[Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Precancerous and Early Cancerous Lesions in the Rectum]. / Endoskopische Resektionsverfahren von flächigen Präkanzerosen und Frühkarzinomen im Rektum.

Today, endoscopy plays a decisive role not only in the detection of colorectal adenomas and carcinomas, but also in the treatment of precancerous lesions, in particular flat adenomas and early carcinomas. In recent years, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become increasingly important alongside classic polypectomy and mucosal resection after saline injection using a snare (EMR). Using ESD the lesion is marked, injected submucosally using viscous substances and the mucosa incised and tunneled with a transparent cap and a fine diathermy knife. Particularly in the case of widespread and high-risk lesions ESD enables a quasi-surgical "en bloc" resection almost regardless of size, with a histological R0 resection rate of far over 90% in specialized centers. ESD enables an excellent histopathological evaluation and has a low recurrence risk of 1-3%. Endoscopic full-thickness resection using a dedicated device (FTRD system) represents another addition to the armamentarium. It can be used for circumscribed submucosal, suspicious or scarred changes up to 2 cm in the middle and upper rectum. Endoscopic intermuscular dissection (EID) enables histopathological analysis of the complete submucosa beyond the mucosa and upper submucosal layer by including the circular inner muscle layer within the resection specimen. It reduces basal R1 situations and offers a new perspective for T1 carcinomas through curative, organ-preserving endoscopic therapy, especially in the case of deep submucosal infiltration alone, without other risk factors for metastases. Indications, the procedure itself and significance of the various techniques for premalignant and early malignant lesions in the rectum are presented.

Comparison between traumatic and atraumatic over-the-scope clips in patients with duodenal ulcer bleeding: a retrospective analysis with propensity score-based matching.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) substantially improved the endoscopic armamentarium for the treatment of severe GI bleeding and can potentially overcome limitations of standard clips. Data indicate a superiority of OTSCs in hemostasis as first- and second-line therapy. However, the impact of the OTSC designs, in particular the traumatic (-t) or atraumatic (-a) type, in duodenal ulcer bleeding has not been analyzed so far. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective collected database from 2009 to 2020 of 6 German endoscopic centers. All patients who underwent emergency endoscopy and were treated using an OTSC for duodenal ulcer bleeding were included. OTSC-t and OTSC-a patients were compared by the Fisher exact test, χ2 test, or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. A propensity score-based 1:1 matching was performed to obtain equal distribution of baseline characteristics in both groups. RESULTS: The entire cohort comprised 173 patients (93 OTSC-a, 80 OTSC-t). Age, gender, anticoagulant therapy, Rockall score, and treatment regimen had similar distributions in the 2 groups. However, the OTSC-t group showed significantly more active bleeding ulcers (Forrest Ia/b). Matching identified 132 patients (66 in both groups) with comparable baseline characteristics. Initial bleeding hemostasis (OTSC-a, 90.9%; OTSC-t, 87.9%; P = .82) and 72-hour mortality (OTSC-a, 4.5%; OTSC-t, 6.0%; P > .99) were not significantly different, but the OTSC-t group revealed a clearly higher rate of recurrent bleeding (34.9% vs 7.6%, P < .001) and necessity of red blood cell transfusions (5.1 ± 3.4 vs 2.5 ± 2.4 concentrates, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: For OTSC use, the OTSC-a should be the preferred option for duodenal ulcer bleeding.

Full-Thickness Resection Device for Complex Colorectal Lesions in High-Risk Patients as a Last-Resort Endoscopic Treatment: Initial Clinical Experience and Review of the Current Literature.

The full-thickness resection device (FTRD) is a novel endoscopic device approved for the resection of colorectal lesions. This case-series describes the device and its use in high-risk patients with colorectal lesions and provides an overview of the potential indications in recently published data. Between December 2014 and September 2015, 3 patients underwent endoscopic full thickness resection using the FTRD for colorectal lesions: 1 case for a T1 adenocarcinoma in the region of a surgical anastomosis after recto-sigmoidectomy, 1 case for a non-lifting colonic adenoma with low-grade dysplasia in an 89-year old patient and 1 for a recurrent adenoma with high-grade dysplasia in a young patient with ulcerative rectocolitis who was under immunosuppression after renal transplantation. Both technical and clinical success rates were achieved in all cases. The size of removed lesions ranged from 9 to 30 mm. Overall, the most frequent indication in the literature has been for lifting or non-lifting adenoma, submucosal tumors, neuroendocrin tumors, incomplete endoscopic resection (R1) or T1 carcinoma. Colorectal FTRD is a feasible technique for the treatment of colorectal lesions and represents a minimally invasive alternative for either surgical or conventional endoscopic resection strategies.

[The revised version of standard terminology in gastroenterological endoscopy - result of a consensus project of the german society for gastroenterology, digestive and metabolic diseases]. / Neufassung der Standard-Terminologie in der gastroenterologischen Endoskopie ­ Ergebnis eines Konsensusprojekts der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten.

A uniform and comprehensive terminology is essential in the correct documentation of diagnostic or therapeutic endoscopic procedure. In the German-speaking world, the standard terminology available so far is based on a previous version published in 1999. Therefore, the German Society for Gastroenterology, Digestive and Metabolic Diseases (DGVS) has undergone a comprehensive revision and re-structuring of the terminology. This appeared mandatory due to various changes, new diagnoses and new endoscopic procedures. The suggestions drawn up by individual working groups were approved by consensus and are now available as an online document (https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121167) for modifying current software systems. In order to ensure an up-to-date documentation in the future, it was decided that annual updates will be performed by the DGVS to check respective software packages for modifications and new contents.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus percutaneous transhepatic drainage for malignant biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a retrospective expertise-based study from two centers.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is widely performed as a salvage procedure in patients with unresectable malignant obstruction of the common bile duct (CBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or in case of surgically altered anatomy. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EU-HGS) is a more recently introduced alternative to relieve malignant obstructive jaundice. The aim of this prospective observational study was to compare the outcome, efficacy and adverse events of EU-HGS and PTBD. METHODS: From April 2012 to August 2015, consecutive patients with malignant CBD obstruction who underwent EU-HGS or PTBD in two tertiary-care referral centers were included. The primary endpoint was the clinical success rate. Secondary endpoints were technical success, overall survival, procedure-related adverse events, incidence of adverse events, and reintervention rate. RESULTS: A total of 51 patients (EU-HGS, n = 31; PTBD, n = 20) were included. Median survival was 71 days (range 25-75th percentile; 30-95) for the EU-HGS group and 78 days (range 25-75th percentile; 42-108) for the PTBD group (p = 0.99). Technical success was achieved in all patients in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 25 (86%) of 31 patients in the EU-HGS group and in 15 (83%) of 20 patients in the PTBD group (p = 0.88). There was no difference in adverse events rates between the two groups (EU-HGS: 16%; PTBD: 10%) (p = 0.69). Four deaths within 1 month (two hemorrhagic and two septic) were considered procedure related (two in the EU-HGS group and two in the PTBD group). Overall reintervention rate was significantly lower after EU-HGS (n = 2) than after PTBD (n = 21) (p = 0.0001). Length of hospital stay was shorter after EU-HGS (8 days versus 15 days; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: EU-HGS can be an effective and safe mini invasive-procedure alternative to PTBD, with similar success and adverse-event rates, but with lower rates of reintervention and length of hospitalization.

Trilumenal hybrid-NOS proctocolectomy.

BACKGROUND: The authors hypothesized that by combining transumbilical, transvaginal, and transrectal accesses, complex bowel operations, including proctocolectomy with restorative J pouch [corrected] reconstruction, might be possible. METHODS AND RESULTS: Out of a series of 30 natural orifice surgery (NOS) operations performed at the authors' institution in the past 12 months, proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch reconstruction was planned for 3 female patients (31 years, BMI = 30; 50 years, BMI = 31; 30 years, BMI = 21) with extensive disease of ulcerative colitis, and they were operated via a 3-lumenal NOS approach. The first 2 patients received a proctocolectomy with a J-pouch formation. A 3-stage procedure was planned for the third patient, and she received a total colectomy. The colonic specimen was retrieved through the anus obviating dilation of the vagina. The J-pouch was prepared through a horizontal 2-cm incision, which later served as the protective loop ileostomy site. CONCLUSION: Trilumenal NOS proctocolectomy is feasible and safe providing a solution to overcome the lack of triangulation using a single-lumen approach.

Reduced medication dependency and improved symptoms and quality of life 12 months after enteryx implantation for gastroesophageal reflux.

BACKGROUND: The need is well recognized for additional data on endoluminal therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This prospective multicenter clinical trial was designed to assess safety and effectiveness of Enteryx, a nonresorbable copolymer implanted into the lower esophagus, in reducing usage of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and improving reflux symptoms and quality of life. METHODS: Enteryx implantation was performed under fluoroscopic visualization without general anesthesia in 93 patients with symptomatic GERD responsive to and relapsing upon cessation of PPI therapy. Subjective and objective data were collected up to 12 months postprocedure. The criterion for treatment success was reduction in PPI dosage of > or =50%. RESULTS: At 12 months, treatment success was attained in 86% (confidence interval, 77%-93%) of 74 evaluable patients and elimination of PPI therapy in 65% (confidence interval, 53%-76%). The treatment success rate by intent-to-treat analysis was 69% (confidence interval, 58%-78%). Reflux-related heartburn (P < 0.0001), regurgitation symptoms (P = 0.0005), and physical (P < 0.0001) and mental quality of life (P = 0.0012) scores improved. The most frequent complications were chest pain (77%), dysphagia/odynophagia (27%), and sensation of fever (26%). CONCLUSIONS: Enteryx implantation provides an effective and safe alternative for management of gastroesophageal reflux, reducing medication dependency and symptoms and enhancing quality of life.

Low-molecular-weight heparin does not prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that heparin has anti-inflammatory effects that could prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. The aim of this investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study was to determine whether low-molecular-weight heparin can prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. METHODS: Patients at increased risk for acute post-ERCP pancreatitis based on assessment of known risk factors were randomized to receive low-molecular-weight heparin (Certoparin 3000 IU subcutaneously) or placebo (saline solution 0.3 mL subcutaneously) the day before ERCP. The drug was given 2 hours before and 22 hours after ERCP. Documentation and follow-up included patient history, risk factors for acute post-ERCP pancreatitis, procedure-related data, assessment of pain (visual analogue scale, need for pain medication), laboratory findings before and after ERCP (0, 4, and 24 hours), as well as post-ERCP complications. The two-sided Fisher exact test was used for statistical comparison, and a p value < or =0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 458 patients were enrolled in the study. Data from 10 patients could not be evaluated, leaving 221 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 227 in the placebo group (total 448 patients; 135 men, 313 women; mean age 58 [15] years). Low-molecular-weight heparin and placebo groups were comparable with regard to risk factors for acute post-ERCP pancreatitis (gender distribution, age <65 years, history of pancreatitis, pancreas divisum, disorders of sphincter of Oddi) and procedure-related data (difficult cannulation, diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP, needle-knife papillotomy, endoscopic sphincterotomy, biliary or pancreatic procedure, pancreatic contrast injection, success and final diagnosis of ERCP). Acute post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 8.5% (38/448), with one death resulting from severe pancreatitis. Low-molecular-weight heparin offered no benefit compared with placebo based on the frequency of acute post-ERCP pancreatitis (low-molecular-weight heparin, 18/221 vs. placebo, 20/227; p=0.87) and the severity of acute post-ERCP pancreatitis (low-molecular-weight heparin, 14 mild, 3 moderate, one severe; placebo, 18 mild, two moderate, 0 severe). The 24-hour serum amylase values and 24-hour pain scores did not differ significantly between the low-molecular-weight heparin group and the placebo group. Bleeding complications occurred in two patients, both in the low-molecular-weight heparin group (one mild, one moderate). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic subcutaneous administration of low-molecular-weight heparin does not prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis.