SPENCER CHENG
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
LIM/26 - Laboratório de Pesquisa em Cirurgia Experimental, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
7 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 7 de 7
- A comparison of the efficiency of 22G versus 25G needles in EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic mass assessment: A systematic review and meta-analysis(2018) GUEDES, Hugo Goncalo; MOURA, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de; DUARTE, Ralph Braga; CORDERO, Martin Andres Coronel; SANTOS, Marcos Eduardo Lera dos; CHENG, Spencer; MATUGUMA, Sergio Eiji; CHAVES, Dalton Marques; BERNARDO, Wanderley Marques; MOURA, Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux deOur aim in this study was to compare the efficiency of 25G versus 22G needles in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions by EUS-FNA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were identified in five databases using an extensive search strategy. Only randomized trials comparing 22G and 25G needles were included. The results were analyzed by fixed and random effects. A total of 504 studies were found in the search, among which 4 randomized studies were selected for inclusion in the analysis. A total of 462 patients were evaluated (233: 25G needle/229: 22G needle). The diagnostic sensitivity was 93% for the 25G needle and 91% for the 22G needle. The specificity of the 25G needle was 87%, and that of the 22G needle was 83%. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.57 for the 25G needle and 4.26 for the 22G needle. The area under the sROC curve for the 25G needle was 0.9705, and it was 0.9795 for the 22G needle, with no statistically significant difference between them (p=0.497). Based on randomized studies, this meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference between the 22G and 25G needles used during EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions.
- EUS-FNA versus ERCP for tissue diagnosis of suspect malignant biliary strictures: a prospective comparative study(2018) MOURA, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux; GUIDAMARAES, Eduardo; MOURA, Hourneaux de; MATUGUMA, Sergio Eiji; SANTOS, Marcos Eduardo dos; MOURA, Eduardo Turiani Hourneaux; BARACAT, Felipe Iankelevich; ARTIFON, Everson L. A.; CHENG, Spencer; BERNARDO, Wanderley Marque; CHACON, Danielle; TANIGAWA, Ryan; JUKEMURA, JoseBackground and study aims Biliary strictures are frequently a challenging clinical scenario and the anatomopathological diagnosis is essential in the therapeutic management, whether for curative or palliative purposes. The acquisition of specimens is necessary since many benign diseases mimic biliopancreatic neoplasms. Endscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the traditionally used method despite the low sensitivity of biliary brush cytology and forceps biopsy. On the other hand, several studies reported good accuracy rates using endoscopic ultrasound- guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). The aim of this prospective study was to compare, the accuracy of EUS-FNA and ERCP for tissue sampling of biliary strictures. Patients and methods After performing the sample size calculation, 50 consecutive patients with indeterminate biliary strictures were included to undergo ERCP and EUS on the same sedation. The gold-standard was surgery or 6 months' follow-up. Evaluation of the diagnostic indices (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, positive and negative likelihood ratio), concordance and adverse events among the methods were performed. Also, subtype analyses of the techniques, anatomical localization and size of the lesion were included. Results The final diagnoses reported in 50 patients were 47 malignant, 1 suspicious and 2 benign lesions. 31 lesions were extraductal and 19 intraductal, 35 were distal and 15 proximal strictures. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-FNA were superior than ERCP tissue sampling (93,8%, 94% vs. 60,4%, 62%, respectively) (P = 0.034), with similar adverse events. There was no concordance between the methods and combining both methods improved the sensitivity and accuracy for 97.9% and 98%, respectively. In the subtype analyses, the EUS-FNA was superior, with a higher accuracy than ERCP tissue sampling in evaluating extraductal lesions (100% vs. 54.8 %, P = 0.019) and in those larger than 1.5 cm (95.8% vs. 61.9%, P = 0.031), but were similar in evaluating intraductal lesions and lesions smaller than 1.5 cm. There was no significant difference between the methods in the analyzes of proximal, distal and pancreatic lesions. Conclusion EUS-FNA is better than ERCP with brush cytology and intraductal forceps biopsy in diagnosing malignant biliary strictures, mainly in the assessment of extraductal lesions and in those larger than 1.5 cm. Combining ERCP with tissue sampling and EUS-FNA is feasible, the techniques have similar complication rates, and the combination greatly improves diagnostic accuracy.
- Anti-reflux versus conventional self-expanding metal stents in the palliation of esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis(2022) SASSO, Joao Guilherme Ribeiro Jordao; MOURA, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de; PROENCA, Igor Mendonca; MONTE JUNIOR, Epifanio Silvino do; RIBEIRO, Igor Braga; SANCHEZ-LUNA, Sergio A.; CHENG, Spencer; BESTETTI, Alexandre Moraes; KUM, Angelo So Taa; BERNARDO, Wanderley Marques; MOURA, Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux deBackground and study aims Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are an effective palliative endoscopic therapy to reduce dysphagia in esophageal cancer. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a relatively common complaint after non-valved conventional SEMS placement. Therefore, valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-V) were designed to reduce the rate of GERD symptoms. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the two stents. Material and methods This was a systematic review and meta-analysis including only randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the outcomes between SEMS-V and non-valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-NV) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data were analyzed with Review Manager Software. Quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines. Results Ten randomized clinical trials including a total of 467 patients, 234 in the SEMS-V group and 233 in the SEMS-NV group, were included. There were no statistically significant differences regarding GERD qualitative analysis (RD -0.17; 95% CI -0.67, 0.33; P= 0.5) and quantitative analysis (SMD -0.22; 95% CI -0.53, 0.08; P=0.15) technical success (RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.07, 0.01; P= 0.16), dysphagia improvement (RD -0.07; 95% CI -0.19, 0.06; P=0.30), and adverse events (RD 0.07; 95% CI -0.07, 0.20; P= 0.32). Conclusions Both SEMS-V and SEMS-NV are safe and effective in the palliation of esophageal cancer with similar rates of GERD, dysphagia relief, technical success, adverse events, stent migration, stent obstruction, bleeding, and improvement of the quality of life.
- EUS VERSUS ERCP FOR PRIMARY DRAINAGE OF MALIGNANT BILIARY OBSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS BASED ON RANDOMIZED TRIALS(2019) LOGIUDICE, Fernanda P.; BERNARDO, Wanderlei M.; GALETTI, Facundo; FUNARI, Mateus P.; SAGAE, Vitor M.; MATSUBAYASHI, Carolina O.; BRUNALDI, Vitor O.; MATUGUMA, Sergio E.; CHENG, Spencer; MOURA, Eduardo G. de
article 5 Citação(ões) na Scopus Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials(2016) DE MOURA, Eduardo T.H.; DE MOURA, Eduardo G.H.; BERNARDO, Wanderley; CHENG, Spencer; KONDO, Andre; DE MOURA, Diogo T.H.; BRAVO, Jose; ARTIFON, Everson L.A.Objective: Through this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to clarify the differences between these two techniques, thus improving primary success cannulation and reducing complications during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, primarily pancreatitis. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to search for data available up until June2015from the most important databases available in the health field: EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane, LILACS and CENTRAL (via BVS), SCOPUS, the CAPES database (Brazil), and gray literature. Results: Nine randomized clinical trialsincluding2583 people were selected from20,198 studies for meta-analysis. Choledocholithiasis had been diagnosed in mostly (63.8%) of the patients, who were aged an average of 63.15 years. In those patients treated using the guide wire-assisted cannulation technique, provided a significantly lower instance of pancreatitis (RD=0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.05; I2= 45%) and greater primary success cannulation (RD=0.07; 95% CI: 0.03-0.12; I2=12%) than conventional contrast cannulation. Conclusions: The guide wire-assisted technique, when compared to the conventional contrast technique, reduces the risk of pancreatitis and increases primary success cannulation rate. Thus, guide wire-assisted cannulation appears to be the most appropriate first-line cannulation technique- Stents and surgical interventions in the palliation of gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review(2016) MINATA, Mauricio Kazuyoshi; BERNARDO, Wanderley Marques; ROCHA, Rodrigo Silva de Paula; MORITA, Flavio Hiroshi Ananias; AQUINO, Julio Cesar Martins; CHENG, Spencer; ZILBERSTEIN, Bruno; SAKAI, Paulo; MOURA, Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux deBackground and study aims: Palliative treatment of gastric outlet obstruction can be done with surgical or endoscopic techniques. This systematic review aims to compare surgery and covered and uncovered stent treatments for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Patients and methods: Randomized clinical trials were identified in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, LILACs, BVS, SCOPUS and CINAHL databases. Comparison of covered and uncovered stents included: technical success, clinical success, complications, obstruction, migration, bleeding, perforation, stent fracture and reintervention. The outcomes used to compare surgery and stents were technical success, complications, and reintervention. Patency rate could not be included because of lack of uniformity of the extracted data. Results: Eight studies were selected, 3 comparing surgery and stents and 5 comparing covered and uncovered stents.The meta-analysis of surgical and endoscopic stent treatment showed no difference in the technical success and overall number of complications. Stents had higher reintervention rates than surgery (RD: 0.26, 95% CI [0.05, 0.47], NNH: 4). There is no significant difference in technical success, clinical success, complications, stent fractures, perforation, bleeding and the need for reintervention in the analyses of covered and uncovered stents. There is a higher migration rate in the covered stent therapy compared to uncovered self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) in the palliation of malignant GOO (RD: 0.09, 95% CI [0.04, 0.14], NNH: 11). Nevertheless, covered stents had lower obstruction rates (RD: -0.21, 95% CI [-0.27,-0.15], NNT: 5). Conclusions: In the palliation of malignant GOO, covered SEMS had higher migration and lower obstruction rates when compared with uncovered stents. Surgery is associated with lower reintervention rates than stents.
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis(2019) LOGIUDICE, Fernanda P.; BERNARDO, Wanderlei M.; GALETTI, Facundo; SAGAE, Vitor M.; MATSUBAYASHI, Carolina O.; MADRUGA NETO, Antonio C.; BRUNALDI, Vitor O.; MOURA, Diogo T. H. de; FRANZINI, Tomazo; CHENG, Spencer; MATUGUMA, Sergio E.; MOURA, Eduardo G. H. deBACKGROUND For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO. AIM To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO. METHODS This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95% CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I-2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of -0.01% (95% CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I-2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95% CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I-2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95% CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I-2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95% CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I-2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I-2 = 0%). CONCLUSION EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.