Clinical predictors of significant findings on EUS for the evaluation of incidental common bile duct dilation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: While endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) is highly accurate for the evaluation of common bile duct (CBD) dilation, the yield of EUS in patients with incidental CBD dilation is unclear. METHODS: Serial patients undergoing EUS for incidental, dilated CBD (per radiologist, minimum >6mm objectively) from two academic medical centers, without active pancreaticobiliary disease or significantly elevated LFTs were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of EUS with significant findings and a novel prediction model was derived from one center, internally validated with bootstrapping, and externally validated at the second center. RESULTS: Of 375 patients evaluated, 31 (8.3%) had significant findings including 26 choledocholithiasis, 1 ampullary adenoma, and 1 pancreatic mass. Predictors of significant findings with EUS included: age ≥70(OR 3.7, 95CI 1.5-10.0), non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain(OR 6.1, 95CI 2.3-17.3), CBD diameter ≥15 mm or ≥17mm with cholecystectomy(OR 6.9, 95CI 2.7-18.7), and prior ERCP(OR 6.8, 95CI 2.1-22.5). A point-based novel clinical prediction model was created: age ≥70=1, non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain=2, prior ERCP=2, CBD dilation=2. A score <1 had 93% (development) and 100% (validation) sensitivity and predicted a <2% chance of having a significant finding in both cohorts while excluding the need for EUS in ∼30% of both cohorts. Conversely, a score >4 was >90% specific for the presence of significant pathology. CONCLUSION: Less than 10% of patients undergoing EUS for incidental CBD dilation had pathologic findings. This novel, externally validated, clinical prediction model may reduce low-yield, invasive evaluation in nearly a third of patients.

High-dimensional deconstruction of pancreatic cancer identifies tumor microenvironmental and developmental stemness features that predict survival.

Numerous cell states are known to comprise the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tumor microenvironment (TME). However, the developmental stemness and co-occurrence of these cell states remain poorly defined. Here, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) on a cohort of treatment-naive PDAC time-of-diagnosis endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) samples (n = 25). We then combined these samples with surgical resection (n = 6) and publicly available samples to increase statistical power (n = 80). Following annotation into 25 distinct cell states, cells were scored for developmental stemness, and a customized version of the Ecotyper tool was used to identify communities of co-occurring cell states in bulk RNA-seq samples (n = 268). We discovered a tumor microenvironmental community comprised of aggressive basal-like malignant cells, tumor-promoting SPP1+ macrophages, and myofibroblastic cancer-associated fibroblasts associated with especially poor prognosis. We also found a developmental stemness continuum with implications for survival that is present in both malignant cells and cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs). We further demonstrated that high-dimensional analyses predictive of survival are feasible using standard-of-care, time-of-diagnosis EUS-FNB specimens. In summary, we identified tumor microenvironmental and developmental stemness characteristics from a high-dimensional gene expression analysis of PDAC using human tissue specimens, including time-of-diagnosis EUS-FNB samples. These reveal new connections between tumor microenvironmental composition, CAF and malignant cell stemness, and patient survival that could lead to better upfront risk stratification and more personalized upfront clinical decision-making.

Challenges of developing and executing a multi-site registry for a novel device with evolving indications for use.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of new technologies in endoscopy has been met with uncertainty, skepticism, and lack of standardization or training parameters, particularly when disruptive devices or techniques are involved. The widespread availability of a novel endoscopic suturing device (OverStitch™) for tissue apposition has enabled the development of applications of endoscopic suturing. METHODS: The American Gastroenterological Association partnered with Apollo Endosurgery to develop a registry to capture in a pragmatic non-randomized study the safety, effectiveness, and durability of endoscopic suturing in approximating tissue in the setting of bariatric revision and fixation of endoprosthetic devices. RESULTS: We highlight the challenges of the adoption of novel techniques by examining the process of developing and executing this multicenter registry to assess real-world use of this endoscopic suturing device. We also present our preliminary data on the safety and effectiveness of the novel device as it is applied in the treatment of obesity. CONCLUSIONS: The Prospective Registry for Trans-Orifice Endoscopic Suturing Applications (ES Registry) was an effective Phase 4, postmarketing registry aimed at capturing pragmatic, real-world use of a novel device. These findings serve to solidify the role of endoscopic suturing in clinical practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in benign biliary pathology with normal foregut anatomy: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Biliary drainage using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-BD) has been developed as a novel technique to obtain biliary access and drainage when ERCP fails. Numerous studies have demonstrated its safety and efficacy specifically pertaining to those with malignant distal biliary obstruction or altered foregut anatomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-BD in benign indications in patients with normal foregut anatomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparative study from 5 academic medical centers (2008-2018) involving patients with benign biliary obstruction and native foregut anatomy who had an initial failed ERCP with subsequent attempt at biliary decompression via EUS-BD or by repeating ERCP. RESULTS: 36 patients (mean age 61.6 ± 2.2, 38.9% female) who underwent attempted EUS-BD following initial failed ERCP were compared to 50 patients (mean age 62.7 ± 2.3, 73.5% female) who underwent repeat ERCP following an initial failed cannulation. EUS-BD was technically successful in 28 (77.8%) patients with rendezvous being the most common approach (86.1%). A higher level of pre-procedural bilirubin was found to be associated with technical success of EUS-BD (3.65 ± 0.63 versus 1.1 ± 0.4, p value 0.04). Success of repeat ERCP following failed cannulation was 86%. Adverse events were significantly more frequent in the EUS-BD cohort when compared to the repeat ERCP (10 (27.8%) versus 4 (8.0%), p = 0.02, OR 4.32. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-BD remains a viable therapeutic option in the setting of benign biliary disease, with success rates of 77.8%. Adverse events were significantly more common with EUS-BD vs. repeat ERCP, emphasizing the need to perform in expert centers with appropriate multidisciplinary support and to strongly consider the urgency of biliary decompression before considering same session EUS-BD after failed initial biliary access.

Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile colon polyps: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND : For large sessile colorectal polyps (LSCPs), endoscopic mucosal resection without diathermy ("cold endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR]") is gaining popularity because of its safety advantages over conventional EMR ("hot EMR"). Polyp recurrence rates have been reported to be higher with cold EMR. Considering these differences, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of these two techniques. METHODS : A decision analysis model was constructed for EMR of an LSCP. The decision tree incorporated the EMR method, clip use, procedural mortality, adverse events and their management, and polyp recurrence. Outcomes included days of lost productivity and marginal cost difference. Adverse event and recurrence rates were extracted from the existing literature, giving emphasis to recent systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. RESULTS : Through 30 months of follow-up, the average cost of removing an LSCP by cold EMR was US$5213, as compared to $6168 by hot EMR, yielding a $955 cost difference (95 % confidence interval $903-$1006). Average days of lost productivity were 6.2 days for cold EMR and 6.3 days for hot EMR. This cost advantage remained over several analyses accounting for variations in recurrence rates and clip closure strategies. Clip cost and LSCP recurrence rate had the greatest and the least impacts on the marginal cost difference, respectively. CONCLUSION : Cold EMR is the dominant strategy over hot EMR, with lower cost and fewer days of lost productivity. In theory, a complete transition to cold EMR for LSCPs in the USA could result in an annual cost saving approaching US$7 million to Medicare beneficiaries.

Endoscopic retrieval of a proximally migrated biliary stent using extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, electrohydraulic lithotripsy, and cholangioscopy with minisnare.

Video 1ERCP was notable for a proximally migrated biliary stent. Cholangiogram demonstrated multiple filling defects consistent with choledocholithiasis surrounding the proximally migrated biliary stent. Retrieval of the stent was successful using cholangioscopy-directed electrohydraulic lithotripsy, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, mechanical lithotripsy, and minisnare over the course of 2 ERCPs. Complete duct clearance of stones was accomplished with balloon sweeps.

Digestive Manifestations in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80-2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Performance and Predictors of Migration of Partially and Fully Covered Esophageal Self-Expanding Metal Stents for Malignant Dysphagia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are routinely used to palliate malignant dysphagia. However esophageal SEMS can migrate or obstruct due to epithelial hyperplasia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rates and factors predicting migration and obstruction, and the nutritional outcomes in partially covered (pc) vs. fully covered (fc) SEMS vs. fcSEMS with antimigration fins (AF) placed for malignant dysphagia. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing SEMS placement for malignant dysphagia at three academic medical centers. RESULTS: Among 357 patients, there were 55 (15.4%) stent migrations, 45 (12.6%) obstructions from epithelial hyperplasia, and 20 (5.6%) food impactions. Median overall survival was 79 days (IQR 41,199). The percent weight change/change in albumin at 30 and 60 days after SEMS placement were -2.24%/-0.544 g/dL and -2.98%/-0.55 g/dL, respectively. Stent migration occurred significantly more often with fcSEMS than pcSEMS (25.3% vs 10.9%; P < .003), but there was no difference when either group was compared to fcSEMS-AF (19.3%). The overall rate of epithelial hyperplasia resulting in stent obstruction was low (12.6%) and not different between stent types. Factors associated with increased risk of SEMS migration on multivariable logistic regression included stricture traversability with a diagnostic endoscope (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.29-4.35) and use of fcSEMS (OR, 2.56; 1.31-5.00) or fcSEMS-AF (OR, 2.30, 1.03-5.14). CONCLUSIONS: Traversability of a malignant esophageal stenosis predicts SEMS migration. In these patients with a limited overall survival, pcSEMS are associated with lower rates of stent migration and similar rates of obstruction compared to fcSEMS.

Triaging advanced GI endoscopy procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic: consensus recommendations using the Delphi method.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is a lack of consensus on which GI endoscopic procedures should be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and which procedures could be safely deferred without having a significant impact on outcomes. METHODS: We selected a panel of 14 expert endoscopists. We identified 41 common indications for advanced endoscopic procedures from the ASGE Appropriate Use of GI Endoscopy guidelines. Using a modified Delphi method, we first achieved consensus on the patient-important outcome for each procedural indication. Panelists prioritized consensus patient-important outcome when categorizing each indication into one of the following 3 procedural time periods: (1) time-sensitive emergent (schedule within 1 week), (2) time-sensitive urgent (schedule within 1 to 8 weeks), and (3) non-time sensitive (defer for >8 weeks and then reassess the timing). Three anonymous rounds of voting were allowed before attempts at consensus were abandoned. RESULTS: All 14 invited experts agreed to participate in the study. The prespecified consensus threshold of 51% was achieved for assigning patient-important outcome(s) to each advanced endoscopy indication. The prespecified consensus threshold of 66.7% was achieved for 40 of 41 advanced endoscopy indications in stratifying them into 1 of 3 procedural time periods. For 12 of 41 indications, 100% consensus was achieved; for 20 of 41 indications, 75% to 99% consensus was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: By using a Modified Delphi method that prioritized patient-important outcomes, we developed consensus recommendations on procedural timing for common indications for advanced endoscopy. These recommendations and the structured decision framework provided by our study can inform decision making as endoscopy services are reopened.

Plans to Reactivate Gastroenterology Practices Following the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of North American Centers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Practices dramatically reduced endoscopy services due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because practices now are considering reintroduction of elective endoscopy, we conducted a survey of North American practices to identify reactivation barriers and strategies. METHODS: We designed and electronically distributed a web-based survey to North American gastroenterologists consisting of 7 domains: institutional demographics, impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy practice, elective endoscopy resumption plans, anesthesia modifications, personal protective equipment policies, fellowship training, and telemedicine use. Responses were stratified by practice type: ambulatory surgery center (ASC) or hospital-based. RESULTS: In total, 123 practices (55% ASC-based and 45% hospital-based) responded. At the pandemic's peak (as reported by the respondents), practices saw a 90% decrease in endoscopy volume, with most centers planning to resume elective endoscopy a median of 55 days after initial restrictions. Declining community prevalence of COVID-19, personal protective equipment availability, and preprocedure severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing availability were ranked as the 3 primary factors influencing reactivation timing. ASC-based practices were more likely to identify preprocedure testing availability as a major factor limiting elective endoscopy resumption (P = .001). Preprocedure SARS-CoV-2 testing was planned by only 49.2% of practices overall; when testing is performed and negative, 52.9% of practices will continue to use N95 masks. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights barriers and variable strategies for reactivation of elective endoscopy services after the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results suggest that more widespread access to preprocedure SARS-CoV-2 tests with superior performance characteristics is needed to increase provider and patient comfort in proceeding with elective endoscopy.

Type of sedation and the need for unplanned interventions during ERCP: analysis of the clinical outcomes research initiative national endoscopic database (CORI-NED).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recent studies suggest that sedation provided by anaesthesia professionals may be less protective against serious adverse events than previously believed, however, data are lacking regarding endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Using the clinical outcomes research initiative national endoscopic database (CORI-NED), we aimed to assess whether mode of sedation was associated with rates of unplanned interventions (UIs) during ERCP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All subjects from CORI-NED undergoing ERCP from 2004 to 2014 were identified and stratified into three groups based on the initial mode of anaesthesia: endoscopist-directed sedation (EDS), monitored anaesthesia care without an endotracheal tube (MAC-WET) and general endotracheal anaesthesia (GEA). The primary outcome was UIs. To assess the impact of sedation mode on UIs, multivariable logistic regression models were created adjusting for demographic, physician and procedure-level variables. DESIGN: Population-based study. RESULTS: 26 698 ERCPs were analysed (7588 EDS, 8395 MAC-WET, 10 715 GEA). UIs occurred in 320 ERCPs (1.2%). EDS was associated with a higher risk of UIs compared with sedation administered by an anaesthesia professional (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.42). Additional factors associated with a higher risk of UIs included ASA class IV compared with class II (OR 3.18, 95% CI 2.00 to 5.06) and ERCPs done in community (OR 1.41, 1.04 to 1.91) and health maintenance organisations (OR 3.75, 2.01 to 6.99) hospitals. CONCLUSION: EDS is associated with a higher risk of UIs during ERCP compared with sedation administered by an anaesthesia professional. Higher ASA class and procedures performed in non-university hospitals were also associated with a higher risk of UIs. This study suggests that, when available, sedation using an anaesthesia professional should be utilised for ERCP.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis using 20-mm versus 15-mm lumen-apposing metal stents: an international, multicenter, case-matched study.

BACKGROUNDS: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided placement of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has gained popularity for the treatment of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). We compared the 20-mm and 15-mm LAMSs for the treatment of symptomatic WON in terms of clinical success and adverse events. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, case-matched study of 306 adults at 22 tertiary centers from 04/2014 to 10/2018. A total of 102 patients with symptomatic WON who underwent drainage with 20-mm LAMS (cases) and 204 patients who underwent drainage with 15-mm LAMS (controls) were matched by age, sex, and drainage approach. Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed to compare clinical success (resolution of WON on follow-up imaging without reintervention) and adverse events (according to American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy criteria). RESULTS: Clinical success was achieved in 92.2 % of patients with 20-mm LAMS and 91.7 % of patients with 15-mm LAMS (odds ratio 0.92; P = 0.91). Patients with 20-mm LAMS underwent fewer direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) sessions (mean 1.3 vs. 2.1; P < 0.001), despite having larger WON collections (transverse axis 118.2 vs. 101.9 mm, P = 0.003; anteroposterior axis 95.9 vs. 80.1 mm, P = 0.01). There was no difference in overall adverse events (21.6 % vs. 15.2 %; P = 0.72) and bleeding events (4.9 % vs. 3.4 %; P = 0.54) between the 20-mm and 15-mm LAMS groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 20-mm LAMS showed comparable clinical success and safety profile to the 15-mm LAMS, with the need for fewer DEN sessions for WON resolution.

Impact of Bariatric Surgery on the Long-term Disease Course of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: An association between inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and obesity has been observed. Little is known about the effect of weight loss on IBD course. Our aim was to determine the impact of bariatric surgery on long-term clinical course of obese patients with IBD, either Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: Patients with IBD who underwent bariatric surgery subsequent to IBD diagnosis were identified from 2 tertiary IBD centers. Complications after bariatric surgery were recorded. Patients were matched 1:1 for age, sex, IBD subtype, phenotype, and location to patients with IBD who did not undergo bariatric surgery. Controls started follow-up at a time point in their disease similar to the disease duration in the matched case at the time of bariatric surgery. Inflammatory bowel disease medication usage and disease-related complications (need for corticosteroids, hospitalizations, and surgeries) among cases and controls were compared. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. Appropriate matches were found for 25 cases. Median follow-up among cases (after bariatric surgery) and controls was 7.69 and 7.89 years, respectively. Median decrease in body mass index after bariatric surgery was 12.2. Rescue corticosteroid usage and IBD-related surgeries were numerically less common in cases than controls (24% vs 52%; odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-1.23; 12% vs 28%; OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.004-1.79). Two cases and 1 control were able to discontinue biologics during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Inflammatory bowel disease patients with weight loss after bariatric surgery had fewer IBD-related complications compared with matched controls. This observation requires validation in a prospective study design.

Outcomes of endoscopic treatment of leaks and fistulae after sleeve gastrectomy: results from a large multicenter U.S. cohort.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy is the most commonly performed bariatric surgery in the United States. Leaks after sleeve gastrectomy (SGL) occur in 1% to 3% of patients. Endoscopic therapies are increasingly used for treatment of SGLs, but few data exist on their outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess technical success, leak resolution, and reoperation rates of patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for repair SGLs. SETTING: Eight high-volume academic endoscopy centers. METHODS: Patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for SGLs from 2007 to 2017 were identified. Patients were excluded if the index endoscopic therapy for SGL was performed elsewhere or if no follow-up data were available. Leaks were classified as acute (≤7 d of SG), early (1-6 wk), late (7-12 wk), and chronic (>12 wk). Leak resolution was defined as lack of extraluminal air, extravasation on oral contrast radiography, cross-sectional imaging, or resolution of percutaneous drain output. Demographic and procedural data were recorded as rates of additional therapy, adverse events, and surgical revision. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients met criteria for analysis (70 women, age 42.6 ± 10.8 yr). A total of 295 endoscopic sessions (median 3, range 1-14) were performed across the cohort. SGLs resolved after index endoscopic therapy in 43 (50.1%) patients. The primary outcome of endoscopic resolution of SGL was observed in 62 patients (72.9%). There were 34 (11.5%) PRAE (the majority occurring with self-expandable metal stents), all but 1 of which were managed endoscopically. Surgical revision was required in 23 (21.7%) patients. On univariate analyses independent variables associated with the need for surgical revision included both acute and chronic SGLs (P = .028), loculated subphrenic collections/abscesses (P = .03), and intraabdominal sepsis (P = .03). On multivariable logistic regression using statistically significant predictors from the univariate analyses, acute SGLs were significantly associated with a need for surgical revision (odds ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 1.2-18.9, P = .025). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic therapy for SGLs is associated with good clinical success, avoiding the need for surgical revision in 73% of patients, with an acceptable adverse event profile. Patients with acute or chronic SGLs and those with loculated abscesses or intraabdominal sepsis are more likely to undergo surgical revision. Endoscopic therapy is an appropriate first-line modality for the management of SGLs, especially those not classified as acute or chronic.

Anesthesia-administered sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: monitored anesthesia care or general endotracheal anesthesia?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The decision to undertake monitored anesthesia care (MAC) or general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) for patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is influenced by many factors. These include locoregional practice preferences, procedure complexity, patient position, and comorbidities. We aim to review the data regarding anesthesia-administered sedation for ERCP and identify the impact of airway management on procedure success, adverse event rates and endoscopy unit efficiency. RECENT FINDINGS: Several studies have consistently identified patients at high risk for sedation-related adverse events during ERCP. This group includes those with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and (BMI). ERCP is commonly performed in the prone position, which can make the placement of an emergent advanced airway challenging. Although this may be alleviated by performing ERCP in the supine position, this technique is more technically cumbersome for the endoscopist. Data regarding the impact of routine GEA on endoscopy unit efficiency remain controversial. SUMMARY: Pursuing MAC or GEA for patients undergoing ERCP is best-approached on an individual basis. Patients at high risk for sedation-related adverse events likely benefit from GEA. Larger, multicenter randomized controlled trials will aid significantly in better delineating which sedation approach is best for an individual patient.