Outcomes of endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection in laterally spreading colorectal polyps: A tertiary care centre experience from India.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection (ESD) is an established endoscopic modality for the management of colorectal polyps. However, there are no studies regarding the outcomes of ESD from India. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the outcomes of ESD in patients with adenomatous polyps in the colon and rectum. METHODS: Data of consecutive patients who underwent ESD for colorectal polyps from 2018 to 2021 were analyzed, retrospectively. The primary outcome of the study was the technical success of ESD. The secondary outcomes included the rate of histologically complete resection (R0), adverse events and recurrence. RESULTS: Seventy patients (63.5 years, 60% males) underwent ESD for polyps in colon and rectum. A majority were located in rectum (80%) and sigmoid colon (15.7%). Narrow band classification of the polyps was Japanese Narrow Band Imaging Expert Team (JNET)-2a in 50 (71.4%) and JNET-2b in 13 (18.6%) patients. ESD was technically successful in 64 (91.4%) patients using conventional technique (72.8%) and pocket or tunnelling technique (18.6%). There were no major adverse events. Histologically RO was achieved in 58 (82.8%) patients and deep sub-mucosal invasion was noted in 12 patients. At a median follow-up of 19 (interquartile range [IQR] 15-27) months, recurrence was noticed in four (5.7%) patients all of which could be managed endoscopically. CONCLUSION: ESD, performed at a tertiary care centre in India, yields high rates of technical success and histologically R0, with a relatively low incidence of adverse events and recurrences.

Pre-medication with simethicone and N-acetyl cysteine for improving mucosal visibility during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Diagnostic performance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be compromized due to adherent mucus and foam. In this study, we aimed at assessing the impact of premedication on mucosal visibility during endoscopy. METHODS: This is a double-blinded (patient and investigator), randomized trial conducted at a tertiary care centre. Patients were randomized into four groups: A (water), B (simethicone [S]), C (N-acetyl cysteine [NAC]), D (S + NAC). Premedication solutions were administered 10-30 minutes before endoscopy and mucosal visibility graded from 1 (best) to 4 (worst) (1 best, 4 worst). Total mucosal visibility scores (TMVS) from six sites ranged from 6 (best) to 24 (worst) points. The primary outcome of study was comparison of TMVS between simethicone and combination (S + NAC) premedication groups. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and impact of endoscopy timing on TMVS. RESULTS: Total 800 patients (39 years, 68.8% males) were randomized into four groups. Median TMVS were significantly lower in groups B (7 [6-8]) and D (8 [6-9]) as compared to A (11 [9-13]) and C (10 [8-12]). Proportion of cases with adequate gastric mucosal visibility (score < 7) was 26% in group A, 71% in group B, 36% in group C and 79% in group D. There was no difference in TMVS in groups A and C (p = 0.137). TMVS were significantly lower in late (> 20-30 minutes) vs. early (10-20 minutes) endoscopy sub-group (8 [7-11] vs, 9 ([7-11], p = 0.001). However, TMVS were similar between group B and group D in early endoscopy group (p = 0.451). There was no significant difference in the lesion detection rate among the different premedication drugs (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Premedication with simethicone or combination (simethicone and NAC) significantly improves mucosal visibility during EGD. If early endoscopy is indicated, simethicone provides similar mucosal visibility and may be an effective alternative to combined premedication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05951712.

Comparison of Short Versus Long Esophageal Myotomy in Cases With Idiopathic Achalasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an established treatment for achalasia. The technique of POEM is still evolving and the impact of length of esophageal myotomy on the outcomes of POEM is not known. In this study, we aim to compare the outcomes of short (3 cm) versus long (6 cm and above) esophageal myotomy in patients undergoing POEM for achalasia cardia. METHODS: Consecutive patients with idiopathic achalasia (type I and II) were randomized to receive short (3 cm) or long esophageal myotomy (≥ 6 cm). Both groups were compared for clinical success, operative time, adverse events, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). RESULTS: Seventy-one consecutive patients with type I and II achalasia underwent POEM with short (n = 34) or long (n = 37) esophageal myotomy techniques. Mean length of esophageal myotomy in short and long groups was 2.76 ± 0.41 and 7.97 ± 2.40, respectively (P < 0.001). Mean operative time was significantly shorter in short myotomy group (44.03 ± 13.78 minutes and 72.43 ± 27.28 minutes, P < 0.001). Clinical success was comparable in both arms at 1-year (Eckardt score 0.935 ± 0.929 vs 0.818 ± 0.983, P = 0.627). Improvement in objective parameters including integrated relaxation pressure and barium column height at 5 minutes was similar in both groups. GERD was detected in 50.88% patients with no significant difference in short and long myotomy groups (44.44% vs 56.67%, P = 0.431). CONCLUSIONS: A short esophageal myotomy is non-inferior to long myotomy with regards to clinical success, adverse events, and GERD in cases with type I and II achalasia. Reduced operating duration favors short esophageal myotomy in these patients.

Single balloon enteroscopy in children for evaluation of small bowel diseases in children: A large, tertiary center study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Device assisted enteroscopy is the cornerstone for small bowel evaluation. However, the data are limited in pediatric patients. In this study, we aim to evaluate the safety and utility of single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) in children. METHODS: The data of children (≤18-years) who underwent SBE from November 2010 to July 2020 was analyzed, retrospectively. The safety and diagnostic yield of SBE were assessed. RESULTS: 189-SBE procedures (males 117, mean age 15.1 ± 2.76, range 3-18 years) were performed in 174-children. The indications for SBE were chronic abdominal pain in 119 (68.4%), gastrointestinal bleed 17 (9.8%), chronic diarrhea 17 (9.8%) and vomiting 13 (7.5%). Antegrade, retrograde and combined SBE were performed in 98 (51.8%), 77 (40.7%), 7 (3.7%) children, respectively. The mean length of small bowel intubation in antegrade and retrograde SBE groups were 168.9 ± 58.6 cm and 120.7 ± 52.1 cm, respectively. Overall, a positive finding was seen in 117 (67.2%) cases. The most common findings were ileal and jejunal ulcers with or without strictures in 76 (64.9%) children. A total of 18 therapeutic enteroscopic procedures were performed. There were no major adverse events. CONCLUSION: SBE is a safe and effective procedure for the evaluation and management of small bowel diseases in children.

Outcomes of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection in upper gastrointestinal sub-epithelial tumors.

BACKGROUND: Submucosal tunneling techniques have expanded the horizon of therapeutic endoscopy. One such procedure, submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER), enables the endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal (GI) sub-epithelial tumors. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of STER in patients with sub-epithelial lesions localized to the upper GI tract. METHODS: Consecutive subjects with a sub-epithelial lesion of ≥ 1 cm size in the upper GI tract were enrolled in the study. STER was performed using the standard technique in an endoscopy suite. A modified technique (double-opening STER) was used in cases with difficult en bloc resection of the tumor. Outcome measures included technical success, en bloc resection rates, adverse events, and recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients with sub-epithelial tumors were evaluated for STER. Of them, 44 subjects (mean age 44.68 ± 12.82, 52.3% males) underwent standard STER. Majority (31, 70.4%) of the lesions were located in the esophagus and cardia. Technical success and en bloc removal of the tumor were achieved in 97.7% and 88.4% of cases, respectively. There was no major adverse event. Minor adverse events were recorded in 7 (15.9%) cases. Majority (31, 70.4%) of the tumors originated from muscularis propria, followed by submucosa (8, 18.2%) and muscularis mucosa (5, 11.4%). The most common histological diagnosis was leiomyoma (59.1%) followed by GI stromal tumors (20.4%). At a mean follow up of 12.36 ± 7.63 months, there was no incidence of tumor recurrence in en bloc as well as piecemeal resection groups. CONCLUSION: STER is a safe and efficacious procedure for sub-epithelial tumors in the upper GI tract. Novel strategies need to be developed to ensure en bloc removal of large lesions.