to complete small bowel visualization. DBE was similar to SBE with regard to diagnostic yield, ability to provide treatment and complication rate, but these results should be interpreted with caution as they is based on very few studies and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low to moderate, due to the small sample size.