Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Barrett's Associated Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Published Literature.

Introduction The role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of Barrett's associated neoplasia (BEN) has been evolving. We examined the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR for BEN. Methods A database search was performed for studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes of ESD and EMR for BEN. Pooled proportional and comparative meta-analyses were performed. Results 47 studies (23 ESD, 19 EMR, and 5 comparative) were included. Mean lesion size for ESD and EMR were 22.5 mm and 15.8 mm respectively. Majority of lesions were Paris type IIa. Pooled analysis for ESD showed en-bloc resection, R0 resection, curative resection, and local recurrence rates of 98%, 78%, 65%, and 2%, respectively. Complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D) and complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) were achieved in 94% and 59% of cases. Pooled rates of perforation, intraprocedural bleeding (IPB), delayed bleeding (DB), and stricture were 1%, 1%, 2%, and 10%, respectively. Pooled analysis for EMR showed en-bloc resection, R0 resection, curative resection, and local recurrence rates of 37%, 67%, 62%, and 6%, respectively. CE-D and CE-IM were achieved in 94% and 76% of cases. Pooled rates of perforation, IPB, DB, and stricture were 0.1%, 1%, 0.4%, and 7.7%, respectively. The mean procedure time for ESD and EMR were 111.3 and 22.3 mins respectively. Comparative analysis showed higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates with ESD compared to EMR, with comparable adverse events. Conclusion ESD and EMR both can be employed to treat BEN depending on the lesion type, size, and expertise.

Analyzing methods for reducing recurrence rates after EMR of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: an indirect pairwise comparison.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite advances in EMR techniques, a high polyp recurrence rate remains a challenge. Due to the scarcity of direct comparisons, we performed an indirect comparison of conventional EMR (EMR alone), underwater EMR (U-EMR), and EMR + adjuvant thermal ablation of polypectomy margins to assess polyp recurrence rates. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to January 12, 2023, for studies reporting polyp recurrence rates after EMR for large nonpedunculated polyps (>15 mm) with or without adjuvant techniques (snare tip soft coagulation [STSC]/argon plasma coagulation [APC]). An indirect comparison was performed by using the frequentist method. The p-score was calculated to identify preferred intervention. Publication bias was assessed by using a comparison-adjusted funnel plot. RESULTS: A total of 9 full articles were identified. On direct comparisons, EMR + STSC had 82% reduced odds (odds ratio, .18; 95% confidence interval, .13-.26; P < .001), whereas U-EMR alone had 77% reduced odds (odds ratio, .23; 95% confidence interval, .08-.67; P = .007) of polyp recurrence compared with EMR alone. On indirect comparison, all interventions had significantly lower odds of polyp recurrence compared with EMR alone. The p-score ranking showed that EMR + STSC seems a potential first method in reducing the odds of polyp recurrence, followed by U-EMR, EMR + APC, and EMR alone. CONCLUSIONS: EMR + STSC seems to provide favorable odds for reducing polyp recurrence postresection for large nonpedunculated polyps. Standardization of methods to detect residual polyp and prevent polyp recurrence at the time of EMR are required.

The Environmental Impact of Gastrointestinal Procedures: A Prospective Study of Waste Generation, Energy Consumption, and Auditing in an Endoscopy Unit.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy procedures are critical for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of a variety of GI disorders. However, like the procedures in other medical disciplines, they are a source of environmental waste generation and energy consumption. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on total waste generation, energy consumption, and the role of intraprocedural inventory audit of a single tertiary care academic endoscopy unit over a 2-month period (May-June 2022). Detailed data on items used were collected, including procedure type (esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy), accessories, intravenous tubing, biopsy jars, linen, and personal protective equipment use. Data on endoscope reprocessing-related waste generation and energy use in the endoscopy unit (equipment, lights, and computers) were also collected. We used an endoscopy staff-guided auditing and review of the items used during procedures to determine potentially recyclable items going to landfill waste. The waste generated was stratified into biohazardous, nonbiohazardous, or potentially recyclable items. RESULTS: A total of 450 consecutive procedures were analyzed for total waste management (generation and reprocessing) and energy consumption. The total waste generated during the study period was 1398.6 kg (61.6% directly going to landfill, 33.3% biohazard waste, and 5.1% sharps), averaging 3.03 kg/procedure. The average waste directly going to landfill was 219 kg per 100 procedures. The estimated total annual waste generation approximated the size of 2 football fields (1-foot-high layered waste). Endoscope reprocessing generated 194 gallons of liquid waste per day, averaging 13.85 gallons per procedure. Total energy consumption in the endoscopy unit was 277.1 kW·h energy per day; for every 100 procedures, amounting to 1200 miles of distance traveled by an average fuel efficiency car. The estimated carbon footprint for every 100 GI procedures was 1501 kg carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent (= 1680 lbs of coal burned), which would require 1.8 acres of forests to sequester. The recyclable waste audit and review demonstrated that 20% of total waste consisted of potentially recyclable items (8.6 kg/d) that could be avoided by appropriate waste segregation of these items. CONCLUSIONS: On average, every 100 GI endoscopy procedures (esophagogastroduodenoscopy/colonoscopy) are associated with 303 kg of solid waste and 1385 gallons of liquid waste generation, and 1980 kW·h energy consumption. Potentially recyclable materials account for 20% of the total waste. These data could serve as an actionable model for health systems to reduce total waste generation and decrease landfill waste and water waste toward environmentally sustainable endoscopy units.

Lack of Effectiveness of Computer Aided Detection for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Nonrandomized Studies.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Benefits of computer-aided detection (CADe) in detecting colorectal neoplasia were shown in many randomized trials in which endoscopists' behavior was strictly controlled. However, the effect of CADe on endoscopists' performance in less-controlled setting is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analyses were aimed at clarifying benefits and harms of using CADe in real-world colonoscopy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from inception to August 20, 2023. We included nonrandomized studies that compared the effectiveness between CADe-assisted and standard colonoscopy. Two investigators independently extracted study data and quality. Pairwise meta-analysis was performed utilizing risk ratio for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Eight studies were included, comprising 9782 patients (4569 with CADe and 5213 without CADe). Regarding benefits, there was a difference in neither adenoma detection rate (44% vs 38%; risk ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.28) nor mean adenomas per colonoscopy (0.93 vs 0.79; MD, 0.14; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.32) between CADe-assisted and standard colonoscopy, respectively. Regarding harms, there was no difference in the mean non-neoplastic lesions per colonoscopy (8 studies included for analysis; 0.52 vs 0.47; MD, 0.14; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.34) and withdrawal time (6 studies included for analysis; 14.3 vs 13.4 minutes; MD, 0.8 minutes; 95% CI, -0.18 to 1.90). There was a substantial heterogeneity, and all outcomes were graded with a very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSION: CADe in colonoscopies neither improves the detection of colorectal neoplasia nor increases burden of colonoscopy in real-world, nonrandomized studies, questioning the generalizability of the results of randomized trials.

US Nationwide Insight Into All-cause 30-day Readmissions following Inpatient Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with a high risk for morbidity, mortality, and hospital readmission. Data regarding those risks in the United States is scarce. We assessed post-ERCP 30-day readmission rates, their etiologies, and impact on the health care system using national data. METHODS: Using the National Readmission Database 2016, we identified patients who underwent inpatient ERCP from January 2016 to December 2016 using ICD-10-CM procedure codes. The primary endpoint was all-cause 30-day readmission rate. Etiologies of readmission were identified by tallying primary diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression with complex survey design was used to identify independent risk factors associated with readmission. RESULTS: A total of 130,145 patients underwent ERCP, 16,278 (12.5%) were readmitted within 30 days, with an associated cost of 268 million dollars. Nearly 40% of readmissions occurred within 7 days, and 47.9% were related to gastrointestinal etiologies. Male gender, increased comorbidities, cirrhosis, Medicare insurance, and pancreatitis or pancreatitis-related indications for ERCP were readmission risk factors. Performance of cholecystectomy on index hospitalization decreased odds of readmission by 50% (adjusted odds ratio: 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.52, P <0.0001). While academic and nonacademic centers had similar readmission rates, high ERCP volume centers had higher rates compared with low-volume centers (adjusted odds ratio:1.10, P =0.008). CONCLUSION: All-cause 30-day readmission rates after inpatient ERCPs are high, mostly occur shortly postdischarge, and impose a heavy health care system burden. Large, multicenter prospective studies assessing the impact of center procedure volume on complications and readmission rates are needed.

Predicting inpatient mortality in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A machine learning approach.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Data are lacking on predicting inpatient mortality (IM) in patients admitted for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IM is a critical outcome; however, difficulty in its prediction exists due to infrequent occurrence. We assessed IM predictors and developed a predictive model for IM using machine-learning (ML). METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2005-2017), we extracted adults admitted for IBD. After ML-guided predictor selection, we trained and internally validated multiple algorithms, targeting minimum sensitivity and positive likelihood ratio (+LR) ≥ 80% and ≥ 3, respectively. Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) compared algorithm performance. The best performing algorithm was additionally trained and validated for an IBD-related surgery sub-cohort. External validation was done using NIS 2018. RESULTS: In 398 426 adult IBD admissions, IM was 0.32% overall, and 0.87% among the surgical cohort (n = 40 784). Increasing age, ulcerative colitis, IBD-related surgery, pneumonia, chronic lung disease, acute kidney injury, malnutrition, frailty, heart failure, blood transfusion, sepsis/septic shock and thromboembolism were associated with increased IM. The QLattice algorithm, provided the highest performance model (+LR: 3.2, 95% CI 3.0-3.3; area-under-curve [AUC]:0.87, 85% sensitivity, 73% specificity), distinguishing IM patients by 15.6-fold when comparing high to low-risk patients. The surgical cohort model (+LR: 8.5, AUC: 0.94, 85% sensitivity, 90% specificity), distinguished IM patients by 49-fold. Both models performed excellently in external validation. An online calculator (https://clinicalc.ai/im-ibd/) was developed allowing bedside model predictions. CONCLUSIONS: An online prediction-model calculator captured > 80% IM cases during IBD-related admissions, with high discriminatory effectiveness. This allows for risk stratification and provides a basis for assessing interventions to reduce mortality in high-risk patients.

Improved Mortality But Increased Economic Burden of Disease in Compensated and Decompensated Cirrhosis: A US National Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Cirrhosis remains a major burden on the health care system despite substantial advances in therapy and care. Studies simultaneously examining mortality, readmission, and cost of care are not available. Here, we hypothesized that improved patient care in the last decade might have led to improved outcomes and reduced costs in patients with cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified compensated cirrhosis (CC) and decompensated cirrhosis (DC) patients using carefully chosen ICD-9/ICD-10 codes from the Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) (years 2010 to 2016). We evaluated trends of 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day readmission, and inflation-adjusted index hospitalization and readmission costs. Factors associated with mortality and readmission were identified using regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 3,374,038 patients with cirrhosis were identified, of whom nearly 50% had a decompensating event on initial admission. The 30-day inpatient mortality rate for both CC and DC patients decreased from 2010 to 2016. The 30-day readmission rate remained stable for DC and declined for CC. Over the study period, 30-day readmission costs increased for DC and remained unchanged for CC. The median cost for index hospitalization remained nearly unchanged, but the cost of readmission increased for both CC and DC groups. Gastrointestinal diseases and infections were the leading cause of readmission in CC and DC patient groups. CONCLUSION: Inpatient mortality has decreased for CC and DC patients. Readmission has declined for CC patients and remained stable for DC patients. However, the economic burden of cirrhosis is rising.

Comparative outcomes of endoscopic and radiological gastrostomy tube placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE analysis.

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are invasive interventions used for enteral access. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with assessment of certainty of evidence to compare the risk of adverse outcomes and technical failure between PEG and PRG. Methods: We queried PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane from inception through January 2022 to identify studies comparing outcomes of PEG and PRG. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included the risk of colon perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, technical failure, peristomal infections, and tube-related complications. We performed GRADE assessment to assess the certainty of evidence and leave-one-out analysis for sensitivity analysis. Results: In the final analysis, 33 studies, including 26 high-quality studies, provided data on 275,117 patients undergoing PEG and 192,691 patients undergoing PRG. Data from high quality studies demonstrated that, compared to PRG, PEG had significantly lower odds of selected outcomes, including 30-day all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.95; P=0.02), colon perforation (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.49-0.75; P<0.001), and peritonitis (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.63-0.81; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between PEG and PRG in terms of technical failure, bleeding, peristomal infections or mechanical complications. The certainty of the evidence was rated moderate for colon perforation and low for all other outcomes. Conclusions: PEG is associated with a significantly lower risk of 30-day all-cause mortality, colon perforation, and peritonitis compared to PRG, while having a comparable technical failure rate. PEG should be considered as the first-line technique for enteral access.

The impact of red blood cell transfusion practices on inpatient mortality in variceal and non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding patients: a 20-year US nationwide retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies in upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding have reported inconsistent outcomes about packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion practices. AIM: To assess whether PRBC transfusion is more likely to be dangerous in variceal bleeding than in non-variceal bleeding due to concern of over-transfusion leading to elevated portal pressure. METHODS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (1999-2018). We identified patients with upper GI bleeding using an algorithmic approach, categorising bleeding from non-variceal or variceal sources. Our primary outcome was all-cause inpatient mortality. To control for the severity of bleeding, we performed propensity matching of baseline features, including age, gender, the presence of shock, the need for ICU care and co-morbidities. We also examined PRBC transfusion, inpatient mortality and hospitalisation rates for both populations. RESULTS: We included 10,228,524 upper GI bleeding discharges; 755,135 patients had variceal bleeding. After propensity matching, PRBC transfusion in variceal bleeders was associated with a 22% increase in inpatient mortality, whereas non-variceal bleeders had a 9% increase in inpatient mortality. Compared to non-variceal bleeders receiving blood transfusion, variceal bleeders had nearly four-fold higher odds of inpatient mortality (propensity-matched OR: 3.8; 95% CI: 3.7-3.8; p < 0.001). Notably, PRBC transfusion rates in both groups have declined since 2011, although it has remained higher in variceal bleeders. Mortality for upper GI bleeding has been declining since 1999. CONCLUSIONS: Although decreased over the last decade, PRBC transfusion rates remain high for variceal bleeders. In addition, PRBC transfusion appears to be more detrimental in variceal bleeders than in non-variceal bleeders.

Efficacy of Combining Aggressive Hydration With Rectal Indomethacin in Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (ERCP). No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has compared the efficacy of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommended interventions for PEP prevention. We assessed the effectiveness of these interventions using network meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs investigating guideline-recommended interventions and their combinations [rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): indomethacin or diclofenac, pancreatic stent (PS), aggressive hydration (AH), sublingual nitrate) for PEP prevention. We performed direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank interventions. Subgroup network meta-analysis for high-risk populations was also performed. We identified a total of 38 RCTs with 10 different interventions. Each intervention was protective against PEP on direct and network meta-analysis compared with controls. Except AH+diclofenac and NSAIDs+ sublingual nitrate, AH+indomethacin was associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP compared with PS [odds ratio (OR), 0.09; credible interval (CrI), 0.003-0.71], indomethcin+PS (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.85), diclofenac (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), AH (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), sublingual nitrate (OR, 0.07; CrI, 0.002-0.63), and indomethacin (OR, 0.06; CrI, 0.002-0.43). AH with either rectal NSAIDs or sublingual nitrate had similar efficacy. AH+indomethacin was the best intervention for preventing PEP with 95.3% probability of being ranked first. For high-risk patients, although the efficacy of PS and indomethacin were comparable, PS had an 80.8% probability of being ranked first. AH+indomethacin seems the best intervention for preventing PEP. For high-risk patients, PS seems the most effective strategy. The potential of combination of interventions need to be explored further.

Major gastrointestinal bleeding risk with direct oral anticoagulants: Does type and dose matter? - A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The relative risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) among different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is debatable. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DOACs with each other are lacking. We performed network meta-analysis to assess whether the risk of major GIB differs based on type and dose of DOAC. Literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from inception to August 2019, limited to English publications, was conducted to identify RCTs comparing DOACs with warfarin or enoxaparin for any indication. Primary outcome of interest was major GIB risk. We used frequentist network meta-analysis through the random-effects model to compare DOACs with each other and DOACs by dose to isolate the impact on major GIB. Twenty-eight RCTs, including 139 587 patients receiving six anticoagulants, were selected. The risk of major GIB for DOACs was equal to warfarin. Comparison of DOACs with each other did not show risk differences. After accounting for dose, rivaroxaban 20 mg, dabigatran 300 mg and edoxaban 60 mg daily had 47, 40 and 22% higher rates of major GIB versus warfarin, respectively. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily had lower major GIB compared to dabigatran 300 mg (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.88) and rivaroxaban 20 mg (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83) daily. Heterogeneity was low, and the model was consistent without publication bias (Egger's test: P = 0.079). All RCTs were high-quality with low risk of bias. DOACs at standard dose, except apixaban, had a higher risk of major GIB compared to warfarin. Apixaban had a lower rate of major GIB compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

Is Multiple Sclerosis an Extra-Intestinal Manifestation of Inflammatory Bowel Disease? Food for Thought.

For many years there has been a suggested association between multiple sclerosis (MS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Aside from their common epidemiological and immunological similarities, there appears to be an association between the incidence of both diseases coexisting. We report a case of a 41-year-old man with chronic diarrhea and weakness, who was found to have concomitant MS and Crohn's Disease. Our report underscores the importance clinicians of maintaining a high degree of suspicion about the potential association of these conditions among these patient populations.

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

Background and study aims Colonoscopy is an effective tool to prevent colorectal cancer. Social media has emerged as a source of medical information for patients.YouTube (a video sharing website) is the most popular video informative source. Therefore, we aimed to assess the educational quality of colonoscopy videos available on YouTube. Methods We performed a YouTube search using the keyword "colonoscopy" yielded 429 videos, of which 255 met the inclusion criteria. Colonoscopy Data Quality Score (C-DQS) was created to rate the quality of the videos (-10 to +40 points) based on a colonoscopy education video available on the Ameican Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) website. Each video was scored by six blinded reviewers independently using C-DQS. The Global Quality Score (GQS) was used for score validation. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the similarity of the scores among reviewers. Results Professional societies had the highest number of videos (44.3 %). Videos from professional societies (6.94) and media (6.87) had significantly higher mean C-DQS compared to those from alternative medicine providers (1.19), companies (1.16), and patients (2.60) ( P  < 0.05). Mean C-DQS score of videos from healthcare providers (4.40) was not statistically different than other sources. There was a high degree of agreement among reviewers for the videos from all sources (ICC = 0.934; P  < 0.001). Discussion YouTube videos are a poor source of information on colonoscopy. Professional societies and media are better sources of quality information for patient education on colonoscopy. The medical community may need to engage actively in enriching the quality of educational material available on YouTube.

Left Shoulder Pain After Routine Colonoscopy: An Unusual Presentation of Splenic Laceration.

Splenic injury is an uncommon complication following a colonoscopy procedure. Splenic laceration typically presents with post-procedural abdominal pain. We present a case of non-specific shoulder pain, following an uneventful routine colonoscopy and highlight the importance of maintaining a high degree of clinical suspicion for the general gastroenterologist.