Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

Saurabh Chandan

Publications and source records attributed to Saurabh Chandan.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for locally recurrent gastric neoplasia following endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for locally recurrent gastric neoplasia following endoscopic resection (ER) is technically challenging because of scar-related submucosal fibrosis. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of salvage ESD in this setting. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through December 2025 for studies reporting ESD outcomes for locally recurrent gastric lesions at or contiguous with a prior ER scar. Primary outcome was curative resection and need for surgery. Secondary outcomes were en bloc and R0 resection, local recurrence, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2. RESULTS: Seven studies (259 patients; 265 ESDs) were included. Across 5 studies and 243 ESDs, pooled curative resection rate was 69.7% (95% CI, 60.6-78.1; I2 = 38%), while 8.2% (95% CI, 3.3-14.6; I2 = 38.4%) required surgery. En bloc resection rate was 92.3% (95% CI, 79.1-99.7; I2 = 83.7%) across 6 studies, and pooled R0 resection rate was 87.5% (95% CI, 82.1-92.2; I2 = 0%) across 4 studies. Over a mean follow-up of 42 months, pooled local recurrence was 2.0% (95% CI, 0.0-9.7; I2 = 54.1%) across 6 studies. Delayed bleeding was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.8-9.0; I2 = 40.8%) and perforation was 4.1% (95% CI, 1.6-7.3; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: ESD for locally recurrent gastric neoplasia after ER achieves acceptable curative resection, high en bloc/R0 resection, and low local recurrence and morbidity. It is a viable organ-preserving option for appropriately selected patients, ideally performed at expert centers with close surveillance.

Humans

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy compared with endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: When ERCP is not feasible or fails in the palliation of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) are viable alternatives. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of the 2 techniques for the palliation of MDBO. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through November 2025 for studies that reported outcomes of EUS-CDS and EUS-GDB in patients with MDBO. A meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions and relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs. We compared the rates of technical and clinical success, overall adverse events (AEs), and lumen-apposing metal stent dysfunction. A random-effects model was used for our meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 (%) statistics. RESULTS: Five studies (352 patients; EUS-CDS: 193 and EUS-GBD: 159) were included. Technical success was 93.3% (95% CI, 70.6-98.8) for EUS-CDS and 95.9% (95% CI, 90.0-98.4) for EUS-GBD (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.10; P = .6). Clinical success was 90.1% (95% CI, 84.7-93.7) versus 86.6% (95% CI, 80.3-91.0) (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.05; P = .4). There were no significant differences in overall AEs (19.7% vs 17.6%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.58-1.48; P = .8), severe AEs (11.0% vs 8.3%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.33-1.44; P = .3), or stent dysfunction (15.0% vs 14.5%; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.35-2.58; P = .9). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GBD appears comparable to EUS-CDS in terms of technical and clinical success, AEs, and stent dysfunction. Further prospective studies are warranted to corroborate our findings.

Humans