An Endoscopic Scoring System for Achalasia: The CARS score.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnosis of achalasia is associated with an average delay of two years. Endoscopic features may prompt an earlier diagnosis. We aimed to develop and test a novel endoscopic CARS score for the prediction of achalasia. METHODS: Part 1: Twenty endoscopic videos were taken from patients undergoing endoscopy for dysphagia or reflux. A survey with videos and endoscopic criteria options was distributed to 6 esophagologists and 6 general gastroenterologists. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was measured and logistic regression was used to evaluate predictive performance. Three rounds of review were conducted to select the final score of four components. PART 2: A retrospective review was conducted for consecutive patients who had comprehensive esophageal testing. Each patient had a CARS endoscopic score calculated based on findings reported at endoscopy. RESULTS: From a video review and analysis of score components, IRR ranged from 0.23 to 0.57 for score components. The final CARS score was selected based on the following four components: Contents, Anatomy, Resistance, and Stasis. In a mixed effects model, the mean score across raters was higher for achalasia compared to non-achalasia subjects (4.44 vs. 0.87, p = < 0.01). In part 2 of the study, achalasia patients had a higher mean CARS score compared to those with no / ineffective motility disorder (mean 4.1 vs 1.3, p = < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a CARS score based on reliability performance in a video-based survey and tested the score in clinical setting. The CARS score performed well in predicting achalasia.

Bariatric Bypass Surgery Is a Risk Factor for Incomplete Colonoscopy Preparation.

OBJECTIVES: Effective colon cancer screening requires adequate bowel preparation. Anecdotal evidence has suggested that patients with a history of bariatric surgery are more likely to have inadequate preparation. This study aims to evaluate the role of bariatric surgery as a predictive risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively for consecutive colonoscopies between March 1, 2013, and November 15, 2017. Only the index colonoscopy for each patient within the review period, and those scored using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) were included. Inadequate preparation was defined as any one or more colon segments with a BBPS score of less than two, and patients with a history of bariatric surgery were identified using ICD 9/10 codes. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching was used to assess for independent factors predictive of inadequate bowel preparation. RESULTS: A total of 25,318 colonoscopies were included in the analysis. Two hundred 278 (1.1%) patients had a history of bariatric surgery, among which 171 (61.5%) had a history of bypass surgery and 107 (38.5%) had a history of restrictive surgical procedure. A history of bariatric surgery was predictive of inadequate bowel preparation in both univariate (OR: 2.87, 95% CI: 1.92-4.29, P = 0.0003) and multivariate analysis (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.43-3.27, P = 0.0003) after controlling for differences in baseline characteristics. When evaluated separately, a history of bypass surgery was associated with inadequate bowel preparation (aOR: 2.96, 95% CI: 1.86-4.72, P < 0.0001), whereas a history of a restrictive bariatric surgery was not associated with inadequate bowel preparation in multivariate analysis (aOR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.4-2.45, P = 0.971). CONCLUSIONS: A history of bariatric surgery is an independent risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation. Furthermore, bypass bariatric surgeries had higher rates of inadequate preparation when compared to restrictive bariatric surgeries. Further quality improvement initiatives should be directed at identifying the appropriate bowel preparation regimen in this population.

Blood-Based Biomarkers in the Diagnosis and Risk Stratification of Pancreatic Cysts.

The use of blood-based biomarkers for the assessment of pancreatic cystic lesions is a rapidly growing field with incredible potential. CA 19-9 remains the only blood-based marker in common use, while many novel biomarkers are in early stages of development and validation. We highlight current work in the fields of proteomics, metabolomics, cell-free DNA/circulating tumor DNA, extracellular vesicles, and microRNA among others, as well as barriers to development and future directions in the work of blood-based biomarkers for pancreatic cystic lesions.

Loop-and-let-go technique for the management of symptomatic large colonic lipoma.

Video 1We depict (1) identification of a large lipoma in the sigmoid colon; (2) radial echo endoscopy confirming diagnosis; (3) removal with the loop-and-let-go technique; (4) ex vivo demonstration of the technique; and (5) an interval follow-up demonstrating healing of the lesion.

Risk factors for small bowel bleeding in an overt gastrointestinal bleeding presentation after negative upper and lower endoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: A small bowel source is suspected when evaluation of overt gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding with upper and lower endoscopy is negative. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is the recommended next diagnostic test for small bowel bleeding sources. However, clinical or endoscopic predictive factors for small bowel bleeding in the setting of an overt bleeding presentation are unknown. We aimed to define predictive factors for positive VCE among individuals presenting with overt bleeding and a suspected small bowel source. METHODS: We included consecutive inpatient VCE performed between September 1, 2012 to September 1, 2015 for melena or hematochezia at two tertiary centers. All patients had EGD and colonoscopy performed prior to VCE. Patient demographics, medication use, and endoscopic findings were retrospectively recorded. VCE findings were graded based on the P0-P2 grading system. The primary outcome of interest was a positive (P2) VCE. The secondary outcome of interest was the performance of a therapeutic intervention. Data were analyzed with the Fisher exact test for dichotomous variables and logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-three VCE were reviewed, and 117 were included in the final analysis. A positive VCE (P2) was identified in 35 (29.9%) cases. In univariate analysis, a positive VCE was inversely associated with presence of diverticula on preceding colonoscopy (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.2-0.99), while identification of blood on terminal ileal examination was associated with a positive VCE (OR: 5.18, 95% CI: 1.51-17.76). In multivariate analysis, only blood identified on terminal ileal examination remained a significant risk factor for positive VCE (OR: 6.13, 95% CI: 1.57-23.81). Blood on terminal ileal examination was also predictive of therapeutic intervention in both univariate (OR: 4.46, 95% CI: 1.3-15.2) and multivariate analysis (OR: 5.04, 95% CI: 1.25-20.32). CONCLUSION: Among patients presenting with overt bleeding but negative upper and lower endoscopy, the presence of blood on examination of the terminal ileum is strongly associated with a small bowel bleeding source as well as with small bowel therapeutic intervention. Presence of diverticula on colonoscopy is inversely associated with a positive VCE and therapeutic intervention in univariate analysis.