Impact of COVID-19 Infection on Pancreato-Biliary Diseases Requiring Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND: Viral infections are known to impact the pancreato-biliary system; however, there are limited data showing that the same is true of COVID-19. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) can safely be performed in patients with COVID-19 infection, but outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infections and concomitant pancreatic and biliary disease requiring endoscopic intervention are unknown. AIMS: This study aims to evaluate the severity of pancreaticobiliary diseases and post-ERCP outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Patients with pancreato-biliary disease that required inpatient ERCP from five centers in the United States and South America between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020 were included. A representative cohort of patients from each month were randomly selected from each site. Disease severity and post-ERCP outcomes were compared between COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative patients. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients were included: 95 COVID positive and 80 COVID negative. Mean CTSI score for the patients who had pancreatitis was higher in COVID-positive cohort by 3.2 points (p < .00001). The COVID-positive group had more cases with severe disease (n = 41) versus the COVID-negative group (n = 2) (p < .00001). Mortality was higher in the COVID-19 positive group (19%) compared to COVID-negative group (7.5%) even though the COVID-19-negative group had higher incidence of malignancy (n = 17, 21% vs n = 7, 7.3%) (p = 0.0455). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that patients with COVID infection have more severe pancreato-biliary disease and worse post-ERCP outcomes, including longer length of stay and higher mortality rate. These are important considerations when planning for endoscopic intervention. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: (NCT05051358).

Retraction notice to "Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia with a minimum follow-up of 2 years: an international multicenter study": [YMGE 85 (2017) 927-933].

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted due to overlapping/duplicate material. Data from some patients from this study have previously been published in other journals without cross-referencing. Twenty patients overlap with a paper by Kumbhari et al.1 Thirty-five patients overlap with the study by Ngamruengphong et al.2.

Efficacy and Safety of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Treatment of Achalasia After Failed Heller Myotomy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with persistent symptoms after Heller myotomy (HM), treatment options include repeat HM, pneumatic dilation, or peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of POEM in patients with achalasia with prior HM vs without prior HM. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 180 patients with achalasia who underwent POEM at 13 tertiary centers worldwide, from December 2009 through September 2015. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with prior HM (HM group, exposure; n = 90) and those without prior HM (non-HM group; n = 90). Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt scores to 3 or less. Adverse events were graded according to criteria set by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technical success, clinical success, and rates of adverse events were compared between groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 8.5 months. RESULTS: POEM was technically successful in 98% of patients in the HM group and in 100% of patients in the non-HM group (P = .49). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the HM group had a clinical response to POEM (81%) than in the non-HM group (94%; P = .01). There were no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the groups (8% in the HM group vs 13% in the non-HM group; P = .23). Symptomatic reflux and reflux esophagitis after POEM were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and effective for patients with achalasia who were not treated successfully by prior HM. Although the rate of clinical success in patients with prior HM is lower than in those without prior HM, the safety profile of POEM is comparable between groups.

Gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy for refractory gastroparesis: results from the first multicenter study on endoscopic pyloromyotomy (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) recently has been reported as minimally invasive therapy for gastroparesis. The aims of this study were to report on the first multicenter experience with G-POEM and to assess the efficacy and safety of this novel procedure for patients with gastroparesis with symptoms refractory to medical therapy. METHODS: All patients with gastroparesis who underwent endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) at 5 medical centers were included. Procedures were performed following the same principles as esophageal POEM. Clinical response was defined as improvement in gastroparetic symptoms with absence of recurrent hospitalization. Adverse events were graded according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients with refractory gastroparesis (11 diabetic, 12 postsurgical, 7 idiopathic) underwent G-POEM. Previous therapies included Botox injection in 12, transpyloric stenting in 3, and PEG with jejunal extension (PEGJ) in 1. Nausea/vomiting were the predominant symptoms in 25 patients. Weight loss was present in 27 patients with an average of 10% loss of body weight. G-POEM was completed successfully in all 30 (100%) patients with a mean procedure time of 72 minutes (range, 35-223 min). The mean myotomy length was 2.6 ± 2.3 cm. The mean length of hospital stay was 3.3 days (range, 1-12 days). Two adverse events occurred in 2 (6.7%) patients, including 1 capnoperitoneum and 1 prepyloric ulcer, rated as mild and severe, respectively. Clinical response was observed in 26 (86%) patients during a median follow-up of 5.5 months. Four patients (2 diabetic, 1 postsurgical, 1 idiopathic cause) did not respond to G-POEM. Repeat gastric emptying scan was obtained in 17 patients, normalized in 8 (47%), and improved in 6 (35%) patients. CONCLUSION: G-POEM is a technically feasible procedure. This small non-randomized study suggests the effectiveness of G-POEM for the treatment of patients with gastroparesis refractory to medical therapy. It concomitantly results in normalization of GES in a significant proportion of treated patients.

Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia with a minimum follow-up of 2 years: an international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has shown promising safety and efficacy in short-term studies. However, long-term follow-up data are very limited. The aims of this study were to assess (1) clinical outcome of patients with a minimum post-POEM follow-up of 2 years and (2) factors associated with long-term clinical failure after POEM. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed that included all consecutive patients with achalasia who underwent POEM with a minimum follow-up of 2 years at 10 tertiary-care centers. Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt score to 3 or lower. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients (45.8% men; mean age, 49 years) were followed for a median of 31 months (interquartile range, 26-38 months). Of these, 81 patients (39.5%) had received previous treatment for achalasia before POEM. Clinical success was achieved in 98% (185/189), 98% (142/144), and 91% (187/205) of patients with follow-up within 6 months, at 12 months, and ≥24 months, respectively. Of 185 patients with clinical response at 6 months, 11 (6%) experienced recurrent symptoms at 2 years. History of previous pneumatic dilation was associated with long-term treatment failure (odds ratio, 3.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-9.23). Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 8.2% of patients and only 1 patient required surgical intervention. Abnormal esophageal acid exposure and reflux esophagitis were documented in 37.5% and 18% of patients, respectively. However, these rates are simply a reference number among a very selective group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and provides high initial clinical success and excellent long-term outcomes. Among patients with confirmed clinical response within 6 months, 6% had recurrent symptoms by 2 years.

Trans-oral anterior fundoplication: 5-year follow-up of pilot study.

BACKGROUND: This is a report of an IRB-approved pilot study of 13 patients who received a trans-oral anterior partial fundoplication for the treatment of GERD using an ultrasound-guided, flexible surgical stapler. All patients had a history of PPI use, objective evidence of GERD, and no significant comorbidity. Under general anesthesia, a flexible stapler was passed trans-orally into the stomach and placed two or three quintuplets of titanium staples approximately 3 cm above the gastroesophageal junction. The stapler contains an ultrasonic range finder, video camera, and illuminator. METHODS: Primary follow-up at 6 weeks included pH metrics, GERD-HRQL scores, and PPI use. The protocol allowed annual telephone interviews for the following 5 years to collect GERD-HRQL scores, PPI use, satisfaction with the procedure, and willingness to have the procedure again. RESULTS: At 6 weeks, mean total acid exposure was significantly reduced, and 12/13 patients reduced GERD-HRQL scores by ≥50%. Twelve of 13 patients had stopped daily GERD medications, and nine of 13 had stopped all GERD medications. Each year, 11 of the 13 patients could be reached with all 13 patients having at least 4-year follow-up. Throughout the follow-up period, GERD-HRQL scores were normal (<10) in all but one patient. All patients would agree to do the procedure again. The median satisfaction score is 8 (range 6-10) on a scale of 1-10. None reported dysphagia. At 1 year, 54% of respondents (6/11) had eliminated PPI use, with another 27% (3/11) taking a reduced dose. Combining respondents at 4 and 5 years to account for all patients, 54% (7/13) had eliminated and another 23% (3/13) reduced PPI use ≥50 %. CONCLUSION: At 5 years, the procedure remained effective as demonstrated by the improved quality of life and changes in PPI use. The results remained stable after the second year.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage Versus Percutaneous Drainage in Patients With Acute Cholecystitis Undergoing Elective Cholecystectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Cholecystectomy (CCY) is the gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC). Nonsurgical management of AC includes percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD). This study aims to compare outcomes of patients who undergo CCY after having received EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD. METHODS: A multicenter international study was conducted in patients with AC who underwent EUS-GBD or PT-GBD, followed by an attempted CCY, between January 2018 and October 2021. Demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural details, postprocedure outcomes, and surgical details and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine patients were included: EUS-GBD in 46 patients (27% male, mean age 74 years) and PT-GBD in 93 patients (50% male, mean age 72 years). Surgical technical success was not significantly different between the 2 groups. In the EUS-GBD group, there was decreased operative time (84.2 vs 165.4 minutes, P < 0.00001), time to symptom resolution (4.2 vs 6.3 days, P = 0.005), and length of stay (5.4 vs 12.3 days, P = 0.001) compared with the PT-GBD group. There was no difference in the rate of conversion from laparoscopic to open CCY: 5 of 46 (11%) in the EUS-GBD arm and 18 of 93 (19%) in the PT-GBD group ( P value 0.2324). DISCUSSION: Patients who received EUS-GBD had a significantly shorter interval between gallbladder drainage and CCY, shorter surgical procedure times, and shorter length of stay for the CCY compared with those who received PT-GBD. EUS-GBD should be considered an acceptable modality for gallbladder drainage and should not preclude patients from eventual CCY.