International consensus on the management of large (≥20 mm) colorectal laterally spreading tumors: World Endoscopy Organization Delphi study.

OBJECTIVES: There have been significant advances in the management of large (≥20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) or nonpedunculated colorectal polyps; however, there is a lack of clear consensus on the management of these lesions with significant geographic variability especially between Eastern and Western paradigms. We aimed to provide an international consensus to better guide management and attempt to homogenize practices. METHODS: Two experts in interventional endoscopy spearheaded an evidence-based Delphi study on behalf of the World Endoscopy Organization Colorectal Cancer Screening Committee. A steering committee comprising six members devised 51 statements, and 43 experts from 18 countries on six continents participated in a three-round voting process. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool was used to assess evidence quality and recommendation strength. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement (strongly agree or agree) on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Forty-two statements reached consensus after three rounds of voting. Recommendations included: three statements on training and competency; 10 statements on preresection evaluation, including optical diagnosis, classification, and staging of LSTs; 14 statements on endoscopic resection indications and technique, including statements on en bloc and piecemeal resection decision-making; seven statements on postresection evaluation; and eight statements on postresection care. CONCLUSIONS: An international expert consensus based on the current available evidence has been developed to guide the evaluation, resection, and follow-up of LSTs. This may provide guiding principles for the global management of these lesions and standardize current practices.

Gastro-esophageal diagnostic workup before bariatric surgery or endoscopic treatment for obesity: position statement of the International Society of Diseases of the Esophagus.

Obesity is a chronic and multifactorial condition characterized by abnormal weight gain due to excessive adipose tissue accumulation that represents a growing worldwide challenge for public health. In addition, obese patients have an increased risk of hiatal hernia, esophageal, and gastric dysfunction, as well as gastroesophageal reflux disease, which has a prevalence over 40% in those seeking endoscopic or surgical intervention. Surgery has been demonstrated to be the most effective treatment for severe obesity in terms of long-term weight loss, comorbidities, and quality of life improvements and overall mortality decrease. The recent emergence of bariatric endoscopic techniques promises less invasive, more cost-effective, and reproducible approaches to the treatment of obesity. With the endorsement of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, we started a Delphi process to develop consensus statements on the most appropriate diagnostic workup to preoperatively assess gastroesophageal function before bariatric surgical or endoscopic interventions. The Consensus Working Group comprised 11 international experts from five countries. The group consisted of gastroenterologists and surgeons with a large expertise with regard to gastroesophageal reflux disease, bariatric surgery and endoscopy, and physiology. Ten statements were selected, on the basis of the agreement level and clinical relevance, which represent an evidence and experience-based consensus of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.

Asia-Pacific survey on green endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Greenhouse gas emissions are the fundamental cause of global warming, with CO2 being the most contributive. Carbon reduction has been widely advocated to mitigate the climate crisis. The endoscopy unit is the third highest waste-generating department in a hospital. The awareness and acceptance of the practice of green endoscopy among healthcare workers is unclear. METHOD: An online survey was conducted over a 5-week period from July to August 2023 in the Asia-Pacific region, which targeted endoscopists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals of the endoscopy unit. The primary outcome was the agreement to adopt green endoscopy. The secondary outcomes included views on sustainable practices, factors associated with increased acceptance of green endoscopy, the acceptance of different carbon reduction measures, and the perceived barriers to implementation. RESULTS: A total of 259 valid responses were received. Overall, 79.5% of participants agreed to incorporate green endoscopy into their practice. Nevertheless, existing green policies were only reported by 12.7% of respondents. The level of understanding of green endoscopy is the only significant factor associated with its acceptance (odds ratio 3.10, P < 0.007). Potential barriers to implementation include healthcare cost increment, infection risk, inadequate awareness, and lack of policy and industrial support. CONCLUSION: Green endoscopy is well accepted among healthcare workers but not widely implemented. The level of understanding is highly associated with its acceptance, highlighting the importance of education. A reliable assessment tool is needed to quantify the environmental impact of endoscopy. Further studies are needed to ascertain its benefit and cost effectiveness.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group. CONCLUSIONS: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus pneumatic dilation in treatment-naive patients with achalasia: 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: 2-year follow-up data from our randomised controlled trial showed that peroral endoscopic myotomy is associated with a significantly higher efficacy than pneumatic dilation as initial treatment of therapy-naive patients with achalasia. Here we report therapeutic success rates in patients treated with peroral endoscopic myotomy compared with pneumatic dilation at the 5-year follow-up. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in six hospitals in the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Hong Kong, and the USA. Adults aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed symptomatic achalasia (based on an Eckardt score >3) were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to peroral endoscopic myotomy or pneumatic dilation using web-based randomisation with a random block size of 8 and stratification according to site. Randomisation concealment for treatment type was double blind until official study enrolment. Treatment was unmasked because of the different technical approach of each procedure. Patients in the pneumatic dilation group were dilated with a single series of 30-35 mm balloons. The need for subsequent dilations in the pneumatic dilation group, and the need for dilation after initial treatment in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group, was considered treatment failure. The primary outcome was therapeutic success (Eckardt score ≤3 in the absence of severe treatment-related complications and no need for retreatment). Analysis of the primary outcome was by modified intention to treat, including all patients randomly assigned to a group, excluding those patients who did not receive treatment or were lost to follow-up. Safety was assessed in all included patients. This study is registered at the Dutch Trial Registry, NTR3593, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 21, 2012, and July 20, 2015, 182 patients were assessed for eligibility, 133 of whom were included in the study and randomly assigned to peroral endoscopic myotomy (n=67) or pneumatic dilation (n=66). 5-year follow-up data were available for 62 patients in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group and 63 patients in the pneumatic dilation group. 50 (81%) patients in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group had treatment success at 5 years, compared with 25 (40%) in the pneumatic dilation group, an adjusted absolute difference of 41% (95% CI 25-57; p<0·0001). Reasons for failure were no initial effect of treatment (one patient in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group vs 12 patients in the pneumatic dilation group) and recurrent symptoms causing treatment failure (11 patients in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group [seven patients between 2 and 5 years] vs 25 patients in the pneumatic dilation group [nine patients between 2 and 5 years]); one patient in the pneumatic dilation group had treatment failure due to an adverse event. Proton-pump inhibitor use (mostly daily) was significantly higher after peroral endoscopic myotomy than after pneumatic dilation among patients still in clinical remission (23 [46%] of 50 patients vs three [13%] of 24 patients; p=0·008). 5-year follow-up endoscopy of patients still in clinical remission showed reflux oesophagitis in 14 (33%) of 42 patients in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group (12 [29%] grade A or B, two [5%] grade C or D) and two (13%) of 16 patients in the pneumatic dilation group (two [13%] grade A or B, none grade C or D; p=0·19). No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred between 2 and 5 years after treatment. The following non-intervention-related serious adverse events occurred between 2 and 5 years: a stroke (one [2%]) in the peroral endoscopic myotomy group; and death due to a melanoma (one [2%]) and dementia (one [2%]) in the pneumatic dilation group. INTERPRETATION: Based on this study, peroral endoscopic myotomy should be proposed as an initial treatment option for patients with achalasia. Although our study has shown that peroral endoscopic myotomy has greater long-term efficacy with a low risk of major treatment-related complications, this should not lead to abandonment of pneumatic dilation from clinical practice. Ideally, all treatment options should be discussed with treatment-naive patients with achalasia and a shared decision should be made. FUNDING: Fonds NutsOhra and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Evaluation of oropharyngeal deglutitive pressure dynamics in patients with Parkinson's disease.

In Parkinson's disease (PD), oropharyngeal dysphagia is common and clinically relevant. The neurophysiology of dysphagia in PD is complex and incompletely understood. The aim of the study was to determine the changes in oropharyngeal deglutitive pressure dynamics in PD and to correlate these with clinical characteristics including dysphagia and PD severity. In prospective consecutive series of 64 patients with PD [mean age: 66.9 ± 8.3 (SD)], we evaluated dysphagia severity clinically as well as with Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) and Swallow Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (SWAL-QOL). PD severity was assessed with Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). We used high-resolution pharyngeal impedance manometry (HRPIM) to objectively evaluate swallow function and compared data from 23 age-matched healthy controls [mean age 62.3 ± 9.1 (SD)]. Metrics assessed were upper esophageal sphincter (UES), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), relaxation time (RT), maximum opening (MaxAdm), and pharyngeal intrabolus pressure (IBP) and pharyngeal contractility (PhCI). Mean MDS-UPDRS score was positively associated with dysphagia severity on SSQ and SWAL-QOL. HRPIM in PD compared with controls showed impaired UES relaxation parameters, with shorter RT, and elevated IRP and IBP. MaxAdm was not affected. The overall pharyngeal contractility was significantly higher in PD. Only the IBP and IRP were associated with PD severity and only IBP was significantly associated with dysphagia severity. UES dysfunction leading to increased flow resistance is common in patients with PD and correlates with dysphagia severity. Increased flow resistance may suggest impaired UES relaxation and/or impaired neuromodulation to bolus volume.NEW & NOTEWORTHY In Parkinson's disease, objective assessment of swallow function with high-resolution impedance manometry identifies upper esophageal sphincter dysfunction leading to increased flow resistance.

Endoscopy After the COVID-19 Pandemic-What Will Be Different?

Purpose of Review: This paper reviews the latest literature regarding the impact of COVID on endoscopy service provision. Recent Findings: Endoscopy has been shown to be largely safe when appropriate infection prevention and control measures are in place. Endoscopy training and education has been profoundly affected though novel training models to overcome this have been developed. Proper handling of delayed or cancelled procedures is of utmost importance to minimize delays in diagnosis and treatment of diseases such as cancer. Adoption of new technologies such as non-endoscopy alternatives and telehealth may be a viable alternative to minimize infection risks. Summary: This pandemic has led to tangible differences in how we provide endoscopy service in the future. Future research focusing on better risk stratification of patients who need endoscopy, validating novel endoscopy training models, and adopting new technologies are urgently needed to support these changes in the post-pandemic world.

Worldwide Techniques and Outcomes in Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE): Results From the Multicenter International Registry.

OBJECTIVE: This international multicenter study by the Upper GI International Robotic Association aimed to gain insight in current techniques and outcomes of RAMIE worldwide. BACKGROUND: Current evidence for RAMIE originates from single-center studies, which may not be generalizable to the international multicenter experience. METHODS: Twenty centers from Europe, Asia, North-America, and South-America participated from 2016 to 2019. Main endpoints included the surgical techniques, clinical outcomes, and early oncological results of ramie. RESULTS: A total of 856 patients undergoing transthoracic RAMIE were included. Robotic surgery was applied for both the thoracic and abdominal phase (45%), only the thoracic phase (49%), or only the abdominal phase (6%). In most cases, the mediastinal lymphadenectomy included the low paraesophageal nodes (n=815, 95%), subcarinal nodes (n = 774, 90%), and paratracheal nodes (n = 537, 63%). When paratracheal lymphadenectomy was performed during an Ivor Lewis or a McKeown RAMIE procedure, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury occurred in 3% and 11% of patients, respectively. Circular stapled (52%), hand-sewn (30%), and linear stapled (18%) anastomotic techniques were used. In Ivor Lewis RAMIE, robot-assisted hand-sewing showed the highest anastomotic leakage rate (33%), while lower rates were observed with circular stapling (17%) and linear stapling (15%). In McKeown RAMIE, a hand-sewn anastomotic technique showed the highest leakage rate (27%), followed by linear stapling (18%) and circular stapling (6%). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to provide an overview of the current techniques and outcomes of transthoracic RAMIE worldwide. Although these results indicate high quality of the procedure, the optimal approach should be further defined.

Cricopharyngeal peroral endoscopic myotomy improves oropharyngeal dysphagia in patients with Parkinson's disease.

Background and study aims Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is prevalent in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction is an important pathophysiological factor for OPD in PD. The cricopharyngeus (CP) is the main component of UES. We assessed the preliminary efficacy of cricopharyngeal peroral endoscopic myotomy (C-POEM) as a treatment for dysphagia due to UES dysfunction in PD. Patients and methods Consecutive dysphagic PD patients with UES dysfunction underwent C-POEM. Swallow metrics derived using high-resolution pharyngeal impedance manometry (HRPIM) including raised UES integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), raised hypopharyngeal intrabolus pressure (IBP), reduced UES opening caliber and relaxation time defined UES dysfunction. Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) and Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire (SWAL-QOL) at before and 1 month after C-POEM measured symptomatic improvement in swallow function. HRPIM was repeated at 1-month follow-up. Results C-POEM was performed without complications in all (n = 8) patients. At 1 month, there was an improvement in both the mean SSQ (from 621.5 to 341.8, mean difference -277.3, 95 %CI [-497.8, -56.7], P  = 0.02) and SWAL-QOL (from 54.9 to 68.3, mean difference 9.1, 95 %CI [0.7, 17.5], P  = 0.037) scores. Repeat HRPIM confirmed a decrease in both the mean UES IRP (13.7 mm Hg to 3.6 mm Hg, mean difference -10.1 mm Hg, 95 %CI [-16.3, -3.9], P  = 0.007) and the mean hypopharyngeal IBP (23.5 mm Hg to 10.4 mm Hg, mean difference -11.3 mm Hg, 95 %CI [-17.2, -5.4], P  = 0.003). Conclusions In dysphagic PD patients with UES dysfunction, C-POEM is feasible and enhances UES relaxation and reduces sphincteric resistance to flow during the swallow, thereby improving dysphagia symptoms.

COVID-19 and endoscopic management of superficial gastrointestinal neoplastic lesions: a multinational cross-sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to report the impact of the pandemic lockdown period on the treatment and prognosis of superficial gastrointestinal neoplastic lesions. METHODS: A survey was completed by 11 centers from four continents regarding postponements during the early lockdown period of the pandemic, and the same period in 2019. RESULTS: In 2020, 55 % of the scheduled procedures were deferred, which was 11 times higher than in 2019; the main reasons were directly related to COVID-19. In countries that were highly affected, this proportion rose to 76 % vs. 26 % in those where there was less impact. Despite the absolute reduction, the relative distribution in 2019 vs. 2020 was similar, the only exception being duodenal lesions (affected by a 92 % reduction in mucosectomies). Although it is expected that the majority of postponements will not affect the stage (based on the results from biopsies and/or endoscopic appearance), 3 % of delayed procedures will probably require surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The lockdown period caused by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic led to a substantial reduction in the number of endoscopic resections for neoplastic lesions. Nevertheless, based on clinical judgment, the planned median delay will not worsen the prognosis of the affected patients.

An international survey on recognition and characterization of atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia.

Background and study aims Atrophic gastritis (AG) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) are premalignant conditions of gastric cancer and endoscopic recognition and characterization may help in stratifying the gastric cancer risk for screening and surveillance. However, there is currently lack of consensus in defining the severity of AG and IM. We aimed to conduct an international survey to understand the current practice of endoscopists worldwide. Methods An online survey was designed to collect data regarding participants' practice in endoscopic assessment of AG & IM. A test using images was conducted to evaluate the difference in accuracy of characterization of AG & IM. Results From July to October 2017, 249 endoscopists responded to the survey. Around 70 % of participants received some form of training on recognition of AG & IM. There was significant variety in the training received across different continents. One hundred seventy-six participants (70 %) would document the presence of both AG and IM, but the classification systems used were inconsistent between endoscopists. Overall accuracy in diagnosis of AG & IM in the image test was 84.5 % and 80.7 % respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was significantly higher among Japanese and Korean endoscopists compared to the rest of the world. Conclusion Training regarding endoscopic recognition of AG & IM differs significantly in different parts of the world. The difference in diagnostic accuracy for these premalignant gastric conditions may also explain the discrepancy in the early cancer detection rates among different countries. A simple unified classification system may be beneficial for better stratification of cancer risks.

ELSA recommendations for minimally invasive surgery during a community spread pandemic: a centered approach in Asia from widespread to recovery phases.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes to surgical practice across the worlds. Some countries are seeing a tailing down of cases, while others are still having persistent and sustained community spread. These evolving disease patterns call for a customized and dynamic approach to the selection, screening, planning, and for the conduct of surgery for these patients. METHODS: The current literature and various international society guidelines were reviewed and a set of recommendations were drafted. These were circulated to the Governors of the Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA) for expert comments and discussion. The results of these were compiled and are presented in this paper. RESULTS: The recommendations include guidance for selection and screening of patients in times of active community spread, limited community spread, during times of sporadic cases or recovery and the transition between phases. Personal protective equipment requirements are also reviewed for each phase as minimum requirements. Capability management for the re-opening of services is also discussed. The choice between open and laparoscopic surgery is patient based, and the relative advantages of laparoscopic surgery with regard to complications, and respiratory recovery after major surgery has to be weighed against the lack of safety data for laparoscopic surgery in COVID-19 positive patients. We provide recommendations on the operating room set up and conduct of general surgery. If laparoscopic surgery is to be performed, we describe circuit modifications to assist in reducing plume generation and aerosolization. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic requires every surgical unit to have clear guidelines to ensure both patient and staff safety. These guidelines may assist in providing guidance to units developing their own protocols. A judicious approach must be adopted as surgical units look to re-open services as the pandemic evolves.

Overview of guidance for endoscopy during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

From its beginning in December 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak has spread globally from Wuhan and is now declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The sheer scale and severity of this pandemic is unprecedented in the modern era. Although primarily a respiratory tract infection transmitted by direct contact and droplets, during aerosol-generating procedures, there is a possibility of airborne transmission. In addition, emerging evidence suggests possible fecal-oral spread of the virus. Clinical departments that perform endoscopy are faced with daunting challenges during this pandemic. To date, multiple position statements and guidelines have been issued by various professional organizations to recommend practices in endoscopic procedures. This article aims to summarize and discuss available evidence for these practices, to provide guidance for endoscopy to enhance patient safety, avoid nosocomial outbreaks, protect healthcare personnel, and ensure rational use of personal protective equipment. Responses adapted to national recommendations and local infection control guidelines and tailored to the availability of medical resources are imminently needed to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Statement for gastroesophageal reflux disease after peroral endoscopic myotomy from an international multicenter experience.

It has been 10 years since peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) was reported for the first time, and POEM has currently become the standard treatment for achalasia and related disorders globally because it is less invasive and has a higher curative effect than conventional therapeutic methods. However, there are limited studies comparing the long-term outcomes of POEM with those of conventional therapeutic methods, particularly in the occurrence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after therapy. With this background, we held a consensus meeting to discuss the pathophysiology and management of GERD after POEM based on published papers and experiences of each expert and to discuss the prevention of GERD and dealing with anti-acid drug refractory GERD. This meeting was held on April 27, 2018 in Tokyo to establish statements and finalize the recommendations using the modified Delphi method. This manuscript presents eight statements regarding GERD after POEM.

Prevention of recurrent idiopathic gastroduodenal ulcer bleeding: a double-blind, randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with a history of Helicobacter pylori-negative idiopathic bleeding ulcers have a considerable risk of recurrent ulcer complications. We hypothesised that a proton pump inhibitor (lansoprazole) is superior to a histamine 2 receptor antagonist (famotidine) for the prevention of recurrent ulcer bleeding in such patients. DESIGN: In this industry-independent, double-blind, randomised trial, we recruited patients with a history of idiopathic bleeding ulcers. After ulcer healing, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive oral lansoprazole 30 mg or famotidine 40 mg daily for 24 months. The primary endpoint was recurrent upper GI bleeding within 24 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population as determined by an independent adjudication committee. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2018, we enrolled 228 patients (114 patients in each study group). Recurrent upper GI bleeding occurred in one patient receiving lansoprazole (duodenal ulcer) and three receiving famotidine (two gastric ulcers and one duodenal ulcer). The cumulative incidence of recurrent upper GI bleeding in 24 months was 0.88% (95% CI 0.08% to 4.37%) in the lansoprazole arm and 2.63% (95% CI 0.71% to 6.91%) in the famotidine arm (p=0.313; crude HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.16, p=0.336). None of the patients who rebled used aspirin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or other antithrombotic drugs. CONCLUSION: This 2-year, double-blind randomised trial showed that among patients with a history of H. pylori-negative idiopathic ulcer bleeding, recurrent bleeding rates were comparable between users of lansoprazole and famotidine, although a small difference in efficacy cannot be excluded. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01180179; Results.