Background/Aims: Scissor-type endoscopic submucosal dissection (ST-ESD) knives can reduce the adverse events associated with ESDs. This study aimed to compare ST-ESD and non-scissor-type (NST)-ESD knives. Methods: We identified ten studies that compared the performance characteristics and safety profiles of ST-ESD and NST-ESD knives. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled proportions. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. Results: On comparing ST-ESD knives to NST-ESD knives, the weighted odds of en bloc resection was 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90–2.90; p=0.14), R0 resection was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.71–1.71; p=0.73), delayed bleeding was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.17–0.90; p=0.03), perforation was 0.35 (95% CI, 0.18–0.70; p<0.01) and ESD self-completion by non-experts was 1.89 (95% CI, 1.20–2.95; p<0.01). There was no heterogeneity, with an I2 score of 0% (95% CI, 0%–54.40%). Conclusions The findings of reduced odds of perforation, a trend toward reduced delayed bleeding, and an improvement in the rates of en bloc and R0 resection with ST-ESD knives compared to NST-ESD knives support the use of ST-ESD knives when non-experts perform ESDs or as an adjunct tool for challenging ESD procedures.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel technique used to repair esophageal perforation and leaks. Varying data have been reported on the overall success rate of EVAC. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the available data on the clinical success rate of EVAC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for publications addressing the efficacy of EVAC in esophageal luminal defects. Pooling was conducted using both fixed and random-effects models. The overall clinical success of EVAC therapy was considered the primary outcome, whereas, overall complication rates, need for adjunct therapy, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Results: In total, 366 patients were included in the study. On pooled analysis, the mean age was 66 years with 68.32% of patients being men. Overall pooled clinical success rate of EVAC therapy was 87.95%. Upon subgroup analysis, the pooled clinical success rate of postsurgical anastomotic leak and transmural esophageal perforation were found to be 86.57% and 88.89%, respectively. The all-cause hospital mortality was 14% and 4.2% in patients with esophageal perforation and EVAC, respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrates that EVAC therapy has a high overall clinical success rate, with low mortality. EVAC therapy seems to be a promising procedure with excellent outcomes in patients with luminal esophageal defects.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel technique used to repair esophageal perforation and leaks. Varying data have been reported on the overall success rate of EVAC. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the available data on the clinical success rate of EVAC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for publications addressing the efficacy of EVAC in esophageal luminal defects. Pooling was conducted using both fixed and random-effects models. The overall clinical success of EVAC therapy was considered the primary outcome, whereas, overall complication rates, need for adjunct therapy, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Results: In total, 366 patients were included in the study. On pooled analysis, the mean age was 66 years with 68.32% of patients being men. Overall pooled clinical success rate of EVAC therapy was 87.95%. Upon subgroup analysis, the pooled clinical success rate of postsurgical anastomotic leak and transmural esophageal perforation were found to be 86.57% and 88.89%, respectively. The all-cause hospital mortality was 14% and 4.2% in patients with esophageal perforation and EVAC, respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrates that EVAC therapy has a high overall clinical success rate, with low mortality. EVAC therapy seems to be a promising procedure with excellent outcomes in patients with luminal esophageal defects.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel technique used to repair esophageal perforation and leaks. Varying data have been reported on the overall success rate of EVAC. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the available data on the clinical success rate of EVAC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for publications addressing the efficacy of EVAC in esophageal luminal defects. Pooling was conducted using both fixed and random-effects models. The overall clinical success of EVAC therapy was considered the primary outcome, whereas, overall complication rates, need for adjunct therapy, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Results: In total, 366 patients were included in the study. On pooled analysis, the mean age was 66 years with 68.32% of patients being men. Overall pooled clinical success rate of EVAC therapy was 87.95%. Upon subgroup analysis, the pooled clinical success rate of postsurgical anastomotic leak and transmural esophageal perforation were found to be 86.57% and 88.89%, respectively. The all-cause hospital mortality was 14% and 4.2% in patients with esophageal perforation and EVAC, respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrates that EVAC therapy has a high overall clinical success rate, with low mortality. EVAC therapy seems to be a promising procedure with excellent outcomes in patients with luminal esophageal defects.

Background/Aims: Colonic volvulus (CV), a common cause of bowel obstruction, often requires intervention. We aimed to identify hospitalization trends and CV outcomes in the United States. Methods: We used the National Inpatient Sample to identify all adult CV hospitalizations in the United States from 2007 to 2017. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and inpatient outcomes were highlighted. Outcomes of endoscopic and surgical management were compared. Results: From 2007 to 2017, there were 220,666 CV hospitalizations. CV-related hospitalizations increased from 17,888 in 2007 to 21,715 in 2017 (p=0.001). However, inpatient mortality decreased from 7.6% in 2007 to 6.2% in 2017 (p<0.001). Of all CV-related hospitalizations, 13,745 underwent endoscopic intervention, and 77,157 underwent surgery. Although the endoscopic cohort had patients with a higher Charlson comorbidity index, we noted lower inpatient mortality (6.1% vs. 7.0%, p<0.001), mean length of stay (8.3 vs. 11.8 days, p<0.001), and mean total healthcare charge ($68,126 vs. $106,703, p<0.001) compared to the surgical cohort. Male sex, increased Charlson comorbidity index scores, acute kidney injury, and malnutrition were associated with higher odds of inpatient mortality in patients with CV who underwent endoscopic management. Conclusions Endoscopic intervention has lower inpatient mortality and is an excellent alternative to surgery for appropriately selected CV hospitalizations.