| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Manes, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Endoscopy. - : Georg Thieme Verlag KG. - 1438-8812 .- 0013-726X. ; 51:5, s. 472-491
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ESGE recommends offering stone extraction to all patients with common bile duct stones, symptomatic or not, who are fit enough to tolerate the intervention.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends liver function tests and abdominal ultrasonography as the initial diagnostic steps for suspected common bile duct stones. Combining these tests defines the probability of having common bile duct stones.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography to diagnose common bile duct stones in patients with persistent clinical suspicion but insufficient evidence of stones on abdominal ultrasonography.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends the following timing for biliary drainage, preferably endoscopic, in patients with acute cholangitis, classified according to the 2018 revision of the Tokyo Guidelines:– severe, as soon as possible and within 12 hours for patients with septic shock– moderate, within 48 – 72 hours– mild, elective.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic placement of a temporary biliary plastic stent in patients with irretrievable biliary stones that warrant biliary drainage.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.ESGE recommends limited sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation as the first-line approach to remove difficult common bile duct stones. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.ESGE recommends the use of cholangioscopy-assisted intraluminal lithotripsy (electrohydraulic or laser) as an effective and safe treatment of difficult bile duct stones.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 2 weeks from ERCP for patients treated for choledocholithiasis to reduce the conversion rate and the risk of recurrent biliary events. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Tejera, Valeria Castro, et al.
(författare)
-
Randomised clinical trial and meta-analysis: mesalazine treatment in irritable bowel syndrome-Effects on gastrointestinal symptoms and rectal biomarkers of immune activity
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. - : Wiley. - 0269-2813 .- 1365-2036. ; 56:6, s. 968-979
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Low-grade immune activation in the gut is a potential treatment target in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Aims To determine improvement in IBS symptoms after mesalazine treatment, and the utility of measures of immune activity in the rectal mucosa Methods This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm, multicentre trial in subjects with IBS (Rome III criteria), with an eight-week treatment period of mesalazine 2400 mg or plcebo once-daily. The primary endpoint was the global assessment of satisfactory relief of IBS symptoms in >= 50% of weeks during intervention. IBS symptoms were also measured with the IBS severity scoring system; immune activity was measured by mucosal patch technology. A post hoc meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials of mesalazine in IBS was added. Results Of 181 included patients, 91 received mesalazine and 90 received placebo. The primary endpoint was met by 32 (36%) patients after mesalazine and 27 (30%) after placebo (p = 0.40). There were no differences in response rates related to IBS subtype or post-infection symptom onset. More reduction of abdominal bloating was noted in the mesalazine group (p = 0.02). The meta-analysis showed no effect of mesalazine on IBS symptoms. No mucosal patch technology measure could predict response to mesalazine, and found no differences in the effects of intervention on levels of immune markers. Conclusions Mesalazine is ineffective in reducing IBS symptoms. Rectal measures of immune activity by the mucosal patch technology cannot predict a higher chance of response to mesalazine.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
