Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by I 2 statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; I 2 = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; I 2 = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; I 2 = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; I 2 = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; I 2 = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; I 2 = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; I 2 = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.

Safety and efficacy of the EndoRotor device for the treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis after EUS-guided cystenterostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Debridement of infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis is indicated to treat and prevent sepsis-related multiorgan failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the EndoRotor-powered endoscopic debridement system to remove solid debris under direct endoscopic visualization. Search strategies were developed for PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 2022, in accordance with Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Outcomes of interest included technical success defined as successful use of device for debridement, clinical success defined as complete debridement and cyst resolution, and procedure-related adverse events. A random-effects model was used for analysis, and results were expressed as odds ratio along with 95% confidence interval. A total of 7 studies (n = 79 patients) were included. The mean walled-off pancreatic necrosis size was 154.6 ± 34.0 mm, whereas the mean procedure time was 71.4 minutes. The mean number of necrosectomy sessions required was 2.2 (range, 1-7). The pooled rate of clinical success was 96% (95% confidence interval, 91%-100%; I 2 = 0%) with a pooled technical success rate of 96% (91%-100%; I 2 = 0%). The pooled procedure-related adverse event rate was 8% (2%-14%; I 2 = 6%), which included procedure-associated bleeding, pneumoperitoneum, peritonitis, pleural effusion, and dislodgement of lumen-apposing metal stents. Our study shows that the novel EndoRotor device seems to be safe and effective for treating pancreatic necrosis. Patients undergoing endoscopic necrosectomy with the EndoRotor seem to require less debridement sessions when compared with studies using conventional instruments.

Risk of Aspiration Pneumonitis After Elective Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in Patients on Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists.

Background Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are gaining popularity in the management of diabetes mellitus and obesity. It has been suggested that this class of medications causes delayed gastric emptying which raised concerns about the potential for aspiration of gastric contents in patients undergoing sedation. This led to a statement by the American Society of Anesthesiologists about their preoperative use. Nevertheless, there is minimal evidence regarding the effects of GLP-1RAs on the risk of aspiration post-esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). In this study, we sought to evaluate the incidence of aspiration and pneumonia in patients receiving GLP-1RAs who underwent EGD. Methodology We performed a retrospective cohort study in TriNetX, a global federated research network of electronic health records. The primary outcome was the development of aspiration post-EGD. Secondary outcomes were the development of aspiration pneumonia and requiring antibiotics post-EGD. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and other comorbidities between the cohorts. Results Our analysis showed a small but significant risk of aspiration pneumonitis in patients on GLP-1RAs undergoing elective EGD compared to non-GLP-1RA-receiving patients. However, there was no increased risk of the composite outcome of respiratory failure or intensive care unit (ICU) admission; however, this did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions GLP-1RA use was associated with an increased risk of aspiration in patients undergoing elective upper endoscopy. However, this did not translate to an increased risk of respiratory failure or ICU admission. Our findings highlight the importance of following an individualized approach to preoperative management that takes into consideration GLP-1RA indications and other aspiration risk factors, including advanced age, impaired gag reflex, and gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea and abdominal distention.

Assessing ChatGPT4 with and without retrieval-augmented generation in anticoagulation management for gastrointestinal procedures.

Background: In view of the growing complexity of managing anticoagulation for patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) procedures, this study evaluated ChatGPT-4's ability to provide accurate medical guidance, comparing it with its prior artificial intelligence (AI) models (ChatGPT-3.5) and the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-supported model (ChatGPT4-RAG). Methods: Thirty-six anticoagulation-related questions, based on professional guidelines, were answered by ChatGPT-4. Nine gastroenterologists assessed these responses for accuracy and relevance. ChatGPT-4's performance was also compared to that of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT4-RAG. Additionally, a survey was conducted to understand gastroenterologists' perceptions of ChatGPT-4. Results: ChatGPT-4's responses showed significantly better accuracy and coherence compared to ChatGPT-3.5, with 30.5% of responses fully accurate and 47.2% generally accurate. ChatGPT4-RAG demonstrated a higher ability to integrate current information, achieving 75% full accuracy. Notably, for diagnostic and therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy, 51.8% of responses were fully accurate; for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with and without stent placement, 42.8% were fully accurate; and for diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy, 50% were fully accurate. Conclusions: ChatGPT4-RAG significantly advances anticoagulation management in endoscopic procedures, offering reliable and precise medical guidance. However, medicolegal considerations mean that a 75% full accuracy rate remains inadequate for independent clinical decision-making. AI may be more appropriately utilized to support and confirm clinicians' decisions, rather than replace them. Further evaluation is essential to maintain patient confidentiality and the integrity of the physician-patient relationship.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) directs bile flow into the digestive tract and has been mostly used in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage was unsuccessful or was not feasible. Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) are deployed during EUS-BD, with the newer electrocautery-enhanced LAMS reducing procedure time and complication rates due to the inbuilt cautery at the catheter tip. EUS-BD with electrocautery-enhanced LAMS has high technical and clinical success rates for palliation of MBO, with bleeding, cholangitis, and stent occlusion being the most common adverse events. Recent studies have even suggested comparable efficacy between EUS-BD and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as the primary approach for distal MBO. In this editorial, we commented on the article by Peng et al published in the recent issue of the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery in 2024.

Effects of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited evidence exists regarding the impact of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) on upper endoscopy. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to comprehensively review the available evidence on this subject. METHODS: A systematic bibliographic search was carried out until May 2024. Pooled estimates were analyzed using a random-effects model, with results presented as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary outcome assessed was the rate of retained gastric content (RGC), while secondary outcomes included rates of aborted and repeated procedures, adverse event rate, and rates of aspiration. RESULTS: This analysis included 13 studies involving a total of 84,065 patients. Patients receiving GLP-1RA therapy exhibited significantly higher rates of RGC (OR, 5.56; 95% CI, 3.35 to 9.23), a trend that was consistent among patients with diabetes (OR, 2.60; 95% CI, 2.23 to 3.02). Adjusted analysis, accounting for variables such as sex, age, body mass index, diabetes, and other therapies, confirmed the elevated rates of RGC in the GLP-1RA user group (adjusted OR, 4.20; 95% CI, 3.42 to 5.15). Furthermore, rates of aborted and repeated procedures were higher in the GLP-1RA user group (OR, 5.13; 95% CI, 3.01 to 8.75; and OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.35; respectively). However, no significant differences were found in AE and aspiration rates between the 2 groups (OR, 4.04; 95% CI, 0.63 to 26.03; and OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 4.77; respectively). CONCLUSION: Use of GLP-1RAs is associated with increased retention of gastric contents and more frequent aborted procedures during upper endoscopy. However, the adverse event and aspiration rates do not seem different; therefore, adjusting fasting time instead of routinely withholding GLP-1RAs could be reasonable in these patients.

Advancements in Early Detection and Screening Strategies for Pancreatic Cancer: From Genetic Susceptibility to Novel Biomarkers.

Pancreatic cancer is a rare but lethal cancer due to its biologically aggressive nature, advanced stage at the time of diagnosis, and poor response to oncologic therapies. The risk of pancreatic cancer is significantly higher to 5% in certain high-risk individuals with inherited genetic susceptibility. Screening for pancreatic cancer in these individuals from high-risk groups can help with the early detection of pancreatic cancer as well as the detection of precursor lesions leading to early surgical resection and improved overall outcomes. The advancements in radiological imaging as well as advanced endoscopic procedures has made a significant impact on the early diagnosis, surveillance, and staging of pancreatic cancer. There is also a significant advancement in the development of biomarkers for the early detection of pancreatic cancer, which has also led to the development of liquid biopsy, allowing for microRNA detection in serum and circulating tumor cells. Various societies and organizations have provided guidelines for pancreatic cancer screening and surveillance in high-risk individuals. In this review, we aim to discuss the hereditary risk factors for developing pancreatic cancer, summarize the screening recommendations by different societies, and discuss the development of novel biomarkers and areas for future research in pancreatic cancer screening for high-risk individuals.

EUS-Guided Vascular Interventions: Recent Advances.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided vascular interventions were first reported in 2000 in a study that evaluated the utility of EUS in sclerotherapy of esophageal varices. Currently, gastric variceal therapy and portosystemic pressure gradient (PPG) measurements are the most widely utilized applications. Ectopic variceal obliteration, splenic artery embolization, aneurysm/pseudoaneurysm treatment, portal venous sampling, and portosystemic shunt creation using EUS are some of the other emerging interventions. Since the release of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA)'s commentary in 2023, which primarily endorses EUS-guided gastric variceal therapy and EUS-PPG measurement, several new studies have been published supporting the use of EUS for various vascular conditions. In this review, we present the recent advances in this field, critically appraising new studies and trials.

ENDOLUMINAL RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION WITH STENTING VS STENTING ONLY IN PATIENTS WITH MALIGNANT BILIARY OBSTRUCTION: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMISED TRIALS.

INTRODUCTION: Endoluminal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a palliative treatment for patients suffering from malignant biliary obstruction. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of RFA on stent patency, patient survival, and adverse events. METHODS: Major databases were searched through November 2023 for patients who underwent stenting with or without RFA for extra-hepatic malignant biliary obstruction. A random effects model was employed for analysis and results conveyed using relative risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 750 subjects (n=374 RFA plus stent vs. n=376 stent only) with malignant biliary obstruction were included. Meta-analysis revealed similar risks of stent patency at 3 months (RR = 1.01; 95% CI [0.92 - 1.11], I2=4% for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only). Meta-analysis showed improved survival at 6 months (RR = 0.84; 95% CI [0.73 - 0.96], I2=21%, P=0.01 for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only). Subgroup analysis comparing plastic vs uncovered metal stents showed that stent patency was unaffected at 3 months (RR = 1.06; 95% CI [0.91 - 1.23]; I2=17%). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with cholangiocarcinoma experienced an overall survival benefit with RFA plus stenting vs. stent only (P<0.001), however, stent patency remained unaffected (P=0.08). An increased incidence of cholecystitis was noted with RFA plus stent vs. stent only (5.1%; 95% CI [3.1% - 7.8%] vs 0.3%; 95% CI [0.01% - 1.5%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Combining endoluminal RFA and stenting may improve overall survival in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. RFA did not impact stent patency significantly.

Cold snare polypectomy versus cold endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background/Aims: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is routinely performed for small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm). However, challenges include insufficient resection depth and immediate bleeding, hindering precise pathological evaluation. We aimed to compare the outcomes of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with that of CSP for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm, using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: Multiple databases were searched in December 2023 for RCTs reporting outcomes of CSP versus CEMR for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm in size. Our primary outcomes were rates of complete and en-bloc resections, while our secondary outcomes were total resection time (seconds) and adverse events, including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Results: The complete resection rates did not significantly differ (CSP, 91.8% vs. CEMR 94.6%), nor did the rates of en-bloc resection (CSP, 98.9% vs. CEMR, 98.3%) or incomplete resection (CSP, 6.7% vs. CEMR, 4.8%). Adverse event rates were similarly insignificant in variance. However, CEMR had a notably longer mean resection time (133.51 vs. 91.30 seconds). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that while both CSP and CEMR are equally safe and effective for resecting small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps, the latter is associated with a longer resection time.

Prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of post-ampullectomy pancreatitis: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of 1858 patients.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting (PPDS) in preventing post-ampullectomy pancreatitis (PAP) at the time of endoscopic ampullectomy (EA) has been reported, however, results are conflicting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis looking at the use of PPDS in reducing PAP as well as overall post-ampullectomy complications. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through May 2023 for studies reporting on EA. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of PAP, with and without PPDS. Pooled rates of adverse events including perforation, delayed bleeding, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were assessed. Random effects model was used for our meta-analysis and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (14 case series, 18 cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trials) with 1868 patients were included. The overall pooled rate of PAP was 12.3% (CI 10.3-14.5). We found no statistically significant difference in rates of PAP among patients with PPDS, 11.9% (CI 8.9-15.7) and without PPDS, 16.6% (CI 13.4-20.4), RR 0.8 (CI 0.51-1.28), p = 0.4. In terms of severe PAP, we found no difference between the two groups. The overall pooled rates of successful en-bloc and piecemeal resection were 74.8% (CI 67.3-81.1) and 25.1% (CI 19-32.4). Additionally, pooled rates of ampullary stenosis, post procedural bleeding, perforation, cholangitis, and procedure related mortality were 3.6%, 11.1%, 4.2%, 3.5%, and 1.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that PPDS at the time of EA does not offer a significant protective effect against PAP. While the incidence of PAP was higher among the no PPDS group, it is plausible that this is more likely due to variation among studies in terms of lesion size, length/size of pancreatic stent used and etiology of ampullary lesions. Future well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Endoscopic Balloon Dilatation of Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Strictures in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the treatment of choice for medically refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess outcomes and safety of endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD) for IPAA strictures. METHODS: A systematic search of numerous databases was performed through June 2023 to identify studies reporting on the outcomes of EBD in pouch-related strictures. Outcomes included technical success, clinical success at index dilation and in pouch retention, recurrence of symptoms post-EBD, and adverse events of EBD. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and results were expressed in terms of pooled rates along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran Q statistical test with I2 statistics. RESULTS: Seven studies with 504 patients were included. The pooled rate of technical success and clinical success of index dilatation was 98.9% (95% CI, 94.8-99.8%; I20%) and 30.2% (95% CI, 7.1-71%; I20%), respectively. The pooled rate of clinical success in pouch retention without the need for additional surgery was 81.4% (95% CI, 69.6-89.3%; I272%). The pooled failure rate of EBD was 18.6% (95% CI, 10.7-30.4%, I272%). The pooled rate of recurrence of symptoms after index dilatation was 58.9% (95% CI, 33.3-80.5%; I213%). The pooled rate of serious adverse events was 1.8% (95% CI, 1-3.5%, I20%). No deaths related to EBD were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic balloon dilatation is safe and highly effective for management of IPAA strictures. Additional studies are needed to compare its efficacy with surgical interventions.

In this meta-analysis of 7 studies consisting of 504 inflammatory bowel disease patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis strictures, endoscopic balloon dilation was highly safe and effective with excellent clinical and technical success rates.

Groove pancreatitis: From enigma to future directions-A comprehensive review.

Groove pancreatitis (GP) is a rare and clinically distinct form of chronic pancreatitis affecting the pancreaticoduodenal groove comprising the head of the pancreas, duodenum, and the common bile duct. It is more prevalent in individuals in their 4-5th decade of life and disproportionately affects men compared with women. Excessive alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking, pancreatic ductal stones, pancreatic divisum, annular pancreas, ectopic pancreas, duodenal wall thickening, and peptic ulcers are significant risk factors implicated in the development of GP. The usual presenting symptoms include severe abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, weight loss, and jaundice. Establishing a diagnosis of GP is often challenging due to significant clinical and radiological overlap with numerous benign and malignant conditions affecting the same anatomical location. This can lead to a delay in initiation of treatment leading to increasing morbidity, mortality, and complication rates. Promising research in artificial intelligence (AI) has garnered immense interest in recent years. Due to its widespread application in diagnostic imaging with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity, AI has the potential of becoming a vital tool in differentiating GP from pancreatic malignancies, thereby preventing a missed or delayed diagnosis. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of GP, covering the etiology, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, radiological and endoscopic evaluation, management strategies, and future directions. This article also aims to increase awareness about this lesser known and often-misdiagnosed clinical entity amongst clinicians to ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Remimazolam for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A comprehensive review.

Worldwide, a majority of routine endoscopic procedures are performed under some form of sedation to maximize patient comfort. Propofol, benzodiazepines and opioids continue to be widely used. However, in recent years, Remimazolam is gaining immense popularity for procedural sedation in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. It is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in July 2020 for use in procedural sedation. Remimazolam has shown a favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile in terms of its non-specific metabolism by tissue esterase, volume of distribution, total body clearance, and negligible drug-drug interactions. It also has satisfactory efficacy and has achieved high rates of successful sedation in GI endoscopy. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that the efficacy of Remimazolam is non-inferior to Propofol, which is currently a gold standard for procedural sedation in most parts of the world. However, the use of Propofol is associated with hemodynamic instability and respiratory depression. In contrast, Remimazolam has lower incidence of these adverse effects intra-procedurally and hence, may provide a safer alternative to Propofol in procedural sedation. In this comprehensive narrative review, highlight the pharmacologic characteristics, efficacy, and safety of Remimazolam for procedural sedation. We also discuss the potential of Remimazolam as a suitable alternative and how it can shape the future of procedural sedation in gastroenterology.

Risk of De Novo Barrett's Esophagus Post Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies with Long-Term Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a major concern in patients undergoing SG and is a risk factor for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of and analyze predictive factors for post-SG BE. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in April 2024, for studies reporting on incidence of BE, erosive esophagitis (EE), and hiatal hernia (HH) post-SG. Primary outcomes were post-SG pooled rates of de novo BE, EE, GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor use, and HH. Meta-regression analysis was performed to assess if patient and post-SG factors influenced the rates of post-SG BE. RESULTS: Nineteen studies with 2046 patients (79% females) were included. Mean age was 42.2 years (standard deviation, 11.1) and follow-up ranged from 2 to 11.4 years. The pooled rate of de novo BE post-SG was 5.6% (confidence interval, 3.5-8.8). Significantly higher pooled rates of EE (risk ratio [RR], 3.37], HH (RR, 2.09), GER/GERD symptoms (RR, 3.32), and proton pump inhibitor use (RR, 3.65) were found among patients post-SG. GER/GERD symptoms post-SG positively influenced the pooled BE rates, whereas age, sex, body mass index, post-SG EE, and HH did not. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that SG results in a significantly increased risk of de novo BE and higher rates of EE, proton pump inhibitor use, and HH. Our findings suggest that clinicians should routinely screen patients with SG for BE and future surveillance intervals should be followed as per societal guidelines.

Controversies and Future Directions in Management of Acute Appendicitis: An Updated Comprehensive Review.

Globally, acute appendicitis has an estimated lifetime risk of 7-8%. However, there are numerous controversies surrounding the management of acute appendicitis, and the best treatment approach depends on patient characteristics. Non-operative management (NOM), which involves the utilization of antibiotics and aggressive intravenous hydration, and surgical appendectomy are valid treatment options for healthy adults. NOM is also ideal for poor surgical candidates. Another important consideration is the timing of surgery, i.e., the role of interval appendectomy (IA) and the possibility of delaying surgery for a few hours on index admission. IA refers to surgical removal of the appendix 8-12 weeks after the initial diagnosis of appendicitis. It is ideal in patients with a contained appendiceal perforation on initial presentation, wherein an initial nonoperative approach is preferred. Furthermore, IA can help distinguish malignant and non-malignant causes of acute appendicitis, while reducing the risk of recurrence. On the contrary, a decision to delay appendectomy for a few hours on index admission should be made based on the patients' baseline health status and severity of appendicitis. Post-operatively, surgical drain placement may help reduce postoperative complications; however, it carries an increased risk of drain occlusion, fistula formation, and paralytic ileus. Furthermore, one of the most critical aspects of appendectomy is the closure of the appendiceal stump, which can be achieved with the help of endoclips, sutures, staples, and endoloops. In this review, we discuss different aspects of management of acute appendicitis, current controversies in management, and the potential role of endoscopic appendectomy as a future treatment option.

Basic Principles and Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis and Differentiation of Pancreatic Cancer from Other Pancreatic Lesions: A Comprehensive Review of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Pancreatic lesions consist of both neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions and often pose a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge due to similar clinical and radiological features. In recent years, pancreatic lesions have been discovered more frequently as incidental findings due to the increased utilization and widespread availability of abdominal cross-sectional imaging. Therefore, it becomes imperative to establish an early and appropriate diagnosis with meticulous differentiation in an attempt to balance unnecessary treatment of benign pancreatic lesions and missing the opportunity for early intervention in malignant lesions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become an important diagnostic modality for the identification and risk stratification of pancreatic lesions due to its ability to provide detailed imaging and acquisition of tissue samples for analysis with the help of fine-needle aspiration/biopsy. The recent development of EUS-based technology, including contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound, real-time elastography-endoscopic ultrasound, miniature probe ultrasound, confocal laser endomicroscopy, and the application of artificial intelligence has significantly augmented the diagnostic accuracy of EUS as it enables better evaluation of the number, location, dimension, wall thickness, and contents of these lesions. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the role of the different types of EUS available for the diagnosis and differentiation of pancreatic cancer from other pancreatic lesions while discussing their key strengths and important limitations.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement (EUS-PPG) is a new modality where the portal pressure is measured by directly introducing a needle into the hepatic vein and portal vein. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-PPG. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify pertinent studies. The primary outcomes assessed were the technical and clinical success of EUS-PPG. Technical success was defined as successful introduction of the needle into the desired vessel, while clinical success was defined as the correlation of the stage of fibrosis on the liver biopsy to EUS-PPG, or concordance of HVPG and EUS-PPG. The secondary outcomes were pooled rates for total and individual adverse events related to EUS-PPG. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Eight cohort studies with a total of 178 patients were included in our analysis. The calculated pooled rates of technical success and clinical success were 94.6% (95%CI 88.5-97.6%; P=<0.001; I2=0) and 85.4% (95%CI 51.5-97.0%; P=0.042; I2=70), respectively. The rate of total adverse events was 10.9% (95%CI 6.5-17.7%; P=<0.001; I2=4), and 93.7% of them were mild, as defined by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Abdominal pain (11%) was the most common adverse event, followed by bleeding (3.6%). There were no cases of perforation or death reported in our study. Conclusions: EUS-PPG is a safe and effective modality for diagnosing portal hypertension. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Advanced trainee perceptions of disposable duodenoscopes and disposable endcaps: results of a nationwide survey.

INTRODUCTION: Disposable duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with disposable endcaps are being used in clinical practice to reduce or eliminate the risk of transmitting infections. The study aim was to assess perceptions and experiences regarding the use of these duodenoscopes among advanced endoscopy fellows in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: A 17-item electronic survey was sent to 74 advanced endoscopy training programs. The survey was completed by 50 participants and their responses were included for analysis. RESULTS: Most participants were from academic training programs (82.7%) and identified as being in their 7th year of post graduate training (92%; PGY-7). Participants performed an average of 414 ERCPs. 29% reported difficulty with cannulation using disposable duodenoscopes versus 15.7% with duodenoscopes with disposable endcaps (vs. standard duodenoscope). 96% of trainees perceived disposable duodenoscopes as not cost effective and 92% stated they would not use this device during independent practice. 100% of trainees stated that they would use duodenoscopes with disposable endcaps during independent practice. For their most challenging cases, 90% of trainees preferred using standard reprocessable duodenoscopes while no trainee indicated they would prefer using a disposable duodenoscope in this scenario. 82% of participants stated that disposable duodenoscopes and disposable endcaps should be used exclusively or preferentially for high-risk patients citing cost, functionality, and concerns regarding environmental impact. DISCUSSION: Advanced endoscopy fellows perceive disposable duodenoscopes as impacting technical maneuverability. Concerns about functionality, cost effectiveness and environmental impact are barriers to adoption.