American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of solid pancreatic masses: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic masses. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses needle selection (fine-needle biopsy [FNB] needle vs FNA needle), needle caliber (22-gauge vs 25-gauge needles), FNB needle type (novel or contemporary [fork-tip and Franseen] vs alternative FNB needle designs), and sample processing (rapid on-site evaluation [ROSE] vs no ROSE). In addition, this guideline addresses stent selection (self-expandable metal stent [SEMS] vs plastic stent), SEMS type (covered [cSEMS] vs uncovered [uSEMS]), and pain management (celiac plexus neurolysis [CPN] vs medical analgesic therapy). In patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), the ASGE recommends FNB needles over FNA needles. With regard to needle caliber, the ASGE suggests 22-gauge over 25-gauge needles. When an FNB needle is used, the ASGE recommends using either a fork-tip or a Franseen needle over alternative FNB needle designs. After a sample has been obtained, the ASGE suggests against the routine use of ROSE in patients undergoing an initial EUS-TA of a solid pancreatic mass. In patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction undergoing drainage with ERCP, the ASGE suggests using SEMSs over plastic stents. In patients with proven malignancy undergoing SEMS placement, the ASGE suggests using cSEMSs over uSEMSs. If malignancy has not been histopathologically confirmed, the ASGE recommends against the use of uSEMSs. Finally, in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer and abdominal pain, the ASGE suggests the use of CPN as an adjunct for the treatment of abdominal pain. This document outlines the process, analyses, and decision approaches used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.

Harnessing endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation to reshape the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma microenvironment and elicit systemic immunomodulation.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is characterized by poor prognostics and substantial therapeutic challenges, with dismal survival rates. Tumor resistance in PDAC is primarily attributed to its fibrotic, hypoxic, and immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA), an Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved minimally invasive technique for treating pancreatic cancer, disrupts tumors with heat and induces coagulative necrosis, releasing tumor antigens that may trigger a systemic immune response-the abscopal effect. We aim to elucidate the roles of EUS-RFA-mediated thermal and mechanical stress in enhancing anti-tumor immunity in PDAC. A comprehensive literature review focused on radiofrequency immunomodulation and immunotherapy in pancreatic tumors to understand the pathophysiological mechanisms of RFA and its effect on the TME, which could prevent recurrence and resistance. We reviewed clinical, preclinical, and in vitro studies on RFA mechanisms in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, discussing the unique immunomodulatory effects of EUS-RFA. Recent findings suggest that combining RFA with immune adjuvants enhances responses in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. EUS-RFA offers a dual benefit against PDAC by directly reducing tumor viability and indirectly enhancing anti-tumor immunity. Observations of neutrophil-mediated immunomodulation and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) modulation support integrating EUS-RFA with targeted immunotherapies for managing pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Integrating EUS-RFA in PDAC treatment promises direct cytoreduction and synergistic effects with molecular targeted therapies. Prospective clinical trials are crucial to assess the efficacy of this combined approach in improving outcomes and survival rates in advanced PDAC cases.

First step to environmentally sustainable endoscopy practice: Prospective study of minimizing multiple device use during screening colonoscopy at a large tertiary center.

The healthcare sector generates 8% of greenhouse emissions in the United States, of which GI endoscopy is the third largest contributor. Single-use tools are a major contributor to modifiable waste generation during GI (gastrointestinal) endoscopy. Through a quality improvement (QI) initiative, we aimed to reduce endoscopy waste by urging gastroenterologists to be mindful of the tools used during polypectomies and avoid using multiple tools. We discussed green endoscopy initiatives in monthly journal club and business meetings. Over 14 weeks, 210 patients were included in the pre-intervention and 112 in the post-intervention group. At baseline, 34% of colonoscopies required no intervention, 32% required one tool (either biopsy forceps or a snare) and 33% required multiple tools. After the intervention, the use of just one tool increased (17% increase, p<0.01) and the use of multiple tools decreased significantly (16% decrease p<0.01). The odds of using a single tool compared to multiple tools after the intervention was 2.98 (95% CI 1.6-5.53), p=0.005. This single-center QI study noted a significant change in practice patterns favoring using a single tool over multiple tools during colonoscopies after an environmentally conscious practice intervention was applied. This intervention can be readily applied to reduce endoscopy-related waste.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis (CP). This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses effectiveness of endoscopic therapies for the management of pain in CP, including celiac plexus block, endoscopic management of pancreatic duct (PD) stones and strictures, and adverse events such as benign biliary strictures (BBSs) and pseudocysts. In patients with painful CP and an obstructed PD, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation in patients without contraindication to surgery before initiation of endoscopic management. In patients who have contraindications to surgery or who prefer a less-invasive approach, the ASGE suggests an endoscopic approach as the initial treatment over surgery, if complete ductal clearance is likely. When a decision is made to proceed with a celiac plexus block, the ASGE suggests an EUS-guided approach over a percutaneous approach. The ASGE suggests indications for when to consider ERCP alone or with pancreatoscopy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy alone or followed by ERCP for treating obstructing PD stones based on size, location, and radiopacity. For the initial management of PD strictures, the ASGE suggests using a single plastic stent of the largest caliber that is feasible. For symptomatic BBSs caused by CP, the ASGE suggests the use of covered metal stents over multiple plastic stents. For symptomatic pseudocysts, the ASGE suggests endoscopic therapy over surgery. This document clearly outlines the process, analyses, and decision processes used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis: summary and recommendations

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis (CP). This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses effectiveness of endoscopic therapies for the management of pain in CP, including celiac plexus block, endoscopic management of pancreatic duct (PD) stones and strictures, and adverse events such as benign biliary strictures (BBSs) and pseudocysts. In patients with painful CP and an obstructed PD, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation in patients without contraindication to surgery before initiation of endoscopic management. In patients who have contraindications to surgery or who prefer a less-invasive approach, the ASGE suggests an endoscopic approach as the initial treatment over surgery, if complete ductal clearance is likely. When a decision is made to proceed with a celiac plexus block, the ASGE suggests an EUS-guided approach over a percutaneous approach. The ASGE suggests indications for when to consider ERCP alone or with pancreatoscopy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy alone or followed by ERCP for treating obstructing PD stones based on size, location, and radiopacity. For the initial management of PD strictures, the ASGE suggests using a single plastic stent of the largest caliber that is feasible. For symptomatic BBSs caused by CP, the ASGE suggests the use of covered metal stents over multiple plastic stents. For symptomatic pseudocysts, the ASGE suggests endoscopic therapy over surgery. This document clearly outlines the process, analyses, and decision processes used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.

Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Clinically Significant Post-ERCP Bleeding: a Contemporary Multi-center Study.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Clinically significant post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) bleeding (CSPEB) is common. Contemporary estimates of risk are lacking. We aimed to identify risk factors for and outcomes following CSPEB. METHODS: We analyzed multi-center prospective ERCP data between 2018-2023 with 30-day follow-up. The primary outcome was CSPEB, defined as hematemesis, melena, or hematochezia resulting in: hemoglobin drop ≥20 g/L or transfusion and/or endoscopy to evaluate suspected bleeding, and/or unplanned healthcare visitation and/or prolongation of existing admission. Firth logistic regression was employed. P-values <0.05 were significant, with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals reported. RESULTS: CSPEB occurred following 129 (1.5%) of 8,517 ERCPs (mean onset 3.2 days), with 110 of 4,849 events (2.3%) occurring following higher-risk interventions (sphincterotomy, sphincteroplasty, pre-cut sphincterotomy, and/or needle-knife access). CSPEB patients required endoscopy and transfusion in 86.0% and 53.5% of cases, respectively, with three cases (2.3%) being fatal. P2Y12 inhibitors were held for a median of 4 days (IQR 4) prior to higher-risk ERCP. Following higher-risk interventions, P2Y12 inhibitors (OR 3.33, 1.26-7.74), warfarin (OR 8.54, 3.32-19.81), dabigatran (OR 13.40, 2.06-59.96), rivaroxaban (OR 7.42, 3.43-15.24) and apixaban (OR 4.16, 1.99-8.20) were associated with CSPEB. Significant intraprocedural bleeding post sphincterotomy (OR 2.32, 1.06-4.60), but not post sphincteroplasty, was also associated. Concomitant cardiorespiratory events occurred more frequently within 30 days following CSPEB (OR 12.71, 4.75-32.54). CONCLUSIONS: Risks of antiplatelet-related CSPEB may be underestimated by endoscopists based on observations of suboptimal holding before higher-risk ERCP. Appropriate periprocedural antithrombotic management is essential and could represent novel quality initiative targets.

The Impact of Intraoperative Glucagon on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Intraoperative Cholangiogram for the Diagnosis of Choledocholithiasis: Experience from a Large Tertiary Care Center.

A proportion of patients who undergo intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) do not have bile duct stones at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), either due to the spontaneous passage of stones or a false-positive IOC. Glucagon has been utilized as an inexpensive tool to allow the passage of micro-choledocholithiasis to the duodenum and resolve filling defects caused by stones or air bubbles. The purpose of our study is to understand the change in diagnostic accuracy of IOC to detect choledocholithiasis with intraoperative glucagon. We conducted a retrospective study at a tertiary care center on adult patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with IOC. The diagnostic accuracy of IOC was assessed before and after the administration of intravenous glucagon. Of 1455 patients, 374 (25.7%) received intraoperative glucagon, and 103 of these 374 patients (27.5%) showed resolution of the filling defect with the passage of contrast to the duodenum. Pre- and post-glucagon administration comparison showed enhancement in specificity from 78% to 83%, an increase in positive predictive value from 67.3% to 72.4%, and an improvement in the diagnostic accuracy of IOC from 81.5% to 84.3%. Our findings suggest that intraoperative glucagon administration carries the potential to reduce the rate of false-positive IOCs, thereby reducing the performance of unnecessary ERCPs.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the following: 1: The role of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients after failed ERCP. 2: The role of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy in resolving distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. 3: The role of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy. 4: The role of EUS-BD versus E-ERCP and PTBD in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy other than RYGB. 5: The role of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary transcystic gallbladder drainage in resolving acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy.

Endoscopic Advances in the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases that occurs secondary to failure of the antireflux barrier system, resulting in the frequent and abnormal reflux of gastric contents to the esophagus. GERD is diagnosed in routine clinical practice based on the classic symptoms of heartburn and regurgitation. However, a subset of patients with atypical symptoms can pose challenges in diagnosing GERD. An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the most common initial diagnostic test used in the assessment for GERD, although half of these patients will not have any positive endoscopic findings suggestive of GERD. The advanced endoscopic techniques have improved the diagnostic yield of GERD diagnosis and its complications, such as Barrett's esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. These newer endoscopic tools can better detect subtle irregularities in the mucosa and vascular structures. The management options for GERD include lifestyle modifications, pharmacological therapy, and endoscopic and surgical interventions. The latest addition to the armamentarium is the minimally invasive endoscopic interventions in carefully selected patients, including the electrical stimulation of the LES, Antireflux mucosectomy, Radiofrequency therapy, Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication, Endoscopic Full-Thickness plication (GERDx™), and suturing devices. With the emergence of these advanced endoscopic techniques, it is crucial to understand their selection criteria, advantages, and disadvantages.

Overall Polyp Detection Rate as a Surrogate Measure for Screening Efficacy Independent of Histopathology: Evidence from National Endoscopy Database.

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is challenging to measure, given its dependency on pathology reporting. Polyp detection rate (PDR) (percentage of screening colonoscopies detecting a polyp) is a proposed alternative to overcome this issue. Overall PDR from all colonoscopies is a relatively novel concept, with no large-scale studies comparing overall PDR with screening-only PDR. The aim of the study was to compare PDR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic indications with overall PDR and evaluate any correlation between individual endoscopist PDR by indication to determine if overall PDR can be a valuable surrogate for screening PDR. Our study analyzed a prospectively collected national endoscopy database maintained by the National Institute of Health from 2009 to 2014. Out of 354,505 colonoscopies performed between 2009-2014, 298,920 (n = 110,794 average-risk screening, n = 83,556 average-risk surveillance, n = 104,770 diagnostic) met inclusion criteria. The median screening PDR was 25.45 (IQR 13.15-39.60), comparable with the median overall PDR of 24.01 (IQR 11.46-35.86, p = 0.21). Median surveillance PDR was higher at 33.73 (IQR 16.92-47.01), and median diagnostic PDR was lower at 19.35 (IQR 9.66-29.17), compared with median overall PDR 24.01 (IQR 11.46-35.86; p < 0.01). The overall PDR showed excellent concordance with screening, surveillance, and diagnostic PDR (r > 0.85, p < 0.01, 2-tailed). The overall PDR is a reliable and pragmatic surrogate for screening PDR and can be measured in real time, irrespective of colonoscopy indication.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy­European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Emerging data suggest neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with improved survival. However, less than 40% of patients demonstrate a meaningful radiographic response to NAC. EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) has emerged as a new modality to treat PDAC. We hypothesize that NAC plus EUS-RFA can be used in the management of resectable PDAC. METHODS: This was a prospective review of PDAC patients meeting the criteria of resectable tumor anatomy who underwent NAC chemotherapy plus EUS-RFA followed by pancreatic resection. Radiographic imaging and perioperative and short-term outcomes were recorded. Surgical pathology specimens were analyzed for treatment response. RESULTS: Three eligible patients with resectable PDAC received 4 months of NAC plus EUS-RFA. One month after completing NAC and EUS-RFA, all 3 patients underwent standard pancreaticoduodenectomy without adverse events. After a 6-week recovery, all patients completed 2 months of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In our institutional experience, this treatment protocol appears to be safe as patients tolerated the combination of chemotherapy and ablation. Patients underwent pancreatic resection with uneventful recovery. This novel neoadjuvant approach may provide a more effective alternative to chemotherapy alone.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic tumors.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgery is a cornerstone in the management of pancreatic cancer and precancerous pancreatic lesions. However, many patients are not suitable candidates for surgery at the time of diagnosis for various reasons. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) appears to be a promising treatment option for patients who are ineligible for surgery for management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs), and pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). RECENT FINDINGS: EUS-RFA may serve as an adjunct to chemotherapy or palliative measures for inoperable cases of PDAC. Given its feasibility and efficacy, EUS-RFA has an evolving niche as a minimally invasive and potentially definitive treatment for PNETs and high-risk PCLs such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). EUS-RFA is a generally well tolerated procedure, with abdominal pain and acute pancreatitis being the most common adverse effects, though the risk can be mitigated through prophylactic measures. SUMMARY: There is an increasing body of evidence to support the use of EUS-RFA in managing pancreatic lesions, either as definitive, adjunctive, or palliative treatment, depending on lesion type.