Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and survival of patients with nonampullary duodenal carcinoid tumors treated with endoscopic therapy versus surgical resection: analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic therapy (ET) has been used to treat nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NAD-NETs) ≤10 mm in size, but data on long-term outcomes are limited. In addition, management of 11- to 19-mm NAD-NETs is not well defined because of variable estimates of risk of metastasis. We aimed to determine the prevalence and risk factors of metastasis of NAD-NETs ≤19 mm and evaluate the long-term survival of patients after ET as compared with radical surgery. METHODS: The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result database was used to identify 1243 patients with T1-2 histologically confirmed NAD-NETs ≤19 mm in size. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 4.8% of cases had metastasis at the time of diagnosis, with lower prevalence in ≤10-mm lesions (3.1%) versus 11- to 19-mm lesions (11.7%, P < .001). The risk factors for metastases included invasion to the muscularis propria (odds ratio, 25.95; 95% confidence interval, 9.01-76.70), age <65 years (odds ratio, 1.93), submucosal involvement (odds ratio, 3.1), and 11 to 19 mm in size (vs ≤10 mm). In patients with well- to moderately differentiated T1-2N0M0 NAD-NETs ≤19 mm confined to the mucosa/submucosa who underwent ET or surgery, the 5-year CSS was 100%. The 5-year OS was similar between the ≤10-mm and 11- to 19-mm groups (86.6% vs 91.0%, P = .31) and the ET and surgery groups (87.4% vs 87.5%, P = .823). CONCLUSIONS: In NAD-NETs, invasion to the muscularis propria is the strongest risk factor for metastasis. In the absence of metastasis, in lesions with well/moderate differentiation and without muscle invasion, ET is adequate for NAD-NETs ≤10 mm and is a viable option for 11- to 19-mm lesions.

Experience of nurse practitioners performing colonoscopy after endoscopic training in more than 1,000 patients.

Background and study aims The demand for screening colonoscopy has continued to rise over the past two decades. As a result, the current workforce of gastroenterologists is unable to meet the needs for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Therefore, solutions are needed to improve this disparity, with non-physician endoscopists being a potential option. However, current literature on the performance of non-physicians in endoscopy is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of colonoscopy performed by three gastrointestinal fellowship-trained nurse practitioners (NPs). Methods This was a retrospective study performed at a single tertiary academic medical center. Colonoscopies performed by three gastrointestinal-specialized NPs after having completed training of at least 140 supervised colonoscopies were reviewed for analysis. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening purposes. Outcomes included colonoscopy quality indicators as defined by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/American College of Gastroenterology Taskforce (ASGE/ACG) Taskforce. Results The study included 1,012 subjects (mean age 56.2 years, female 51.5 %, African American 73.9 %) who underwent screening colonoscopies by three NPs. Cecal intubation was successful in 997 subjects (98.5 %). Mean adenoma detection rate was 35.6 %. Mean withdrawal time was 18.9 minutes. There were no adverse events including colonic perforations or delayed post-polypectomy bleeding. Conclusions Three fellowship-trained NPs in colonoscopy in the United States satisfied the quality indicators proposed by the ASGE/ACG Task force, demonstrating that adequately trained NPs can perform colonoscopy safely and effectively. With the demand for colonoscopy exceeding the supply, non-physicians could be part of the solution to meet the demands for CRC screening.

Mini-laparoscopy in the endoscopy unit: Safety and outcomes in over one thousand patients.

AIM: To investigate the safety of consecutive mini-laparoscopy guided liver biopsies for the diagnosis and staging of liver diseases. METHODS: In this study we retrospectively analyzed the safety of mini-laparoscopic liver biopsy performed in an endoscopy unit in 1071 patients. We measured the incidence of bleeding and evaluated the management and outcome of bleeding interventions. RESULTS: The most common etiologies of liver injury were viral hepatitis and autoimmune liver disease. 250 patients had macroscopically and histologically proven cirrhosis. 13 patients had no pathological findings. 33% of all patients had bleeding that required argon plasma coagulation of the puncture site during laparoscopy. Significant bleeding occurred more often in patients with liver cirrhosis compared to non-cirrhotic liver diseases but was effectively treated with laparoscopic coagulation. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, mini-laparoscopy liver biopsy can be performed safely and effectively in high risk patients with advanced liver disease; mini-laparoscopy with liver biopsy can be done safely in an endoscopy unit.