We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
EUS-guided Gastrojejunostomy Versus Laparoscopic Gastrojejunostomy: An International Collaborative Study.
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 2017 November
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) with placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent is a minimally invasive and efficacious procedure for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) patients not amenable to surgery. Laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (Lap-GJ) has traditionally been the standard of care. No direct comparison between EUS-GJ and Lap-GJ has been described. Our aim was to compare the clinical outcomes, success rate, and adverse events (AE) of EUS-GJ with Lap-GJ.
METHODS: Patients with GOO from 4 academic centers in 3 countries were included. Technical success was defined as successful creation of a gastrojejunostomy. Clinical success was defined as the ability to tolerate a diet postprocedure.
RESULTS: Data were collected on 54 patients. A total of 25 patients underwent EUS-GJ (male n=11, mean age 63.9 y) and 29 patients underwent Lap-GJ (male n=22, mean age 75.8 y). Technical success was achieved in 29 (100%) Lap-GJ group patients and 23 (88%) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.11). AEs occurred in 41% (n=12) of patients in the Lap-GJ group and 12% (n=3) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.0386). According to the Clavien-Dindo Classification, the Lap-GJ group AEs were grade I (n=4), grade II (n=5), grade III (n=2), and grade V (n=1); the EUS-GJ AEs were grade II (n=2) and grade V (n=1).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the EUS-GJ group contained more complex patients, efficacy was similar between the groups. AEs were significantly lower in the EUS-GJ group. EUS-GJ is a safe and efficacious, minimally invasive option for patients with GOO.
METHODS: Patients with GOO from 4 academic centers in 3 countries were included. Technical success was defined as successful creation of a gastrojejunostomy. Clinical success was defined as the ability to tolerate a diet postprocedure.
RESULTS: Data were collected on 54 patients. A total of 25 patients underwent EUS-GJ (male n=11, mean age 63.9 y) and 29 patients underwent Lap-GJ (male n=22, mean age 75.8 y). Technical success was achieved in 29 (100%) Lap-GJ group patients and 23 (88%) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.11). AEs occurred in 41% (n=12) of patients in the Lap-GJ group and 12% (n=3) in the EUS-GJ group (P=0.0386). According to the Clavien-Dindo Classification, the Lap-GJ group AEs were grade I (n=4), grade II (n=5), grade III (n=2), and grade V (n=1); the EUS-GJ AEs were grade II (n=2) and grade V (n=1).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the EUS-GJ group contained more complex patients, efficacy was similar between the groups. AEs were significantly lower in the EUS-GJ group. EUS-GJ is a safe and efficacious, minimally invasive option for patients with GOO.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app