Palliation of Gastric Outlet Obstruction in Case of Biliary Obstruction-A Retrospective, Multicenter Study: The B-GOOD Study.

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel and effective procedure for the management of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with more durable results when compared to enteral stenting (ES). However, data comparing EUS-GE to ES in patients already treated with EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) for distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) are lacking. We aimed to compare outcomes of EUS-GE and ES for the palliation of GOO in this specific population of patients. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients with DMBO treated by EUS-CDS and subsequent GOO treated by EUS-GE or ES from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were overall AEs rate and dysfunction of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment. Secondary outcomes included clinical success, technical success, procedure duration, length of hospital stay and relapse of GOO symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 77 consecutive patients were included in the study: 25 patients underwent EUS-GE and 52 underwent ES. AEs rate and patency outcomes of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment were comparable between the two groups (12.5% vs. 17.3%; p = 0.74). No recurrence of GOO symptoms was registered in the EUS-GE group while 11.5% of ES patients had symptoms recurrence, even if not statistically significant (p = 0.16), after a mean follow-up period of 63.5 days. CONCLUSION: EUS-GE and ES are both effective and safe for the palliation of GOO in patients already treated by EUS-CDS for DMBO with no difference in the biliary stent dysfunction rate and overall AEs. EUS-GE is associated with less recurrence of GOO symptoms.

Prevalence of Helicobacter pylori Infection and Efficacy of Bismuth Quadruple and Levofloxacin Triple Eradication Therapies: A Retrospective Analysis.

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is a widespread global health issue and a primary cause of diseases like gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcers, and gastric cancer. This study examines the prevalence of H. pylori infection in patients undergoing upper endoscopy and assesses the efficacy of bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) and levofloxacin triple therapy. A retrospective analysis of 507 gastroscopies was conducted, with indications including epigastric pain, heartburn, postprandial fullness, early satiation, and regurgitation. Rapid urease tests were performed, and endoscopic findings documented. Two treatment regimens were used: BQT as the first-line therapy and levofloxacin triple therapy as the second-line. Of the 507 patients, 68.8% were infected with H. pylori. Gastric ulcer patients had significantly higher H. pylori prevalence compared to those with small polyps, Barrett's esophagus, or normal endoscopy. Among the 310 patients who participated in follow-up interviews, 11.9% did not initiate therapy and 5.1% discontinued due to intolerance. The overall eradication rate was 88.6%, with BQT showing a higher eradication rate (89.4%) compared to levofloxacin triple therapy (83.8%). The study highlights the high prevalence of H. pylori among patients with gastrointestinal symptoms and the effectiveness of BQT as a first-line treatment.

Anesthesiologist-directed care for elective gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of an Italian multicentric prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Sedation, ranging from minimal, moderate and deep sedation to general anesthesia, improves patient comfort and procedure quality in gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE). There are currently no comprehensive recommendations on sedation practice in diagnostic and therapeutic GIE. We aimed to investigate real-life sedation practice in elective GIE. METHODS: We performed a multicentric observational study across 14 Endoscopy Units in Italy. We recorded consecutive data on all diagnostic procedures performed with Anesthesiologist-directed care (ADC) and all therapeutic procedures performed with ADC or non-Anesthesiologist sedation (NAS) over a three-month period. RESULTS: Dedicated ADC is available five days/week in 28.6% (4/14), four days/week in 21.5% (3/14), three days/week in 35.7% (5/14), two days/week in 7.1% (1/14) and one day/week in 7.1% (1/14) of participating Centers. ADC use for elective diagnostic GIE varied from 18.2% to 75.1% of the total number of procedures performed with ADC among different Centers. ADC use for elective therapeutic GIE varied from 10.8% to 98.9% of the total number of elective therapeutic procedures performed among different Centers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the lack of standardization and consequent great variability in sedation practice for elective GIE, with ADC being potentially overused for diagnostic procedures and underused for complex therapeutic procedures. A collaborative effort involving Endoscopists, Anesthesiologist and Institutions is needed to optimize sedation practice in GIE.

Technical failure during colorectal endoscopic full-thickness resection: the "through thick and thin" study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is an effective and safe technique for nonlifting colorectal lesions. Technical issues or failures with the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) system are reported, but there are no detailed data. The aim of our study was to quantify and classify FTRD technical failures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study involving 17 Italian centers with experience in advanced resection techniques and the required devices. Each center shared and classified all prospectively collected consecutive failures during colorectal EFTR using the FTRD from 2018 to 2022. The primary outcome was the technical failure rate and their classification; secondary outcomes included subsequent management, clinical success, and complications. RESULTS: Included lesions were mainly recurrent (52 %), with a mean (SD) dimension of 18.4 (7.5) mm. Among 750 EFTRs, failures occurred in 77 patients (35 women; mean [SD] age 69.4 [8.9] years). A classification was proposed: type I, snare noncutting (53 %); type II, clip misdeployment (31 %); and type III, cap misplacement (16 %). Among endoscopic treatments completed, rescue endoscopic mucosal resection was performed in 57 patients (74 %), allowing en bloc and R0 resection in 71 % and 64 %, respectively. The overall adverse event rate was 27.3 %. Pooled estimates for the rates of failure, complications, and rescue endoscopic therapy were similar for low and high volume centers (P = 0.08, P = 0.70, and P = 0.71, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal EFTR with the FTRD is a challenging technique with a non-negligible rate of technical failure and complications. Experience in rescue resection techniques and multidisciplinary management are mandatory in this setting.

EUS-Guided Gallbladder Drainage Using a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent for Acute Cholecystitis: Results of a Nationwide Study with Long-Term Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has become one of the treatments of choice for acute cholecystitis (AC) in fragile patients, scant data are available on real-life settings and long-term outcomes. METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective study including EUS-guided GBD using LAMS for AC in 19 Italian centers from June 2014 to July 2020. The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success, and the secondary outcomes were the rate of adverse events (AE) and long-term follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 116 patients (48.3% female) were included, with a mean age of 82.7 ± 11 years. LAMS were placed, transgastric in 44.8% of cases, transduodenal in 53.3% and transjejunal in 1.7%, in patients with altered anatomy. Technical success was achieved in 94% and clinical success in 87.1% of cases. The mean follow-up was 309 days. AEs occurred in 12/116 pts (10.3%); 8/12 were intraprocedural, while 1 was classified as early (<15 days) and 3 as delayed (>15 days). According to the ASGE lexicon, two (16.7%) were mild, three (25%) were moderate, and seven (58.3%) were severe. No fatal AEs occurred. In subgroup analysis of 40 patients with a follow-up longer than one year, no recurrence of AC was observed. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GBD had high technical and clinical success rates, despite the non-negligible rate of AEs, thus representing an effective treatment option for fragile patients.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections and bleeding risk: a propensity matched study.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) using the Hot-Axios device has recently been associated with a significant risk of bleeding. This adverse event (AE) seems to occur less frequently with the use of a different device, the Spaxus stent. The aim of the current study was to compare the rates of bleeding between the two stents. METHODS: Patients admitted for treatment of PFCs by EUS plus lumen-apposing metal stent in 18 endoscopy referral centers between 10 July 2019 and 28 February 2022 were identified and their outcomes compared using a propensity-matching analysis. RESULTS: 363 patients were evaluated. After a 1-to-1 propensity score match, 264 patients were selected (132 per group). The technical and clinical success rates were comparable between the two groups. Significantly more bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred in the Hot-Axios group than in the Spaxus group (6.8% vs. 1.5%; P = 0.03); stent type was a significant predictor of bleeding in both univariate and multivariate regression analyses (P = 0.03 and 0.04, respectively). Bleeding necessitating arterial embolization did not however differ significantly between the two groups (3.0% vs. 0%; P = 0.12). In addition, the Hot-Axios was associated with a significantly higher rate of overall AEs compared with the Spaxus stent (9.8% vs. 3.0%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that, in patients with PFCs, bleeding requiring transfusion and/or intervention occurred significantly more frequently with use of the Hot-Axios stent than with the Spaxus stent, although this was not the case for bleeding requiring embolization.

Current trends of minimally invasive therapy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

Introduction: The minimally invasive approach of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures for cholecystocholedocholithiasis, such as EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV), and EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), is affirmed as an effective treatment for patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) who are unfit for surgery and for patients with common bile duct stones (CBDSs) who have experienced a previous ERCP failure. Furthermore, in cases of difficult CBDS extraction during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), cholangioscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (CS-EHL) has showed optimal results. The main objective of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of EUS-GBD and percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) in patients with AC who are unfit for surgery. We also aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EUS-GBD, EUS-BD, and EUS-RV following ERCP failure and the effectiveness of CS-EHL for difficult CBDS extraction in our hospital. The secondary aim was to examine the safety of these procedures. Materials and methods: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of all the EUS-GBD, PT-GBD, EUS-BD, EUS-RV, and CS-EHL procedures, which were prospectively collected in the gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy unit and the general surgery unit from January 2020 to June 2023. The efficacy was expressed in terms of technical and clinical success rates, while safety was assessed based on the rate of adverse events (AEs). Results: We enrolled 83 patients with AC and high surgical risk. Among them, 57 patients (68.7%, 24/57 male, median age 85 ± 11 years) underwent EUS-GBD, and 26 (31.3%, 19/26 male, median age 83 ± 7 years) underwent PT-GBD. The technical and clinical success rates were 96.5 and 100% for EUS-GBD, and 96.1 and 92% for PT-GBD. The AEs for EUS-GBD were 1.7%, and for PT-GBD, it was 12%. ERCP for CBDS extraction failed in 77 patients. Among them, 73 patients (94.8%) underwent EUS-RV with technical and clinical success rates of 72.6% (53/73) and 100%, respectively. No AEs were reported. Four out of 77 patients were directly treated with EUS-BD for pyloric inflammatory stenosis. In 12 patients (16.4%), following unsuccessful EUS-RV with a CBD diameter ≥ 12 mm, an EUS-BD was performed. Both technical and clinical success rates for EUS-BD were 100%, and no AEs were reported. EUS-GBD was the treatment of choice for the remaining 8 (10.9%) patients after failure of both ERCP and EUS-RV. The procedure had high technical and clinical success rates (both at 100%), and no AEs were reported. The 12 difficult CBDS extraction treated with CS-EHL also showed high technical and clinical success rates (both at 100%), with no reported AEs. Conclusion: The minimally invasive approach for cholecystocholedocholithiasis, especially EUS-guided procedures, had high efficacy and safety in treating AC in high-risk surgical patients and CBDS extraction after a previously unsuccessful ERCP.

Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainages has marked a turning point in the field of interventional ultrasound and it is gathering worldwide diffusion in different clinical settings. Nevertheless, the procedure may conceal unexpected pitfalls. LAMS misdeployment is the most frequent cause of technical failure and it can be considered a procedure-related adverse event when it hampers the conclusion of the planned procedure or results in significant clinical consequences. Stent misdeployment can be managed successfully by endoscopic rescue maneuvers to allow the completion of the procedure. To date, no standardized indication is available to guide an appropriate rescue strategy depending on the type of procedure or of misdeployment. AIM: To evaluate the incidence of LAMS misdeployment during EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and pancreatic fluid collections drainage (EUS-PFC) and to describe the endoscopic rescue strategies adopted under the circumstance. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature on PubMed by searching for studies published up to October 2022. The search was carried out using the exploded medical subject heading terms "lumen apposing metal stent", "LAMS", "endoscopic ultrasound" and "choledochoduodenostomy" or "gallbladder" or "pancreatic fluid collections". We included in the review on-label EUS-guided procedures namely EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC. Only those publications reporting EUS-guided LAMS positioning were considered. The studies reporting a technical success rate of 100% and other procedure-related adverse events were considered to calculate the overall rate of LAMS misdeployment, while studies not reporting the causes of technical failure were excluded. Case reports were considered only for the extraction of data regarding the issues of misdeployment and rescue techniques. The following data were collected from each study: Author, year of publication, study design, study population, clinical indication, technical success, reported number of misdeployment, stent type and size, flange misdeployed and type of rescue strategy. RESULTS: The overall technical success rate of EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC was 93.7%, 96.1%, and 98.1% respectively. Significant rates of LAMS misdeployment have been reported for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC drainage, respectively 5.8%, 3.4%, and 2.0%. Endoscopic rescue treatment was feasible in 86.8%, 80%, and 96.8% of cases. Non endoscopic rescue strategies were required only in 10.3%, 16% and 3.2% for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. The endoscopic rescue techniques described were over-the-wire deployment of a new stent through the created fistula tract in 44.1%, 8% and 64.5% and stent-in-stent in 23.5%, 60%, and 12.9%, respectively for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. Further therapeutic option were endoscopic rendezvous in 11.8% of EUS-CDS and repeated procedure of EUS-guided drainage in 16.1% of EUS-PFC. CONCLUSION: LAMS misdeployment is a relatively common adverse event in EUS-guided drainages. There is no consensus on the best rescue approach in these cases and the choice is often made by the endoscopist relying upon the clinical scenario, anatomical characteristics, and local expertise. In this review, we investigated the misdeployment of LAMS for each of the on-label indications focusing on the rescue therapies used, with the aim of providing useful data for endoscopists and to improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Replacement of Adalimumab Originator to Adalimumab Biosimilar for a Non-Medical Reason in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Real-life Comparison of Adalimumab Biosimilars Currently Available in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.

Adalimumab Biosimilar GP2017 versus Adalimumab Originator in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

The approval of adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has reduced the cost of treatment. While several ADA biosimilars are currently available, comparative data on the ADA biosimilar GP2017 (HyrimozTM) and its originator (HumiraTM) in IBD are lacking. We compared the efficacy and safety of GP2017 versus originator in IBD outpatients in an Italian real-life setting. This retrospective analysis enrolled consecutive IBD patients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was assessed with the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the induction of remission and the safety of GP2017 versus ADA originator. One hundred and thirty-four patients (30.6% with UC and 69.4% with CD, median age 38 years) were enrolled: 62 (46.3%) patients were treated with GP2017, and 72 (53.7%) with ADA originator; 118 (88.1%) patients were naïve to ADA. Clinical remission was obtained in 105 (78.4%) patients, during a median follow-up of 12 months, 82.3% and 75% in the GP2017 and ADA originator groups, respectively (p = 0.311). Treatment was well tolerated in both groups. This analysis of real-world data suggests that GP2017 and its originator are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.

Digital single-operator cholangioscopy in diagnostic and therapeutic bilio-pancreatic diseases: A prospective, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Digital single-operator cholangioscopy (D-SOC) is an endoscopic procedure that is increasingly used for the management of bilio-pancreatic diseases. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of D-SOC for diagnostic and therapeutic indications. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective study(January 2016-June 2019) across eighteen tertiary centers. The primary outcome was procedural success of D-SOC. Secondary outcomes were: D-SOC visual assessment and diagnostic yield of SpyBite biopsy in cases of biliary strictures, stone clearance rate in cases of difficult biliary stones, rate of adverse events(AEs) for all indications. RESULTS: D-SOC was performed in 369 patients (201(54,5%) diagnostic and 168(45,5%)therapeutic). Overall, procedural success rate was achieved in 360(97,6%) patients. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy in biliary strictures were: 88,5%, 77,3%, 83,3%, 84,1% and 83,6% for D-SOC visual impression; 80,2%, 92,6%, 95,1%, 72,5% and 84,7% for the SpyBite biopsy, respectively. For difficult biliary stones, complete duct clearance was obtained in 92,1% patients (82,1% in a single session). Overall, AEs occurred in 37(10%) cases.The grade of AEs was mild or moderate for all cases, except one which was fatal. CONCLUSION: D-SOC is effective for diagnostic and therapeutic indications.Most of the AEs were minor and managed conservatively, even though a fatal event has happened that is not negligible and should be considered before using D-SOC.

Perceived Feasibility of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenteric Anastomosis: An Italian Survey.

Background and Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenteric anastomosis (EUS-GEA) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to surgery across several indications. The aim of this survey is to investigate the perceived feasibility of this technique nationwide, within a working group skilled in interventional endosonography. Materials and Methods: Endoscopists were asked to answer to 49 items on a web-based questionnaire about expertise, peri- and intra-procedural aspects in the three main settings of EUS-GEA performance, budget/refund, and future perspectives. Statistical analysis was performed through SPSS® (IBM Corp. Released 2017. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). Results: Sixty endosonographers belonging to forty Italian centers were I-EUS app users and were all invited to participate. In total, 29 participants from 24 Italian centers completed the survey. All the participants were endosonographers with a broad range of experience both in the field of EUS (only 10.3% with more than 20 years of experience) and duodenal stenting (only 6.9% placed more than 10 stents in 2020), whereas 86.2% also performed ERCP. A total of 27.6% of participants performed EUS-GEA (3.4% more than 20 during their career); on the other hand, 79.3% of participants routinely performed drainage of peri-pancreatic fluid collections, 62.1% performed biliary drainage, and 62.1% performed gallbladder drainage with LAMS. A total of 89.7% of participants thought that EUS-GEA could be useful in their daily clinical practice, with 100% concluding that this procedure will need to be performed in referral centers in the near future; however, in 55.2% of cases, organizational obstacles may occur and affect the diffusion of the procedure. With regard to indications: 44.8% of participants performed the procedure with palliative intent for malignant indication (96.6% pancreatic adenocarcinoma), and 13.6% also for benign indication. A total of 20.7% of participants experienced adverse events (none severe or fatal, 66.6% moderate). A total of 62.1% of participants considered the procedure technically challenging, although 82.8% considered the risk of adverse events acceptable when considering the benefit. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first survey assessing the perceived feasibility of EUS-guided anastomoses after its advent. There are currently wide variations in practice nationwide, which demonstrate a need to define technical, qualitative, and peri-procedural requirements to carry out this procedure. Therefore, a standardization of these requirements is needed in order to overcome the technical, economical, and organizational obstacles relative to its diffusion.

Spyglass percutaneous transhepatic lithotripsy of symptomatic recurrent lithiasis of the intrahepatic bile duct with distal stenosis.

In patients with symptomatic intrahepatic biliary lithiasis, the treatment is usually discussed by a multidisciplinary team. Although hepatectomy is considered as definitive treatment, when lobar atrophy is absent, endoscopic procedures are frequently proposed as first-line treatment due the low invasiveness and for sparing liver parenchyma. Percutaneous route is used in case of peroral approach failure. We present a case of recurrent symptomatic intrahepatic biliary lithiasis of the right posterior hepatic duct, sustained by downstream biliary stenosis. Peroral cholangioscopy failed to visualize the stone for the accompanying stenosis. Thus, the patient was successfully treated with percutaneous transhepatic lithotripsy performed with Spyglass direct visualization system II (Boston Scientific Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, USA). During the procedure, the biopsy of the biliary stenosis revealed fibrosis, which was treated by cholangioplasty with cutting balloon. After 15 months, the patient is asymptomatic, with moderate residual stenosis in absence of calculi at follow-up magnetic resonance cholangiography.

Comparison of performances of infliximab biosimilars CT-P13 versus SB2 in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint. RESULTS: 197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.

A multicenter survey on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during the COVID-19 pandemic in northern and central Italy.

Background and study aims COVID-19 has dramatically impacted endoscopy practice because upper endoscopy procedures can be aerosol-generating. Most elective procedures have been rescheduled. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is frequently performed in emergency or urgent settings in which rescheduling is not possible. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ERCP in Italy during the SARS-CoV-2 lockdown, in areas with high incidence of COVID-19. Patients and methods We performed a retrospective survey of centers performing ERCP in high COVID-19 prevalence areas in Italy to collect information regarding clinical data from patients undergoing ERCP, staff, case-volume and organization of endoscopy units from March 8, 2020 to April 30, 2020. Results We collected data from 31 centers and 804 patients. All centers adopted a triage and/or screening protocol for SARS-CoV-2 and performed follow-up of patients 2 weeks after the procedure. ERCP case-volume was reduced by 44.1 % compared to the respective 2019 timeframe. Of the 804 patients undergoing ERCP, 22 (2.7 %) were positive for COVID-19. Adverse events occurred at a similar rate to previously published data. Of the patients, endoscopists, and nurses, 1.6 %, 11.7 %, and 4.9 %, respectively, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at follow up. Only 38.7 % of centers had access to a negative-pressure room for ERCP. Conclusion The case-volume reduction for ERCP during lockdown was lower than for other gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. No definitive conclusions can be drawn about the percentage of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and healthcare workers observed after ERCP. Appropriate triage and screening of patients and adherence to society recommendations are paramount.

Gut microbiota profiles and characterization of cultivable fungal isolates in IBS patients.

Studies so far conducted on irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have been focused mainly on the role of gut bacterial dysbiosis in modulating the intestinal permeability, inflammation, and motility, with consequences on the quality of life. Limited evidences showed a potential involvement of gut fungal communities. Here, the gut bacterial and fungal microbiota of a cohort of IBS patients have been characterized and compared with that of healthy subjects (HS). The IBS microbial community structure differed significantly compared to HS. In particular, we observed an enrichment of bacterial taxa involved in gut inflammation, such as Enterobacteriaceae, Streptococcus, Fusobacteria, Gemella, and Rothia, as well as depletion of health-promoting bacterial genera, such as Roseburia and Faecalibacterium. Gut microbial profiles in IBS patients differed also in accordance with constipation. Sequence analysis of the gut mycobiota showed enrichment of Saccharomycetes in IBS. Culturomics analysis of fungal isolates from feces showed enrichment of Candida spp. displaying from IBS a clonal expansion and a distinct genotypic profiles and different phenotypical features when compared to HS of Candida albicans isolates. Alongside the well-characterized gut bacterial dysbiosis in IBS, this study shed light on a yet poorly explored fungal component of the intestinal ecosystem, the gut mycobiota. Our results showed a differential fungal community in IBS compared to HS, suggesting potential for new insights on the involvement of the gut mycobiota in IBS. KEY POINTS: • Comparison of gut microbiota and mycobiota between IBS and healthy subjects • Investigation of cultivable fungi in IBS and healthy subjects • Candida albicans isolates result more virulent in IBS subjects compared to healthy subjects.

Factors That Affect Adequacy of Colon Cleansing for Colonoscopy in Hospitalized Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hospitalization is associated with inadequate colon cleansing before colonoscopy. We aimed to identify factors associated to inadequate colon cleansing among inpatients, and to derive and validate a model to identify inpatients with inadequate cleansing. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study at 12 hospitals in Italy. Consecutive adult inpatients scheduled for colonoscopy for any indication were enrolled from February through May 2019 (derivation cohort, n = 1016) and from June through August 2019 (validation cohort, n = 508). Inadequate cleansing was defined as Boston bowel preparation scale scores below 2 in any colon segment. We performed multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with inadequate cleansing. RESULTS: In the combined cohorts, 1032 patients (68%) had adequate colon cleansing. Physicians' meetings to optimize bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.65), written and oral instructions to patients (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36-0.65), admission to gastroenterology unit (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.98), split-dose regimens (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.20-0.35), a 1-liter polyethylene glycol-based bowel purge (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.65), and 75% or more intake of bowel preparation (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05-0.15) significantly reduced odds of inadequate colon cleansing. Alternatively, bedridden status (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.55-2.98), constipation (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.55-3.0), diabetes mellitus (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.18-2.20), use of anti-psychotic drugs (OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.62-6.56), and 7 or more days of hospitalization (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) increased risk of inadequate colon cleansing. We developed a model to identify patients with inadequate cleaning using data from patients in the derivation cohort and tested it in the validation cohort. Calibration values were P = .218 for the discrimination cohort and P = .232 for the validation cohort. Discrimination values were c-statistic, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74-0.81) for the discrimination cohort and c-statistic, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.78) for the validation cohort. We developed app for use by clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective observational study, we identified setting-, patient- and preparation-related factors that affect colon cleansing among inpatients. We derived and validated a model to identify patients with inadequate preparation and developed an app for clinicians. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT03925506.

The diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in hospitalized patients. An observational multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy demands a considerable amount of resources, and little is known about its diagnostic yield among inpatients. AIMS: To assess indications, diagnostic yield and findings of colonoscopy for inpatients, and to identify risk factors for relevant findings and cancer. METHODS: Multicentre, prospective, observational study including 12 hospitals. Consecutive adult inpatients undergoing colonoscopy were evaluated from February through November 2019. RESULTS: 1,302 inpatients underwent colonoscopy. Diagnostic yield for relevant findings and cancer was 586 (45%) and 112 (8.6%), respectively. Adequate colon cleansing was achieved in 896 (68.8%) patients. Split-dose/same-day regimen was adopted in 847 (65%) patients. Factors associated to relevant findings were age ≥70 years (RR 1.32), male gender (RR 1.11), blood loss (RR 1.22) and adequate cleansing (RR 1.63). Age ≥70 years (RR 2.08), no previous colonoscopy (RR 2.69) and split-dose/same-day regimen (RR 1.59) significantly increased cancer detection. Implementing adequate cleansing and split-dose/same-day regimen in all patients would increase the diagnostic yield for any relevant findings and cancer from 43% to 70% and from 6% to 10%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Relevant colorectal diseases and cancer were frequent among inpatients. Factors associated with detection of relevant findings were identified. Adequate colon cleansing and split-dose/same-day regimen significantly increased colonoscopy diagnostic yield.