Cold versus hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection for large (≥15 mm) flat non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Conventional hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (H-EMR) is effective for the management of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colon polyps (LNPCPs) however, electrocautery-related complications may incur significant morbidity. With a superior safety profile, cold snare EMR (C-EMR) of LNPCPs is an attractive alternative however evidence is lacking. We conducted a randomised trial to compare the efficacy and safety of C-EMR to H-EMR. METHODS: Flat, 15-50 mm adenomatous LNPCPs were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to C-EMR or H-EMR with margin thermal ablation at a single tertiary centre. The primary outcome was endoscopically visible and/or histologically confirmed recurrence at 6 months surveillance colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB), delayed perforation and technical success. RESULTS: 177 LNPCPs in 177 patients were randomised to C-EMR arm (n=87) or H-EMR (n=90). Treatment groups were equivalent for technical success 86/87 (98.9%) C-EMR versus H-EMR 90/90 (100%); p=0.31. Recurrence was significantly greater in C-EMR (16/87, 18.4% vs 1/90, 1.1%; relative risk (RR) 16.6, 95% CI 2.24 to 122; p<0.001).Delayed perforation (1/90 (1.1%) vs 0; p=0.32) only occurred in the H-EMR group. CSPEB was significantly greater in the H-EMR arm (7/90 (7.8%) vs 1/87 (1.1%); RR 6.77, 95% CI 0.85 to 53.9; p=0.034). CONCLUSION: Compared with H-EMR, C-EMR for flat, adenomatous LNPCPs, demonstrates superior safety with equivalent technical success. However, endoscopic recurrence is significantly greater for cold snare resection and is currently a limitation of the technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04138030.

Impact of margin thermal ablation after endoscopic mucosal resection of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colonic polyps on long-term recurrence.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The efficacy of colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is limited by recurrence and the necessity for conservative surveillance. Margin thermal ablation (MTA) after EMR has reduced the incidence of recurrence at the first surveillance colonoscopy at 6 months (SC1). Whether this effect is durable to second surveillance colonoscopy (SC2) is unknown. We evaluated long-term surveillance outcomes in a cohort of LNPCPs that have undergone MTA. METHODS: LNPCPs undergoing EMR and MTA from four academic endoscopy centres were prospectively recruited. EMR scars were evaluated at SC1 and in the absence of recurrence, SC2 colonoscopy was conducted in a further 12 months. A historical control arm was generated from LNPCPs that underwent EMR without MTA. The primary outcome was recurrence at SC2 in all LNPCPs with a recurrence-free scar at SC1. RESULTS: 1152 LNPCPs underwent EMR with complete MTA over 90 months until October 2022. 854 LNPCPs underwent SC1 with 29/854 (3.4%) LNPCPs demonstrating recurrence. 472 LNPCPs free of recurrence at SC1 underwent SC2. 260 LNPCPs with complete SC2 follow-up formed the control arm from January 2012 to May 2016. Recurrence at SC2 was significantly less in the MTA arm versus controls (1/472 (0.2%) vs 9/260 (3.5%); p<0.001)). CONCLUSION: LNPCPs that have undergone successful EMR with MTA and are free of recurrence at SC1 are unlikely to develop recurrence in subsequent surveillance out to 2 years. Provided the colon is cleared of synchronous neoplasia, the next surveillance can be potentially extended to 3-5 years. Such an approach would reduce costs and enhance patient compliance.

Prevalence of Endoscopically Curable Low-Risk Cancer Among Large (≥20 mm) Nonpedunculated Polyps in the Right Colon.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection is increasingly promoted for the treatment of all large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) to cure potential low-risk cancers (superficial submucosal invasion without additional high-risk histopathologic features). The effect of a universal en bloc strategy on oncologic outcomes for the treatment of LNPCPs in the right colon is unknown. We evaluated this in a large Western population. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients referred for endoscopic resection (ER) of LNPCPs was analyzed. Patients found to have cancer after ER and those referred directly to surgery were included. The primary outcome was to determine the proportion of right colon LNPCPs with low-risk cancer. RESULTS: Over 180 months until June 2023, 3294 sporadic right colon LNPCPs in 2956 patients were referred for ER at 7 sites (median size 30 [interquartile range 15] mm). A total of 63 (2.1%) patients were referred directly to surgery, and cancer was proven in 56 (88.9%). A total of 2851 (96.4%) of 2956 LNPCPs underwent ER (median size 35 [interquartile range 20] mm), of which 75 (2.6%) were cancers. The overall prevalence of cancer in the right colon was 4.4% (n = 131 of 2956). Detailed histopathologic analysis was possible in 115 (88%) of 131 cancers (71 after ER, 44 direct to surgery). After excluding missing histopathologic data, 23 (0.78%) of 2940 sporadic right colon LNPCPs were low-risk cancers. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of right colon LNPCPs referred for ER containing low-risk cancer amenable to endoscopic cure was <1%, in a large, multicenter Western cohort. A universal endoscopic submucosal dissection strategy for the management of right colon LNPCPs is unlikely to yield improved patient outcomes given the minimal impact on oncologic outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Numbers: NCT01368289, NCT02000141.

Selection of endoscopic resection technique for large colorectal lesion treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥ 20 mm (LNPCPs) comprise 1% of all colorectal lesions. LNPCPs are more likely to contain advanced histology such as high-grade dysplasia and submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC). Endoscopic resection is the first-line approach for management of these lesions. Endoscopic resection options include endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold-snare EMR (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR). This review aimed to critically evaluate current endoscopic resection techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence-based selective resection algorithms should inform the most appropriate endoscopic resection technique. Most LNPCPs are removed by conventional EMR but there has been a trend toward C-EMR for endoscopic resection of LNPCPs. More high-quality trials are required to better define the limitations of C-EMR. Advances in our understanding of ESD technique, has clarified its role within the colorectum. More recently, the development of a full thickness resection device (FTRD) has allowed the curative endoscopic resection of select lesions. SUMMARY: Endoscopic resection should be regarded as the principle approach for all LNPCPs. Underpinned by high-quality research, endoscopic resection has become more nuanced, leading to improved patient outcomes.

Safety and tolerability outcomes of nonanesthesiologist-administered propofol using target-controlled infusion in routine GI endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nonanesthesiologist-administered propofol (NAAP) is increasingly accepted, but data are limited on drug administration using target-controlled infusion (TCI) in clinical practice. TCI adjusts the drug infusion based on patient-specific parameters, maintaining a constant drug dose to reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs) because of drug overdosing and to enhance patient comfort. The aims of this study were to assess the rate of AEs and to evaluate patient satisfaction with NAAP using TCI in a retrospective cohort of 18,302 procedures. METHODS: Low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists score I and II) undergoing outpatient GI endoscopic procedures, including EGDs and colonoscopies, were sequentially enrolled at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) between May 2019 and November 2021. RESULTS: Data from 7162 EGDs and 11,140 colonoscopies were analyzed. Mean patient age was 59.1 ± 14.8 years, and mean body mass index was 24.9 ± 3.7 kg/m2. The male-to-female ratio was equal at 8798 (48.1%):9486 (51.9%). AEs occurred in 240 procedures (1.3%) out of the total cohort, with no differences between EGDs and colonoscopies (100 [1.4%] and 140 [1.2%], respectively; P = .418). Most patients (15,875 [98.9%]) indicated they would likely repeat the procedure with the same sedation protocol. Age (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.03; P < .008) was the only independent factor associated with overall AEs. CONCLUSIONS: NAAP using TCI is an effective and safe sedation method for routine endoscopy. The proper propofol dosage based on individual patients and the presence of trained operators are crucial for NAAP sedation management.

Short esophageal myotomy versus standard myotomy for treatment of sigmoid-type achalasia: results of an international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with sigmoid-type achalasia can be challenging to treat with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). A short myotomy improves technical success; however, outcomes have not previously been evaluated. METHODS: This was a multicenter, international, retrospective study of patients who underwent POEM with short (≤4 cm) or standard esophageal myotomy. Outcomes included clinical and technical success, procedural adverse events, and reflux rates. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients with sigmoid achalasia (sigmoid, n = 74; advanced sigmoid, n = 35) underwent POEM across 13 centers (short myotomy, n = 59; standard, n = 50). Technical success was 100% across both groups. Patients who underwent short myotomy had a significantly shorter mean procedure time (57.7 ± 27.8 vs 83.1 ± 44.7 minutes, P = .0005). A total of 6 adverse events were recorded in 6 patients (5.5%; 4 mild, 2 moderate); the adverse event rate was not significantly different between short and standard groups. Ninety-eight patients had follow-up data (median, 3.6 months; interquartile range, 1-14 months). Clinical success was 94% (short, 93%; standard, 95%; P = .70) and did not differ based on achalasia subtype or sigmoid achalasia severity. Twenty-one (22%) patients reported post-POEM reflux and 44% (16 of 36) had objective evidence of pathologic reflux. Rates of pathologic reflux were significantly increased in the standard versus short group (odds ratio, 18.0; 95% confidence interval, 2.0-159.0; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: POEM with short myotomy is effective and safe for the short-term treatment of sigmoid and advanced sigmoid achalasia. Short myotomy may lead to less reflux than standard myotomy.

Evaluating no fixation, endoscopic suture fixation, and an over-the-scope clip for anchoring fully covered self-expanding metal stents in benign upper gastrointestinal conditions: a comparative multicenter international study (With Video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) are widely used in benign upper gastrointestinal (GI) conditions, but stent migration remains a limitation. An over-the-scope clip (OTSC) device (Stentfix {SF], Ovesco Endoscopy) for stent anchoring has recently been developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of OTSC fixation on FCSEMS migration rate. METHODS: In this retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent FCSEMS placement for benign upper GI conditions from January 2011 to October 2022 at 16 centers, the primary outcome was rate of stent migration. The secondary outcomes were clinical success and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 311 (no fixation [NF] 122, SF 94, endoscopic suturing [ES] 95) patients underwent 316 stenting procedures. Compared with the NF group (n = 49, 39%), the rates of stent migration were significantly lower in the SF (n = 16, 17%, P = .001) and ES (n = 23, 24%, P = .01) groups. The rates of stent migration were not different between the SF and ES groups (P = .2). On multivariate analysis, SF (odds ratio [OR], 0.34, 95% CI, 0.17-0.70, P < .01) and ES (OR, 0.46, 95% CI, 0.23-0.91; P = .02) were independently associated with decreased risk of stent migration. Compared with the NF group (n = 64; 52%), there were higher rates of clinical success in the SF (n = 64; 68%; P = .03) and ES (n = 66; 69%; P = .02) groups. There was no significant difference in the rates of adverse events among the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: Stent fixation using OTSCs is safe and effective at preventing stent migration and may also result in improved clinical response.

Can optical evaluation distinguish between t1a and t1b esophageal adenocarcinoma: an international expert inter-observer agreement study.

INTRODUCTION: While piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for T1a oesophageal adenocarcinoma is acceptable, enbloc-R0 excision is advocated for T1b disease as it may offer a potential cure and mitigate recurrence. Thus, distinguishing between T1a and T1b disease is imperative under current treatment paradigms. We sought to ascertain whether expert Barrett's endoscopists were able to make this distinction based on optical evaluation. METHODS: Sixty sets of endoscopic images of histologically confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD), T1a and T1b disease (n=20 for each) were compiled from consecutive patients at a single institution. Each set contained four images, and were standardized to include an overview, a close-up in high-definition white light, a near-focus magnification image, and a narrow-band image. Experts were invited to predict histology for each set. RESULTS: 19 experts from 8 countries (Australia, USA, Italy, Netherlands, Germany, Canada, Belgium, and Portugal) participated. The majority had been practicing for >20 years, with a median annual case volume for Barrett's EMR of 50 (IQR 18-75), and Barrett's ESD of 25 (IQR 10-45). Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (T1a/b) could be distinguished from HGD, with a pooled sensitivity of 89.1% (95% CI:84.7-93.4. When predicting T-stage for T1b adenocarcinoma cases, pooled sensitivity was 43.8% (95% CI:29.9-57.7). Fleiss' kappa was 0.421 (95% CI:0.399-0.442, P<0.001), indicating fair-to-moderate agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Expert Barrett's endoscopists can reliably differentiate T1a/T1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma from HGD. Although there is fair-to-moderate agreement for T-staging, T1b disease cannot be reliably distinguished from T1a disease. This may have implications on clinical decision making and selection of endoscopic treatment methods.

Standard length of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an established treatment for achalasia, yet there is still a lack of technical standardization. No clear definition of 'long', 'standard', or 'short' POEM exists to date. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to analyze current POEM length standards. We included studies reporting technical details of POEM, in which no definite or comparative myotomy length was intentionally adopted (standard myotomy). The primary outcome was the pooled mean total myotomy length. Sub-group analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity across studies. From the initial 7172 records, 31 studies with 3023 patients were included. Pooled mean of total myotomy length was 10.39 cm (95% CI 10.06-10.71; I2 99.3%). Pooled mean of esophageal and gastric myotomy length, provided by 17 studies, was 7.11 cm (95% CI 6.51-7.71; I2 99.8%) and 2.81 cm (95% CI 2.41-3-22; I2 99.8%), respectively. On subgroup analysis for achalasia subtypes, pooled mean length in non-spastic achalasia (type I and II) was 10.17 cm (95% CI 9.91-10.43; I2 94.2%), while in type III it was 14.02 cm (95% CI 10.59-17.44; I2 98.9%). Pooled mean myotomy length for studies conducted between 2014-2020 was 10.53 cm (95% CI, 10.22-10.84; I2 99.1%) and 9.74 cm (95% CI, 7.95-11.54; I2 99.7%) in 2021-2022. Myotomy length during a 'standard' POEM is 10.4 cm, remaining over 10 cm in non-spastic achalasia. The high heterogeneity across studies confirms that the POEM technique needs further standardization. We found no significant time trend towards adopting short POEM, despite recent evidence supporting its use.

A multi-omic analysis reveals the esophageal dysbiosis as the predominant trait of eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated rare disease, characterized by esophageal dysfunctions. It is likely to be primarily activated by food antigens and is classified as a chronic disease for most patients. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms underlying EoE is needed to implement and improve therapeutic lines of intervention and ameliorate overall patient wellness. METHODS: RNA-seq data of 18 different studies on EoE, downloaded from NCBI GEO with faster-qdump ( https://github.com/ncbi/sra-tools ), were batch-corrected and analyzed for transcriptomics and metatranscriptomics profiling as well as biological process functional enrichment. The EoE TaMMA web app was designed with plotly and dash. Tabula Sapiens raw data were downloaded from the UCSC Cell Browser. Esophageal single-cell raw data analysis was performed within the Automated Single-cell Analysis Pipeline. Single-cell data-driven bulk RNA-seq data deconvolution was performed with MuSiC and CIBERSORTx. Multi-omics integration was performed with MOFA. RESULTS: The EoE TaMMA framework pointed out disease-specific molecular signatures, confirming its reliability in reanalyzing transcriptomic data, and providing new EoE-specific molecular markers including CXCL14, distinguishing EoE from gastroesophageal reflux disorder. EoE TaMMA also revealed microbiota dysbiosis as a predominant characteristic of EoE pathogenesis. Finally, the multi-omics analysis highlighted the presence of defined classes of microbial entities in subsets of patients that may participate in inducing the antigen-mediated response typical of EoE pathogenesis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that the complex EoE molecular network may be unraveled through advanced bioinformatics, integrating different components of the disease process into an omics-based network approach. This may implement EoE management and treatment in the coming years.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus self-expandable metal stent for treatment of anastomotic leaks < 30 mm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Management of anastomotic leaks after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy remains a challenge. Although intracavitary endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has shown great efficacy for large dehiscences, the optimal management of smaller leaks has not been standardized. This study aims to compare EVT versus self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) in the treatment of leaks < 30 mm in size, due to the lack of current data on this topic. METHODS: Patients undergoing EVT (cases) or SEMS (controls) between May 2017 and July 2022 for anastomotic leaks < 3 cm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were enrolled. Controls were matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age (± 3 years), BMI (± 3 kg/m2) and leak size (± 4 mm). RESULTS: Cases (n = 22) and controls (n = 22) showed no difference in baseline characteristics and leak size, as per matching at enrollment. No differences were detected between the two groups in terms of time from surgery to endoscopic treatment (p = 0.11) or total number of procedures per patient (p = 0.05). Remarkably, the two groups showed comparable results in terms of leaks resolution (90.9% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.11). The number of procedures per patient was not significant between the two cohorts (p = 0.05). The most frequent complication in the SEMS group was migration (15.3% of procedures). CONCLUSION: EVT and SEMS seem to have similar efficacy outcomes in the treatment of anastomotic defects < 30 mm after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. However, larger studies are needed to corroborate these findings.

Precision endoscopy in colorectal polyps' characterization and planning of endoscopic therapy.

Precision endoscopy in the management of colorectal polyps and early colorectal cancer has emerged as the standard of care. It includes optical characterization of polyps and estimation of submucosal invasion depth of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps to select the appropriate endoscopic resection modality. Over time, several imaging modalities have been implemented in endoscopic practice to improve optical performance. Among these, image-enhanced endoscopy systems and magnification endoscopy represent now well-established tools. New advanced technologies, such as endocytoscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy, have recently shown promising results in predicting the histology of colorectal polyps. In recent years, artificial intelligence has continued to enhance endoscopic performance in the characterization of colorectal polyps, overcoming the limitations of other imaging modes. In this review we retrace the path of precision endoscopy, analyzing the yield of various endoscopic imaging techniques in personalizing management of colorectal polyps and early colorectal cancer.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy versus duodenal stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: an international, multicenter, propensity score-matched comparison.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic duodenal stenting is the current standard treatment for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) in patients with limited life expectancy. However, duodenal stenting is prone to stent dysfunction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel technique with potentially superior stent patency. We compared clinical success, safety, and stent dysfunction of EUS-GE and duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO using propensity score matching. METHODS: This international, multicenter, retrospective study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing EUS-GE or duodenal stenting for GOO between 2015 and 2021 in three European centers. Primary outcomes were clinical success (GOO scoring system [GOOSS] ≥ 2) and stent dysfunction (GOOSS ≤ 1 after initial clinical success). A propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed using age, sex, underlying disease, disease stage, ascites, and peritoneal carcinomatosis as variables. RESULTS: 214 patients underwent EUS-GE (n = 107) or duodenal stenting (n = 107). After propensity score matching, 176 patients were matched and compared. Technical success rates for EUS-GE and duodenal stenting were 94 % (95 %CI 89 %-99 %) vs. 98 % (95 %CI 95 %-100 %), respectively (P = 0.44). Clinical success rates were 91 % (95 %CI 85 %-97 %) vs. 75 % (95 %CI 66 %-84 %; P = 0.008). Stent dysfunction occurred in 1 % (95 %CI 0-4 %) vs. 26 % (95 %CI 15 %-37 %) of patients (P < 0.001). Adverse event rate was 10 % (95 %CI 4 %-17 %) vs. 21 % (95 %CI 12 %-29 %; P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: EUS-GE had higher clinical success and lower stent dysfunction, with similar safety, compared with duodenal stenting, suggesting that EUS-GE may be preferred over duodenal stenting in patients with malignant GOO.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for post-esophagectomy anastomotic dehiscence as rescue treatment: a single center case series.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) represents an effective endoscopic technique for the treatment of post-esophagectomy leaks and can be used after failure of primary treatment. We aimed to investigate endoscopic data and success rate of EVT for post-esophagectomy anastomotic leaks, after failed redo surgery or previous endoscopic treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively recruited 12 patients from January 2018 to October 2020. Success was defined as dehiscence closure at radiological and/or endoscopic evaluation. Ethical Committee of our institution approved the study. RESULTS: Twelve patients (66.7% male, mean age 65.08 ± 16.7 years) affected by esophago-gastric (n = 10) or esophago-jejunal (n = 2) anastomosis dehiscences after oncologic surgery were treated with EVT, after failure of previous redo-surgical (n = 3, 25%) or endoscopic management (n = 9, 75%). Technical success rate was 100% (60/60 procedures) and dehiscence closure was achieved in three quarters of patients (9/12, 75%). Regarding complications, one case of sponge dislocation (1/60 = 1.7%) and another case of delayed stricture after post-EVT stent placement (1/60 = 1.7%) were recorded, during a mean follow up of 182.3 days. CONCLUSIONS: EVT is a promising option in the treatment of the most complicated anastomotic dehiscences. Its use could be also considered after failure of previous endoscopic or surgical management.