Background and Aims:There are no systematic reviews comparing the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-based brush cytology and forceps biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) for the diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture; so in this revision, we will compare ERCP against EUS-FNA for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture.Design:A systematic review was conducted of comparative studies (prospective or retrospective) analyzing EUS and ERCP for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture.Materials and Methods:The databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, LILACS, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched for studies dated previous to November 2014. We identified three prospective studies comparing EUS-FNA and ERCP for the diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture and five prospective studies comparing EUS-FNA with the same diagnosis of the other three studies. All patients were subjected to the same gold standard method. We calculated study variables (sensitivity, specificity, prevalence, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy) and performed a meta-analysis using the Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software.Results:A total of 294 patients were included in the analysis. The pretest probability for malignant biliary stricture was 76.66%. The mean sensitivities of ERCP and EUS-FNA for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture were 49% and 75%, respectively; the specificities were 96.33% and 100%, respectively. The posttest probabilities positive predictive value (98.33% and 100%, respectively) and negative predictive value (34% and 47%, respectively) were determined. The accuracies were 60.66% and 79%, respectively.Conclusion:We found that EUS-FNA was superior to ERCP with brush cytology and forceps biopsy for diagnosing malignant biliary strictures. However, a negative EUS-FNA or ERCP test may not exclude malignant biliary stricture because both have low negative posttest probabilities.

Achalasia of the cardia is associated with an increased risk of esophageal carcinoma. The real burden of achalasia at the malignancy genesis is still a controversial issue. Therefore, there are no generally accepted recommendations on follow-up evaluation for achalasia patients. This study aims to estimate the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in achalasia patients. We searched for association between carcinoma and esophageal achalasia in databases up to January 2017 to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 1,046 studies were identified from search strategy, of which 40 were selected for meta-analysis. A cumulative number of 11,978 esophageal achalasia patients were evaluated. The incidence of squamous cell carcinoma was 312.4 (StDev 429.16) cases per 100,000 patient-years at risk. The incidence of adenocarcinoma was 21.23 (StDev 31.6) cases per 100,000 patient-years at risk. The prevalence for esophageal carcinoma was 28 carcinoma cases in 1,000 esophageal achalasia patients (CI 95% 2, 39). The prevalence for squamous cell carcinoma was 26 cases in 1,000 achalasia patients (CI 95% 18, 39) and for adenocarcinoma was 4 cases in 1,000 achalasia patients (CI 95% 3, 6).The absolute risk increase for squamous cell carcinoma was 308.1 and for adenocarcinoma was 18.03 cases per 100,000 patients per year. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis estimating the burden of achalasia as an esophageal cancer risk factor. The high increased risk rate for cancer in achalasia patients points to a strict endoscopic surveillance for these patients. Also, the increased risk for developing adenocarcinoma in achalasia patients suggests fundoplication after myotomy, to avoid esophageal reflux and Barret esophagus, a known risk factor for adenocarcinoma.

No abstract

Objective To analyze the diagnostic accuracy of two-(2D) and three-(3D) dimensional saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH) in the detection

No abstract