AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. METHODS: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

Endohepatology: Arrival at the frontier of interventional endosonography.

Endohepatology describes the emerging field where diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are used for the diagnosis and management of liver disease and its sequelae. In this editorial we comment on the article by Gadour et al. The spectrum of EUS-guided procedures includes liver parenchymal and lesional biopsy, abscess drainage, treatment of focal liver lesions, diagnosis of portal hypertension and management of gastric varices. The data suggest that the application of EUS to hepatology is technically feasible and safe, heralding the arrival at a new frontier for EUS. More data, specifically randomised trials comparing EUS to interventional radiology techniques, and continued partnership between endoscopy and hepatology are required to see this field establish itself outside expert tertiary centres.

Is the European Crohn's and Colitis organisation (ECCO) e-guide an acceptable and feasible tool for increasing gastroenterologists' guideline adherence? A mixed methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Management of inflammatory bowel disease is constantly evolving, increasing the importance for gastroenterologists to keep up to date with guidelines. Traditional implementation strategies have had only small positive impacts on clinical practice. eHealth strategies such as the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation e-guide may be beneficial for clinician decision making in keeping with guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the e-guide. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability. Cognitive (think-aloud) interviews were conducted with Australian gastroenterologists while using the e-guide. Two clinical scenarios were developed to allow evaluation of various aspects of the e-guide. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative interview data and descriptive analysis to the quantitative and observational data. RESULTS: Seventeen participants completed the study. Data saturation were reached. The ECCO e-guide was largely feasible and acceptable, as demonstrated by most clinical questions answered correctly, 87% reaching the answer within 3 min, and most feeling it was useful, would be beneficial to their practice and would use it again. Issues raised included difficulties with website navigation, layout of the e-guide and difficulties with access (network firewalls, paid subscription required). CONCLUSIONS: The ECCO e-guide is largely acceptable and feasible for gastroenterologists to use. Aspects of the e-guide could be modified to improve user experience. This study highlights the importance of engaging end-users in the development and evaluation of clinician educational tools.

Hepatology consultation is associated with decreased early return to alcohol use after discharge from an inpatient alcohol use disorder treatment program.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol cessation is the only intervention that both prevents and halts the progressions of alcohol-associated liver disease. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between a return to alcohol use and consultation with hepatology in treatment-seeking patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD). METHODS: Two hundred forty-two patients with AUD were enrolled in an inpatient treatment program, with hepatology consultation provided for 143 (59%) patients at the request of the primary team. Patients not seen by hepatology served as controls. The primary outcome was any alcohol use after discharge assessed using AUDIT-C at 26 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: For the primary endpoint, AUDIT at week 26, 61% of the hepatology group and 28% of the controls completed the questionnaire (p=0.07). For the secondary endpoint at week 52, these numbers were 22% and 11% (p = 0.6). At week 26, 39 (45%) patients in the hepatology group versus 31 (70%) controls (p = 0.006) returned to alcohol use. Patients evaluated by hepatology had decreased rates of hazardous alcohol use compared to controls, with 36 (41%) versus 29 (66%) (p = 0.008) of the patients, respectively, reporting hazardous use. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups and no difference in rates of prescribing AUD therapy. There was no difference in outcomes at 52 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients evaluated by hepatology had significantly lower rates of return to alcohol use and lower rates of hazardous drinking at 26 weeks but not at 52 weeks. These findings suggest that hepatology evaluation during inpatient treatment of AUD may lead to decreased rates of early return to alcohol use.

Publication authorship: A new approach to the bibliometric study of scientific work and beyond.

Bibliometric studies offer numerous ways of analyzing scientific work. For example, co-citation and bibliographic coupling networks have been widely used since the 1960s to describe the segmentation of research and to look the development of the scientific frontier. In addition, co-authorship and collaboration networks have been employed for more than 30 years to explore the social dimension of scientific work. This paper introduces publication authorship as a complement to these established approaches. Three data sets of academic articles from accounting, astronomy, and gastroenterology are used to illustrate the benefits of publication authorship for bibliometric studies. In comparison to bibliographic coupling, publication authorship produces significantly better intra-cluster cosine similarities across all data sets, which in the end yields a more fine-grained picture of the research field in question. Beyond this finding, publication authorship lends itself to other types of documents such as corporate reports or meeting minutes to study organizations, movements, or any other concerted activity.

What is the role of out of programme clinical fellowships in the era of Shape of Training? A single-centre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The updated Shape of Training curriculum has shortened the duration of specialty training. We present the potential role of out of programme clinical fellowships. METHOD: An electronic online survey was sent to all current fellows to understand their experiences, training opportunities and motivations.Data were collected on fellows' endoscopic experiences and publications using PubMed for all previous doctors who have completed the Sheffield Fellowship Programme. RESULTS: Since 2004, 39 doctors have completed the Sheffield Fellowship.Endoscopic experience: current fellows completed a median average of 350 (IQR 150-500) gastroscopies and 150 (IQR 106-251) colonoscopies per year. Fellows with special interests completed either 428 hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures or 70 endoscopic mucosal resections per year.Medline publications: Median average 9 publications(IQR 4-17). They have also received multiple national or international awards and 91% achieved a doctoral degree.The seven current fellows in the new Shape of Training era (57% male, 29% Caucasian, aged 31-40 years) report high levels of enjoyment due to their research projects, supervisory teams and social aspects. The most cited reasons for undertaking the fellowship were to develop a subspecialty interest, take time off the on-call rota and develop endoscopic skills. The most reported drawback was a reduced income.All current fellows feel that the fellowship has enhanced their clinical confidence and prepared them to become consultants. CONCLUSION: Out of programme clinical fellowships offer the opportunity to develop the required training competencies, subspecialty expertise and research skills in a supportive environment.

Gastroenterology/Hepatology: What You May Have Missed in 2023.

This article summarizes clinically important gastroenterology developments from 2023 for internal medicine specialists. In colorectal cancer screening, a new RNA fecal screening test is on the horizon, as well as a new analysis on the benefits of using artificial intelligence in screening colonoscopy to detect more polyps. There is new evidence for management of gastrointestinal bleeding, a new drug for treatment of recurrent small-intestinal angiodysplasia, and a new endoscopic treatment method in patients with gastrointestinal tumor bleeding. The authors feature a randomized trial about amitriptyline as treatment for patients with irritable bowel syndrome by primary care providers and bring you news about new biologic agents for inflammatory bowel disease and eosinophilic esophagitis. Finally, they review 2 important articles on new terminology and management of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Pain Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Commentary.

DESCRIPTION: Pain is a common symptom among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although pain typically occurs during episodes of inflammation, it is also commonly experienced when intestinal inflammation is quiescent. Many gastroenterologists are at a loss how to approach pain symptoms when they occur in the absence of gut inflammation. We provide guidance in this area as to the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of pain among patients with IBD. METHODS: This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary incorporates important as well as recently published studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors. Formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations were not included because systematic reviews were not performed.