SPENCER CHENG
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
LIM/26 - Laboratório de Pesquisa em Cirurgia Experimental, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
2 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 2 de 2
- Pure Cut or Endocut for Biliary Sphincterotomy? A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial(2023) FUNARI, Mateus Pereira; BRUNALDI, Vitor Ottoboni; PROENCA, Igor Mendonca; GOMES, Pedro Victor Aniz; QUEIROZ, Lucas Tobias Almeida; VIEIRA, Yuri Zamban; MATUGUMA, Sergio Eiji; IDE, Edson; FRANZINI, Tomazo Antonio Prince; SANTOS, Marcos Eduardo Lera dos; CHENG, Spencer; MINATA, Mauricio Kazuyoshi; SANTOS, Jose Sebastio dos; MOURA, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de; KEMP, Rafael; MOURA, Eduardo Guimares Hourneaux deINTRODUCTION: Adverse events (AE) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are not uncommon and post-ERCP acute pancreatitis (PEP) is the most important one. Thermal injury from biliary sphincterotomy may play an important role and trigger PEP or bleeding. Therefore, this study evaluated the outcomes of 2 electric current modes used during biliary sphincterotomy. METHODS: From October 2019 to August 2021, consecutive patients with native papilla undergoing ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy were randomized to either the pure cut or endocut after cannulation. The primary outcome was PEP incidence. Secondary outcomes included intraprocedural and delayed bleeding, infection, and perforation. RESULTS: A total of 550 patients were randomized (272 pure cut and 278 endocut). The overall PEP rate was 4.0% and significantly higher in the endocut group (5.8% vs 2.2%, P = 0.034). Univariate analysis revealed >5 attempts (P = 0.004) and endocut mode (P = 0.034) as risk factors for PEP. Multivariate analysis revealed >5 attempts (P = 0.005) and a trend for endocut mode as risk factors for PEP (P = 0.052). Intraprocedural bleeding occurred more often with pure cut (P = 0.018), but all cases were controlled endoscopically during the ERCP. Delayed bleeding was more frequent with endocut (P = 0.047). There was no difference in perforation (P = 1.0) or infection (P = 0.4999) between the groups. DISCUSSION: Endocut mode may increase thermal injury leading to higher rates of PEP and delayed bleeding, whereas pure cut is associated with increased intraprocedural bleeding without clinical repercussion. The electric current mode is not related to perforation or infection. Further RCT assessing the impact of electric current on AE with overlapping preventive measures such as rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and hyperhydration are needed. The study was submitted to the Brazilian Clinical Trials Platform (http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br) under the registry number RBR-5d27tn.
- Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) Versus Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Randomized Clinical Trial(2023) SANTOS, Marcos Eduardo Lera dos; PROENCA, Igor Mendonca; MOURA, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de; RIBEIRO, Igor Braga; MATUGUMA, Sergio Eiji; CHENG, Spencer; JR, Joao Remi de Freitas; LUZ, Gustavo de Oliveira; MCCARTY, Thomas R.; JUKEMURA, Jose; MOURA, Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux deBackground and aim Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is the gold standard approach for the treatment of encapsulated pancreatic collections (EPCs) including pseudocyst and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), and is associated with an equivalent clinical efficacy to surgical drainage with fewer complications and less morbidity. Drainage may be achieved via several types of stents including a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS). However, to date there have been no randomized trials to compare these devices. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the SEMS versus LAMS for EUS-guided drainage of EPCs. Methods A phase IIB randomized trial was designed to compare the SEMS versus LAMS for the treatment of EPCs. Technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and procedure time were evaluated. A sample size of 42 patients was determined.
Results There was no difference between the two groups in technical (LAMS 80.95% vs 100% SEMS, p=0.107), clinical (LAMS 85.71% vs 95.24% SEMS, p=0.606) or radiological success (LAMS 92.86% vs 83.33% SEMS, p=0.613). There was no difference in AEs including stent migration rate and mortality. The procedure time was longer in the LAMS group (mean time 43.81 min versus 24.43 min, p=0.001). There was also a difference in the number of intra-procedure complications (5 LAMS vs 0 SEMS, p=0.048). Conclusion SEMS and LAMS have similar technical, clinical, and radiological success as well as AEs. However, SEMS has a shorter procedure time and fewer intra-procedure complications compared to non-electrocauteryenhanced LAMS in this phase IIB randomized controlled trial (RCT). The choice of the type of stent used for EUS drainage of EPCs should consider device availability, costs, and personal and local experience.