| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Del Chiaro, M, et al.
(författare)
-
European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Gut. - : BMJ. - 1468-3288 .- 0017-5749. ; 67:5, s. 789-804
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Evidence-based guidelines on the management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) are lacking. This guideline is a joint initiative of the European Study Group on Cystic Tumours of the Pancreas, United European Gastroenterology, European Pancreatic Club, European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, European Digestive Surgery, and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. It replaces the 2013 European consensus statement guidelines on PCN. European and non-European experts performed systematic reviews and used GRADE methodology to answer relevant clinical questions on nine topics (biomarkers, radiology, endoscopy, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN), mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN), serous cystic neoplasm, rare cysts, (neo)adjuvant treatment, and pathology). Recommendations include conservative management, relative and absolute indications for surgery. A conservative approach is recommended for asymptomatic MCN and IPMN measuring <40 mm without an enhancing nodule. Relative indications for surgery in IPMN include a main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter between 5 and 9.9 mm or a cyst diameter ≥40 mm. Absolute indications for surgery in IPMN, due to the high-risk of malignant transformation, include jaundice, an enhancing mural nodule >5 mm, and MPD diameter >10 mm. Lifelong follow-up of IPMN is recommended in patients who are fit for surgery. The European evidence-based guidelines on PCN aim to improve the diagnosis and management of PCN.
|
|
| 6. |
- Scholten, L, et al.
(författare)
-
Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: Different Types, Different Management, New Guidelines
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Visceral medicine. - : S. Karger AG. - 2297-4725 .- 2297-475X. ; 34:3, s. 173-177
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) include different types of cysts with various biological behavior. The most prevalent PCN are intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN), mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN), and serous cystic neoplasm (SCN). Management of PCN should focus on the prevention of malignant progression, while avoiding unnecessary morbidity of surgery. This requires specialized centers with dedicated multidisciplinary PCN teams. The malignant potential of PCN varies enormously between the various types of PCN. A combination of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and endoscopic ultrasound with or without fine needle aspiration is typically needed before a reliable diagnosis can be made. Several guidelines discuss the management of PCN; however, most of these are non-evidence-based without clear consensus on the optimal treatment and follow-up strategy. The 2018 European guidelines on PCN are the first evidence-based guidelines to include IPMN, MCN, SCN, and all other PCN. This guideline advises a more conservative approach to side-branch IPMN and MCN smaller than 40 mm and more often a surgical approach in IPMN with a main duct dilatation beyond 5 mm. The goal of this review is to summarize the different types and management of the most common PCN based on the current literature and guidelines.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Arvanitakis, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients - Part 1: Definitions and indications. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Endoscopy. - : Georg Thieme Verlag KG. - 1438-8812 .- 0013-726X. ; 53:011, s. 81-92
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ESGE recommends considering the following indications for enteral tube insertion: (i) clinical conditions that make oral intake impossible (neurological conditions, obstructive causes); (ii) acute and/or chronic diseases that result in a catabolic state where oral intake becomes insufficient; and (iii) chronic small-bowel obstruction requiring a decompression gastrostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the use of temporary feeding tubes placed through a natural orifice (either nostril) in patients expected to require enteral nutrition (EN) for less than 4 weeks. If it is anticipated that EN will be required for more than 4 weeks, percutaneous access should be considered, depending on the clinical setting.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the gastric route as the primary option in patients in need of EN support. Only in patients with altered/unfavorable gastric anatomy (e. g. after previous surgery), impaired gastric emptying, intolerance to gastric feeding, or with a high risk of aspiration, should the jejunal route be chosen.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE suggests that recent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding due to peptic ulcer disease with risk of rebleeding should be considered to be a relative contraindication to percutaneous enteral access procedures, as should hemodynamic or respiratory instability.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests that the presence of ascites and ventriculoperitoneal shunts should be considered to be additional risk factors for infection and, therefore, further preventive precautions must be taken in these cases.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that percutaneous tube placement (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy [PEG], percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension [PEG-J], or direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy [D-PEJ]) should be considered to be a procedure with high hemorrhagic risk, and that in order to reduce this risk, specific guidelines for antiplatelet or anticoagulant use should be followed strictly.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with advanced dementia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with a life expectancy shorter than 30 days.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence*.
|
|
| 10. |
- Gkolfakis, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients - Part 2: Peri- and post-procedural management. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Endoscopy. - : Georg Thieme Verlag KG. - 1438-8812 .- 0013-726X. ; 53:022, s. 178-195
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ESGE recommends the “pull” technique as the standard method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the direct percutaneous introducer (“push”) technique for PEG placement in cases where the “pull” method is contraindicated, for example in severe esophageal stenosis or in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) or esophageal cancer.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the intravenous administration of a prophylactic single dose of a beta-lactam antibiotic (or appropriate alternative antibiotic, in the case of allergy) to decrease the risk of post-procedural wound infection.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends that inadvertent insertion of a nasogastric tube (NGT) into the respiratory tract should be considered a serious but avoidable adverse event (AE).Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that each institution should have a dedicated protocol to confirm correct positioning of NGTs placed “blindly” at the patient’s bedside; this should include: radiography, pH testing of the aspirate, and end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring, but not auscultation alone.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends confirmation of correct NGT placement by radiography in high-risk patients (intensive care unit [ICU] patients or those with altered consciousness or absent gag/cough reflex).Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that EN may be started within 3 – 4 hours after uncomplicated placement of a PEG or PEG-J.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.ESGE recommends that daily tube mobilization (pushing inward) along with a loose position of the external PEG bumper (1 – 2 cm from the abdominal wall) could mitigate the risk of development of buried bumper syndrome.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.
|
|
