ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND GUIDED BILIARY DRAINAGE (EUS-BD) WITH LUMEN APPOSING METAL STENTS FOR MALIGNANT BILIARY OBSTRUCTION: A MULTICENTER NORTH AMERICAN EXPERIENCE [Meeting Abstract]
David, Y N; Kakked, G; Dixon, R E; Nieto, J; Deshmukh, A A; Krafft, M R; Shah-Khan, S M; Nasr, J Y; Trindade, A J; Hoerter, N A; Khanna, L; Tzimas, D; Kedia, P; Kumbhari, V; Itani, M I; Farha, J; Chapman, C G; Kasmin, F; Gress, F G; Nagula, S; Greenwald, D A; DiMaio, C J; Waye, J D; Kumta, N A
Background: Endoscopic Ultrasound guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been demonstrated as a safe and effective alternative to Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant biliary obstruction. Various plastic and metal stents have previously been used for drainage, with recently increasing use of lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS). However there is limited data to guide patient selection, choice of stent, or method of placement. This study examines the rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events associated with the use of LAMS for EUS-BD.
Method(s): A retrospective study was conducted at 10 institutions. It included all cases of biliary obstruction that EUS-BD was performed using a LAMS. Collected data points were clinical and technical factors, adverse events and mortality. Main outcomes were technical success (defined as successful LAMS placement), clinical success (50% decline in bilirubin at 2 weeks), recurrence of biliary obstruction, and adverse events.
Result(s): 72 patients were included with median follow up of 56 days. Descriptive data is in Table 1 and Table 2. Most obstructions (89%) were at the distal common bile duct and the main etiology was pancreatic cancer (82%). Mean pre-procedure bilirubin was 19.2 mg/dl and common bile duct size was 22.7 mm. ERCP was attempted initially in 47% of patients. In patients where technical success (97%) was achieved, 100% clinical resolution was noted. Median time to clinical success was 1 day. Biliary obstruction recurred in 6% of cases, though no predicting factors were identified. A total of 9 (12.5%) (6 mild, 1 moderate, 2 severe) non-LAMS related adverse events were reported. There were 11 (15%) LAMS associated adverse events (6 food impaction, 4 bleeding, 1 migration). Elective LAMS removal without fistula closure was performed in 3 cases and was not associated with recurrent biliary obstruction or adverse events. 17% of patients died during follow up but no deaths were attributed to the procedure.
Conclusion(s): EUS-BD with LAMS is effective in relieving malignant biliary obstruction with low rates of recurrence. There was high technical success with this procedure and this resulted in clinical resolution in all successful cases. No other clinical or technical factors were associated with initial technical or clinical success, recurrent biliary obstruction or adverse events. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and generate longer term data. [Formula presented] [Formula presented]
Copyright
EMBASE:2006056124
ISSN: 1097-6779
CID: 4472122
Variability in the analysis of a single neuroimaging dataset by many teams
Botvinik-Nezer, Rotem; Holzmeister, Felix; Camerer, Colin F; Dreber, Anna; Huber, Juergen; Johannesson, Magnus; Kirchler, Michael; Iwanir, Roni; Mumford, Jeanette A; Adcock, R Alison; Avesani, Paolo; Baczkowski, Blazej M; Bajracharya, Aahana; Bakst, Leah; Ball, Sheryl; Barilari, Marco; Bault, Nadège; Beaton, Derek; Beitner, Julia; Benoit, Roland G; Berkers, Ruud M W J; Bhanji, Jamil P; Biswal, Bharat B; Bobadilla-Suarez, Sebastian; Bortolini, Tiago; Bottenhorn, Katherine L; Bowring, Alexander; Braem, Senne; Brooks, Hayley R; Brudner, Emily G; Calderon, Cristian B; Camilleri, Julia A; Castrellon, Jaime J; Cecchetti, Luca; Cieslik, Edna C; Cole, Zachary J; Collignon, Olivier; Cox, Robert W; Cunningham, William A; Czoschke, Stefan; Dadi, Kamalaker; Davis, Charles P; Luca, Alberto De; Delgado, Mauricio R; Demetriou, Lysia; Dennison, Jeffrey B; Di, Xin; Dickie, Erin W; Dobryakova, Ekaterina; Donnat, Claire L; Dukart, Juergen; Duncan, Niall W; Durnez, Joke; Eed, Amr; Eickhoff, Simon B; Erhart, Andrew; Fontanesi, Laura; Fricke, G Matthew; Fu, Shiguang; Galván, Adriana; Gau, Remi; Genon, Sarah; Glatard, Tristan; Glerean, Enrico; Goeman, Jelle J; Golowin, Sergej A E; González-García, Carlos; Gorgolewski, Krzysztof J; Grady, Cheryl L; Green, Mikella A; Guassi Moreira, João F; Guest, Olivia; Hakimi, Shabnam; Hamilton, J Paul; Hancock, Roeland; Handjaras, Giacomo; Harry, Bronson B; Hawco, Colin; Herholz, Peer; Herman, Gabrielle; Heunis, Stephan; Hoffstaedter, Felix; Hogeveen, Jeremy; Holmes, Susan; Hu, Chuan-Peng; Huettel, Scott A; Hughes, Matthew E; Iacovella, Vittorio; Iordan, Alexandru D; Isager, Peder M; Isik, Ayse I; Jahn, Andrew; Johnson, Matthew R; Johnstone, Tom; Joseph, Michael J E; Juliano, Anthony C; Kable, Joseph W; Kassinopoulos, Michalis; Koba, Cemal; Kong, Xiang-Zhen; Koscik, Timothy R; Kucukboyaci, Nuri Erkut; Kuhl, Brice A; Kupek, Sebastian; Laird, Angela R; Lamm, Claus; Langner, Robert; Lauharatanahirun, Nina; Lee, Hongmi; Lee, Sangil; Leemans, Alexander; Leo, Andrea; Lesage, Elise; Li, Flora; Li, Monica Y C; Lim, Phui Cheng; Lintz, Evan N; Liphardt, Schuyler W; Losecaat Vermeer, Annabel B; Love, Bradley C; Mack, Michael L; Malpica, Norberto; Marins, Theo; Maumet, Camille; McDonald, Kelsey; McGuire, Joseph T; Melero, Helena; Méndez Leal, Adriana S; Meyer, Benjamin; Meyer, Kristin N; Mihai, Glad; Mitsis, Georgios D; Moll, Jorge; Nielson, Dylan M; Nilsonne, Gustav; Notter, Michael P; Olivetti, Emanuele; Onicas, Adrian I; Papale, Paolo; Patil, Kaustubh R; Peelle, Jonathan E; Pérez, Alexandre; Pischedda, Doris; Poline, Jean-Baptiste; Prystauka, Yanina; Ray, Shruti; Reuter-Lorenz, Patricia A; Reynolds, Richard C; Ricciardi, Emiliano; Rieck, Jenny R; Rodriguez-Thompson, Anais M; Romyn, Anthony; Salo, Taylor; Samanez-Larkin, Gregory R; Sanz-Morales, Emilio; Schlichting, Margaret L; Schultz, Douglas H; Shen, Qiang; Sheridan, Margaret A; Silvers, Jennifer A; Skagerlund, Kenny; Smith, Alec; Smith, David V; Sokol-Hessner, Peter; Steinkamp, Simon R; Tashjian, Sarah M; Thirion, Bertrand; Thorp, John N; Tinghög, Gustav; Tisdall, Loreen; Tompson, Steven H; Toro-Serey, Claudio; Torre Tresols, Juan Jesus; Tozzi, Leonardo; Truong, Vuong; Turella, Luca; van 't Veer, Anna E; Verguts, Tom; Vettel, Jean M; Vijayarajah, Sagana; Vo, Khoi; Wall, Matthew B; Weeda, Wouter D; Weis, Susanne; White, David J; Wisniewski, David; Xifra-Porxas, Alba; Yearling, Emily A; Yoon, Sangsuk; Yuan, Rui; Yuen, Kenneth S L; Zhang, Lei; Zhang, Xu; Zosky, Joshua E; Nichols, Thomas E; Poldrack, Russell A; Schonberg, Tom
Data analysis workflows in many scientific domains have become increasingly complex and flexible. Here we assess the effect of this flexibility on the results of functional magnetic resonance imaging by asking 70 independent teams to analyse the same dataset, testing the same 9 ex-ante hypotheses1. The flexibility of analytical approaches is exemplified by the fact that no two teams chose identical workflows to analyse the data. This flexibility resulted in sizeable variation in the results of hypothesis tests, even for teams whose statistical maps were highly correlated at intermediate stages of the analysis pipeline. Variation in reported results was related to several aspects of analysis methodology. Notably, a meta-analytical approach that aggregated information across teams yielded a significant consensus in activated regions. Furthermore, prediction markets of researchers in the field revealed an overestimation of the likelihood of significant findings, even by researchers with direct knowledge of the dataset2-5. Our findings show that analytical flexibility can have substantial effects on scientific conclusions, and identify factors that may be related to variability in the analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging. The results emphasize the importance of validating and sharing complex analysis workflows, and demonstrate the need for performing and reporting multiple analyses of the same data. Potential approaches that could be used to mitigate issues related to analytical variability are discussed.
PMID: 32483374
ISSN: 1476-4687
CID: 4468852