Are we missing pancreatic exocrine insufficiency in 'at-risk' groups? Prospective assessment of the current practice and yield of faecal elastase testing in patients with diabetes mellitus, HIV and/or high alcohol intake.

There is cumulative evidence that pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) is under-recognised and can occur in patients with 'at-risk' conditions. Thus, we aimed to assess the current practice and yield of requesting faecal elastase (FEL-1), an indicator of PEI, in patients with 'at-risk' conditions. We prospectively recruited patients attending secondary care clinics with diabetes mellitus (DM), people living with HIV (PLHIV) and inpatients admitted to hospital with high alcohol intake (HAI). All patients underwent testing with FEL-1. Those patients with PEI (FEL-1 <200 µg/g) were contacted and offered a follow-up review in gastroenterology clinic. In total, 188 patients were recruited (HAI, n=78; DM, n=64; and PLHIV, n=46). Previous FEL-1 testing had not been performed in any of the patients. The return rate of samples was 67.9% for patients with HAI, 76.6% for those with DM and 56.5% for those with PLHIV. The presence of PEI was shown in 20.4% of patients with DM, 15.4% of patients with PLHIV and 22.6% in those with HAI. Diarrhoea and bloating were the most reported symptoms in followed-up patients with low FEL-1 (31.8% and 22.7% of patients, respectively). Follow-up computed tomography (CT) scans in those patients with PEI identified chronic pancreatitis changes in 13.6% and pancreatic atrophy in 31.8% of patients. These results suggest that there is a lack of testing for PEI in 'at-risk' groups. Our findings also suggest that using FEL-1 to test for PEI in patients with DM, PLHIV and HAI has a significant impact, although further studies are required to validate these findings.

Does reverse mentoring work in the NHS: a feasibility study of clinicians in practice.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risks and benefits of reverse mentoring of consultants by junior doctors. DESIGN: A feasibility study divided into two phases: first a semistructured interview where performance of participating consultants was assessed by junior doctors and then a second phase allowing for feedback to be given on a one-to-one basis. Data collected through questionnaires with free text questions and Likert scores. SETTING: Tertiary teaching hospital in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Six junior doctors (66.6% male, age range 31-40 years) and five consultants (80% male, age range 35-65 years and consultants for 5-20 years). INTERVENTION: Reverse mentoring session. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The concerns and/or benefits of the process of reverse mentoring. Confidence was assessed in 7 domains: clinical practice, approach to juniors, approachability, use of technology, time management, strengths and areas for improvement using Likert scales giving a total out of 35. RESULTS: The most common concerns cited were overcoming the hierarchical difference and a selection bias in both mentors and mentees. However, no participant experienced this hierarchical difference through the reverse mentoring process and no relationships were negatively affected. Mentors became more confident in feeding back to seniors (23 vs 29 out of 35, p=0.04) most evident in clinical practice and areas to improve (3 vs 4 out of 5, p=0.041 and 3 vs 5 out of 5, p=0.041, respectively). CONCLUSION: We present the first study of reverse mentoring in an NHS clinical setting. Initial concerns with regard to damaged relationships and hierarchical gradients were not experienced and all participants perceived that they benefited from the process. Reverse mentoring can play a role in engaging and training future leaders at junior stages and provide a means for consultants to receive valuable feedback from junior colleagues.

Comparison of patient tolerance and acceptability of magnet-controlled capsule endoscopy and flexible endoscopy in the investigation of dyspepsia.

Background and study aims Oropharyngeal intubation during Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is uncomfortable, associated with aerosol generation and transmission of airborne microbes. Less-invasive alternatives may be better tolerated. In this study, patient tolerance and acceptability of EGD and transnasal endoscopy (TNE) have been compared with magnet-controlled capsule endoscopy (MACE). Patients and methods A comparison of MACE with EGD and TNE in the investigation of dyspepsia was performed. Factors affecting patient tolerance and acceptability were examined using the Endoscopy Concerns Scale (ECS) and Universal Patient Centeredness Questionnaire (UPC-Q). Results Patients were significantly more distressed (scoring least to most distress: 1-10) by gagging (6 vs 1), choking (5 vs 1), bloating (2 vs 1), instrumentation (4 vs 1), discomfort during (5 vs 1) and after (2 vs 1) EGD compared to MACE (all P  < 0.0001). Patients were more distressed by instrumentation (5 vs 1) and discomfort during (5 vs 1) TNE compared to MACE ( P  = 0.001). Patients were more accepting of MACE than EGD and TNE with a UPC-Q score (scoring least to most acceptable: 0-100) lower for EGD (50 vs 98, P  < 0.0001) and TNE (75 vs 88, P  = 0.007) than MACE, and a post-procedure ECS score (scoring most to least acceptable: 10-100) higher for EGD (34 vs 11, P  < 0.0001) and TNE (25 vs 10.5, P  = 0.001) than MACE. MACE would be preferred by 83 % and 64 % of patients even if EGD or TNE respectively was subsequently recommended to obtain biopsies in half of examinations. Conclusions Gagging and choking during instrumentation, the main causes of patient distress during EGD, occurred less during TNE but tolerance, acceptability and patient experience favored MACE.

Performance measures for the SACRED team-centered approach to advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative.

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology have defined performance measures for upper and lower gastrointestinal, pancreaticobiliary, and small-bowel endoscopy. Quality indicators to guide endoscopists in the growing field of advanced endoscopy are also underway. We propose that equal attention is given to developing the entire advanced endoscopy team and not the individual endoscopist alone.We suggest that the practice of teams intending to deliver high quality advanced endoscopy is underpinned by six crucial principles concerning: selection, acceptance, complications, reconnaissance, envelopment, and documentation (SACRED).

Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 2008, a plethora of research studies has compared the efficacy of water-assisted (aided) colonoscopy (WAC) and underwater resection (UWR) of colorectal lesions with standard colonoscopy. We reviewed and graded the research evidence with potential clinical application. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus among experienced colonoscopists on definitions and practice of water immersion (WI), water exchange (WE), and UWR. METHODS: Major databases were searched to obtain research reports that could potentially shape clinical practice related to WAC and UWR. Pertinent references were graded (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Extracted data supporting evidence-based statements were tabulated and provided to respondents. We received responses from 55 (85% surveyed) experienced colonoscopists (37 experts and 18 nonexperts in WAC) from 16 countries in 3 rounds. Voting was conducted anonymously in the second and third round, with ≥80% agreement defined as consensus. We aimed to obtain consensus in all statements. RESULTS: In the first and the second modified Delphi rounds, 20 proposed statements were decreased to 14 and then 11 statements. After the third round, the combined responses from all respondents depicted the consensus in 11 statements (S): definitions of WI (S1) and WE (S2), procedural features (S3-S5), impact on bowel cleanliness (S6), adenoma detection (S7), pain score (S8), and UWR (S9-S11). CONCLUSIONS: The most important consensus statements are that WI and WE are not the same in implementation and outcomes. Because studies that could potentially shape clinical practice of WAC and UWR were chosen for review, this modified Delphi consensus supports recommendations for the use of WAC in clinical practice.

Infliximab induction regimens in steroid-refractory acute severe colitis: a multicentre retrospective cohort study with propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated induction regimens of infliximab have been proposed to improve response rates in patients with steroid-refractory acute severe colitis. AIM: To determine the differences in outcome for acute severe ulcerative colitis between accelerated and standard-dose infliximab METHODS: We collected data on hospitalised patients receiving differing regimens of rescue therapy for steroid-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis. Our primary outcome was 30-day colectomy rate. Secondary outcomes were colectomy within index admission, and at 90 days and 12 months. We used propensity score analysis with optimal calliper matching using high risk covariates defined a priori to reduce potential provider selection bias. RESULTS: We included 131 patients receiving infliximab rescue therapy; 102 received standard induction and 29 received accelerated induction. In the unmatched cohort, there was no difference by type of induction in the 30-day colectomy rates (18% vs 20%, P = .45), colectomy during index admission (13% vs 20%, P = .26) or overall colectomy (20% vs 24%, P = .38). In the propensity score-matched cohort of 52 patients, 30-day colectomy (57% vs 27%, P = .048) and index admission colectomy (53% vs 23%, P = .045) rates were higher in those receiving standard induction compared to accelerated induction but there was no difference in overall colectomy rates (57% vs 31%, P = .09). There was no significant difference in length of stay or in complication and infection rates. CONCLUSION: In a propensity score-matched cohort, steroid-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis patients, short-term, but not long-term, colectomy rates appear to be lower in those receiving an accelerated induction regimen.

Magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy in suspected acute upper GI bleeding versus esophagogastroduodenoscopy in detecting focal lesions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acute upper GI bleeding is common and requires investigation with EGD, but endotherapy is not always necessary. Magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy (MACE) uses a capsule steerable by an external magnet and allows examination of the upper GI tract and small bowel, but its role in acute upper GI bleeding has not been assessed. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study comparing the diagnostic yield of MACE and EGD in patients with suspected acute upper GI bleeding. Patient tolerance, mucosal visibility by MACE, and frequency of small-bowel bleeding were assessed. Whether or not MACE could safely predict discharge of patients was also determined. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included for analysis (median age, 60 years; 75.8% male). MACE detected more focal lesions (peptic, vascular, and fresh/altered blood without a clear source) than EGD (40 versus 25, respectively, P = .02) but statistical significance was not reached for significant lesions (considered to be the bleeding source; 14 vs 13, respectively, P = 1). Capsule endoscopy identified an additional cause for bleeding in the small bowel in 18%. Visualization by MACE was excellent in most areas; views of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, fundus, and duodenal bulb were suboptimal. MACE was better tolerated than unsedated EGD and correctly identified patients who were safe for discharge. CONCLUSIONS: MACE had higher diagnostic yield for focal lesions and was better tolerated than EGD. It also correctly predicted safe discharge for patients with acute upper GI bleeding. (Clinical trials registration number: NCT02690376.).

Diagnostic yield of magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy versus gastroscopy in recurrent and refractory iron deficiency anemia.

BACKGROUND: Small-bowel capsule endoscopy is advocated and repeat upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy should be considered for evaluation of recurrent or refractory iron deficiency anemia (IDA). A new device that allows magnetic steering of the capsule around the stomach (magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy [MACE]), followed by passive small-bowel examination might satisfy both requirements in a single procedure. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, MACE and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were performed in patients with recurrent or refractory IDA. Comparisons of total (upper GI and small bowel) and upper GI diagnostic yields, gastric mucosal visibility, and patient comfort scores were the primary end points. RESULTS: 49 patients were recruited (median age 64 years; 39 % male). Combined upper and small-bowel examination using the new capsule yielded more pathology than EGD alone (113 vs. 52; P < 0.001). In upper GI examination (proximal to the second part of the duodenum, D2), MACE identified more total lesions than EGD (88 vs. 52; P < 0.001). There was also a difference if only IDA-associated lesions (esophagitis, altered/fresh blood, angioectasia, ulcers, and villous atrophy) were included (20 vs. 10; P = 0.04). Pathology distal to D2 was identified in 17 patients (34.7 %). Median scores (0 - 10 for none - extreme) for pain (0 vs. 2), discomfort (0 vs. 3), and distress (0 vs. 4) were lower for MACE than for EGD (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Combined examination of the upper GI tract and small bowel using the MACE capsule detected more pathology than EGD alone in patients with recurrent or refractory IDA. MACE also had a higher diagnostic yield than EGD in the upper GI tract and was better tolerated by patients.

Paradigm shift: should the elderly undergo propofol sedation for DBE? A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the safety of propofol-assisted double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) in elderly patients against a younger cohort. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: All patients undergoing DBE over a 30-month period were recruited at our tertiary centre. PATIENTS: 215 procedures in 161 patients were performed. An age cut-off of 65 years and above was used to define those who were elderly. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were subcategorised into four groups: elderly or young undergoing DBE with propofol or conventional sedation (with midazolam±fentanyl). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient demographics, comorbidities, procedural data, complications, diagnostic and therapeutic yield were compared. RESULTS: Cardiovascular disease and a higher American Society of Anaethesiologists (ASA) status were more prevalent in elderly patients undergoing DBE with propofol (p<0.05). Common indications for DBE were occult and overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and suspected Crohn's disease (elderly vs young: 50.7% vs 42.3%, 17.8% vs 12% and 19.2% vs 26.1%, respectively). Diagnostic yield was higher in elderly compared with young patients (75.3% vs 58.5%, p=0.016). The most common findings in elderly and young patients were angioectasia (30.1% and. 18.3%, respectively) and ulcers (17.8% and 9.2%, respectively), while therapeutic intervention rates were comparable (42.5% vs 32.4%, p=0.18). ASA status did not affect propofol dose (p=0.55) or procedure duration (p=0.31). Tolerance scores were favourable in those receiving propofol compared with conventional sedation (p<0.05). There was no difference in complications between the four groups (p=0.17). CONCLUSION: Compared with young patients, propofol-assisted DBE in the elderly is safe and has a high diagnostic yield.

Upper gastrointestinal tract capsule endoscopy using a nurse-led protocol: First reported experience.

AIM: To test the feasibility and performance of a novel upper gastrointestinal (GI) capsule endoscope using a nurse-led protocol. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort analysis of patients who declined gastroscopy (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, OGD) but who consented to upper GI capsule endoscopy. Patients swallowed the upper GI capsule following ingestion of 1 liter of water (containing simethicone). A series of positional changes were used to exploit the effects of water flow and move the upper GI capsule from one gravity-dependent area to another using a nurse-led protocol. Capsule transit time, video reading time, mucosal visualisation, pathology detection and patient tolerance was evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the study. The mean capsule transit times in the oesophagus and stomach were 28 s and 68 min respectively. Visualisation of the following major anatomical landmarks was achieved (graded 1-5: Poor to excellent): Oesophagus, 4.8 (± 0.5); gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ), 4.8 (± 0.8); cardia, 4.8 (± 0.8); fundus, 3.8 (± 1.2); body, 4.5 (± 1); antrum, 4.5 (± 1); pylorus, 4.7 (± 0.8); duodenal bulb, 4.7 (± 0.7); second part of the duodenum (D2), 4.7 (± 1). The upper GI capsule reached D2 in 64% of patients. The mean video reading time was 48 min with standard playback mode and 20 min using Quickview (P = 0.0001). No pathology was missed using Quickview. Procedural tolerance was excellent. No complications were seen with the upper GI capsule. CONCLUSION: The upper GI capsule achieved excellent views of the upper GI tract. Future studies should compare the diagnostic accuracy between upper GI capsule and OGD.

Reassessing the value of gastroscopy for the investigation of dyspepsia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic yield of investigating dyspepsia with oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) with or without mucosal biopsy. DESIGN: Retrospective service evaluation study. SETTING: Two teaching hospitals: The Royal Hallamshire Hospital and Northern General Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK. PATIENTS: 500 patients, 55 years of age and over, who underwent OGD to investigate dyspepsia were included. The study period included a 3-month window. All OGDs were performed on an outpatient basis. INTERVENTIONS: Data were extracted from electronic OGD records within the study period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic yield provided by endoscopic examination and histological assessment. RESULTS: 378 patients (75.6%) were reported to have some form of endoscopic abnormality, and 417 patients (83.4%) had biopsies taken. The most common findings at OGD were gastritis (47.2%) and oesophagitis (24.4%). Oesophagogastric malignancy was seen in 1%. Diagnoses made endoscopically or histologically that would not have been appropriately managed by empirical therapies were seen in 16.2%. CONCLUSION: OGD in dyspepsia influences patient management in approximately one-sixth of cases. However, the majority of patients are sufficiently managed with Helicobacter pylori testing and eradication and/or a trial of proton pump inhibitor therapy. Further non-invasive approaches are needed to identify patients who need endoscopy for biopsy or therapy.

Gastric preparation for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy: A prospective, randomized single-blinded controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) is a novel technique for which there is no agreed gastric preparation. We aimed to determine an optimal standardized gastric preparation regimen. METHODS: 120 patients referred for MCE were randomly assigned to gastric preparation with either water alone (A), water with simethicone (B) or water, simethicone and pronase (C). Image quality was assessed using cleanliness and visualization scores, higher scores equating to better image quality. RESULTS: The total cleanliness scores were (mean±SD) 15.83±2.41 (A), 21.35±1.23 (B), and 20.82±1.90 (C). The total visualization scores (mean±SD) were 10.75±2.02 (A), 15.20±1.32 (B), and 15.08±1.86 (C). While the image quality of the whole stomach in groups B and C were significantly better than group A (P<0.0001), there was no statistical difference between group B and C (P>0.05). MCE detected positive findings in 21 (52.5%), 27 (67.5%) and 21 (53.8%) patients in group A, B and C respectively, with no significant difference between groups (P>0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Simethicone swallowed with water prior to MCE produced the optimal gastric mucosal image quality. The addition of pronase had no demonstrable additional benefit.

An update on small bowel endoscopy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The breakthrough success of capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy has inspired researchers to test and push the boundary of these technologies. The authors herein summarize the latest and most significant studies with clinical impact. RECENT FINDINGS: Competing capsule endoscopy models have enriched the platform of this wireless device. The role of capsule endoscopy in Crohn's disease is expanding as we learn more of the significance of disease distribution and response to treatment. The benefit of capsule endoscopy in abdominal pain has previously been sceptical, but may have a role. Device-assisted enteroscopy demonstrates significant benefit in the management of patients with Crohn's disease and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. On the contrary, long-term data suggest that endotherapy to small bowel angioectasia may not be as beneficial to patients as we once thought. The role of device-assisted enteroscopy in novel territory, including coeliac disease and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, continues to be tested. SUMMARY: The limit of capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy is yet to be reached. Accumulating long-term data alludes to the benefits of our current practice while spawning novel indications for small bowel endoscopy.