Plastic pigtail vs lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of walled-off necrosis (PROMETHEUS study): an open-label, multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have displaced double-pigtail plastic stents (DPS) as the standard treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON),ß but evidence for exclusively using LAMS is limited. We aimed to assess whether the theoretical benefit of LAMS was superior to DPS. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, randomized trial was carried out in 9 tertiary hospitals. Between June 2017, and Oct 2020, we screened 99 patients with symptomatic WON, of whom 64 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the DPS group (n = 31) or the LAMS group (n = 33). The primary outcome was short-term (4-weeks) clinical success determined by the reduction of collection. Secondary endpoints included long-term clinical success, hospitalization, procedure duration, recurrence, safety, and costs. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT03100578. RESULTS: A similar clinical success rate in the short term (RR, 1.41; 95% CI 0.88-2.25; p = 0.218) and in the long term (RR, 1.2; 95% CI 0.92-1.58; p = 0.291) was observed between both groups. Procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LAMS group (35 vs. 45-min, p = 0.003). The hospital admission after the index procedure (median difference, - 10 [95% CI - 17.5, - 1]; p = 0.077) and global hospitalization (median difference - 4 [95% CI - 33, 25.51]; p = 0.82) were similar between both groups. Reported stent-related adverse events were similar for the two groups (36 vs.45% in LAMS vs. DPS), except for de novo fever, which was significantly 26% lower in LAMS (RR, 0.26 [0.08-0.83], p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical superiority of LAMS over DPS for WON therapy was not proved, with similar clinical success, hospital stay and similar safety profile between both groups, yet a significant reduction in procedure time was observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03100578.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) Clinical Guidelines.

Acute pancreatitis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. It can develop complications such as fluid collections and necrosis. Infection of necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with organ failure and worse prognosis. In the past years, the treatment of pancreatic collections has shifted from open surgery to minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasound guided drainage. These guidelines from a selection of experts among the Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) have the purpose to provide advice on the management of pancreatic collections based on a thorough review of the available scientific evidence. It also reflects the experience and clinical practice of the authors, who are advanced endoscopists or clinical pancreatologists with extensive experience in managing patients with acute pancreatitis.

POEM from A to Z: current perspectives.

The "third space endoscopy" or also called "submucosal endoscopy" is a reality we can transfer to our patients since 2010. Various modifications of the submucosal tunneling technique allow access to the submucosa or deeper layers of the gastrointestinal tract. In addition to peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia, also called esophageal POEM, other variants have emerged that make it possible to treat different esophageal motility disorders, esophageal diverticula, subepithelial tumors of various locations, gastroparesis, reconnection of complete esophageal strictures or even thanks to exceptional endoscopists, pediatric disorders such as Hirschsprung's disease. Although some technical aspects are yet to be standardized, these procedures are becoming widespread worldwide and will likely become the standard treatment of these pathologies soon.

Development and validation of artificial neural networks model for detection of Barrett's neoplasia: a multicenter pragmatic nonrandomized trial (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for the detection and localization of Barrett's neoplasia and assess its performance compared with that of general endoscopists in a statistically powered multicenter study by using real-time video sequences. METHODS: In phase 1, the hybrid visual geometry group 16-SegNet model was trained by the use of 75,198 images and videos (96 patients) of neoplastic and 1,014,973 images and videos (65 patients) of nonneoplastic Barrett's esophagus. In phase 2, image-based validation was performed on a separate dataset of 107 images (20 patients) of neoplastic and 364 images (14 patients) of nonneoplastic Barrett's esophagus. In phase 3 (video-based external validation) we designed a real-time video-based study with 32 videos (32 patients) of neoplastic and 43 videos (43 patients) of nonneoplastic Barrett's esophagus from 4 European centers to compare the performance of the CAD model with that of 6 nonexpert endoscopists. The primary endpoint was the sensitivity of CAD diagnosis of Barrett's neoplasia. RESULTS: In phase 2, CAD detected Barrett's neoplasia with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 95.3%, 94.5%, and 94.7%, respectively. In phase 3, the CAD system detected Barrett's neoplasia with sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 93.8%, 90.7%, 95.1%, and 92.0%, respectively, compared with the endoscopists' performance of 63.5%, 77.9%, 74.2%, and 71.8%, respectively (P < .05 in all parameters). The CAD system localized neoplastic lesions with accuracy, mean precision, and mean intersection over union of 100%, 0.62, and 0.54, respectively, when compared with at least 1 of the expert markings. The processing speed of the CAD detection and localization were 5 ms/image and 33 ms/image, respectively. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study describing external (multicenter) validation of AI algorithms for the detection of Barrett's neoplasia on real-time endoscopic videos. The CAD system in this study significantly outperformed nonexpert endoscopists on real-time video-based assessment, achieving >90% sensitivity for neoplasia detection. This result needs to be validated during real-time endoscopic assessment.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage using lumen-apposing metal stent of malignant afferent limb syndrome in patients with previous Whipple surgery: Multicenter study (with video).

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided digestive anastomosis (EUS-A) is a new alternative under evaluation in patients presenting with afferent limb syndrome (ALS) after Whipple surgery. The aim of the present study is to analyze the safety and effectiveness of EUS-A in ALS. METHODS: This is an observational multicenter study. All patients ≥18 years old with previous Whipple surgery presenting with ALS who underwent an EUS-A using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) between 2015 and 2021 were included. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as resolution of the ALS or ALS-related cholangitis. Furthermore, technical success, adverse event rate, and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (mean age: 65.5 ± 10.2 years; 44.4% male) were included. The most common underlying disease was pancreatic cancer (68.9%). EUS-A was performed at a median of 6 weeks after local tumor recurrence. The most common approach used was the direct/freehand technique (66.7%). Technical success was achieved in 95.6%, with no differences between large (≥15 mm) and small LAMS (97.4% vs. 100%, P = 0.664). Clinical success was retained in 91.1% of patients. A complementary treatment by dilation of the stent followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography through the LAMS was performed in three cases (6.7%). There were six recurrent episodes of cholangitis (14.6%) and two procedure-related adverse events (4.4%) after a median follow-up of 4 months. Twenty-six patients (57.8%) died during the follow-up due to disease progression. CONCLUSION: EUS-A is a safe and effective technique in the treatment of malignant ALS, achieving high clinical success with an acceptable recurrence rate.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021.

1: ESGE recommends in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) for pre-endoscopy risk stratification. Patients with GBS ≤ 1 are at very low risk of rebleeding, mortality within 30 days, or needing hospital-based intervention and can be safely managed as outpatients with outpatient endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in patients with acute UGIH who are taking low-dose aspirin as monotherapy for secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis, aspirin should not be interrupted. If for any reason it is interrupted, aspirin should be re-started as soon as possible, preferably within 3-5 days.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that following hemodynamic resuscitation, early (≤ 24 hours) upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy should be performed. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 4: ESGE does not recommend urgent (≤ 12 hours) upper GI endoscopy since as compared to early endoscopy, patient outcomes are not improved. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends for patients with actively bleeding ulcers (FIa, FIb), combination therapy using epinephrine injection plus a second hemostasis modality (contact thermal or mechanical therapy). Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends for patients with an ulcer with a nonbleeding visible vessel (FIIa), contact or noncontact thermal therapy, mechanical therapy, or injection of a sclerosing agent, each as monotherapy or in combination with epinephrine injection. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE suggests that in patients with persistent bleeding refractory to standard hemostasis modalities, the use of a topical hemostatic spray/powder or cap-mounted clip should be considered. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that for patients with clinical evidence of recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage, use of a cap-mounted clip should be considered. In the case of failure of this second attempt at endoscopic hemostasis, transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) should be considered. Surgery is indicated when TAE is not locally available or after failed TAE. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for patients who receive endoscopic hemostasis and for patients with FIIb ulcer stigmata (adherent clot) not treated endoscopically. (A): PPI therapy should be administered as an intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (e. g., 80 mg then 8 mg/hour) for 72 hours post endoscopy. (B): High dose PPI therapies given as intravenous bolus dosing (twice-daily) or in oral formulation (twice-daily) can be considered as alternative regimens.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10: ESGE recommends that in patients who require ongoing anticoagulation therapy following acute NVUGIH (e. g., peptic ulcer hemorrhage), anticoagulation should be resumed as soon as the bleeding has been controlled, preferably within or soon after 7 days of the bleeding event, based on thromboembolic risk. The rapid onset of action of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS), as compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), must be considered in this context.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Personal protective equipment during activity resumption in endoscopy units: waterproof gowns in the daily practice.

Adapting endoscopy units to the resumption of services remains challenging. Published recommendations for the resumption of endoscopy services are logical but, in some cases, may prove difficult to put into practice in the daily workflow of most centers. In relation to the SEED-AEG position statement document, we agree on the use of personal protective equipment during the procedures including footwear, body, hand, face, and hair protection. Since gloves are changed for all interventions, body protection would be the most problematic of all protection equipment as both the forearm and trunk areas can potentially come into contact with the endoscope, which in turn, is inserted into the patient.

Main prophylactic measures in bariatric endoscopy. Spanish Expert Recommendations Guideline.

Bariatric endoscopy (BE) encompasses a number of techniques -some consolidated, some under development- aiming to contribute to the management of obese patients and their associated metabolic diseases as a complement to dietary and lifestyle changes. To date different intragastric balloon models, suture systems, aspiration methods, substance injections and both gastric and duodenal malabsorptive devices have been developed, as well as endoscopic procedures for the revision of bariatric surgery. Their ongoing evolution conditions a gradual increase in the quantity and quality of scientific evidence about their effectiveness and safety. Despite this, scientific evidence remains inadequate to establish strong grades of recommendation allowing a unified perspective on prophylaxis in BE. This dearth of data conditions leads, in daily practice, to frequently extrapolate the measures that are used in bariatric surgery (BS) and/or in general therapeutic endoscopy. In this respect, this special article is intended to reach a consensus on the most common prophylactic measures we should apply in BE. The methodological design of this document was developed while attempting to comply with the following 5 phases: Phase 1: delimitation and scope of objectives, according to the GRADE Clinical Guidelines. Phase 2: setup of the Clinical Guide-developing Group: national experts, members of the Grupo Español de Endoscopia Bariátrica (GETTEMO, SEED), SEPD, and SECO, selecting 2 authors for each section. Phase 3: clinical question form (PICO): patients, intervention, comparison, outcomes. Phase 4: literature assessment and synthesis. Search for evidence and elaboration of recommendations. Based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification, most evidence in this article will correspond to level 5 (expert opinions without explicit critical appraisal) and grade of recommendation C (favorable yet inconclusive recommendation) or D (inconclusive or inconsistent studies). Phase 5: External review by experts. We hope that these basic preventive measures will be of interest for daily practice, and may help prevent medical and/or legal conflicts for the benefit of patients, physicians, and BE in general.

Resumption of activity in gastroenterology departments. Recommendations by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG. / Restablecimiento de la actividad en los servicios de Digestivo. Recomendaciones de la SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU y AEG.

The set of measures proposed by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG are aimed to help departments in their resumption of usual activity. We have prepared a number of practical recommendations regarding patient management and the stepwise resumption of healthcare activity. These recommendations are based on the sparse, changing evidence available, and will be updated in the future according to daily needs and the availability of expendable materials to suit them; in each department they will be implemented depending upon the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in each region, and the burden the pandemic has represented for each hospital. The general objectives of these recommendations include: (a)To protect our patients against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and to provide them with high-quality care. (b)To protect all healthcare professionals against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2. (c)To resume normal functioning of our departments in a setting of ongoing risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Resumption of activity in gastroenterology departments. Recommendations by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG.

The set of measures proposed by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG are aimed to help departments in their resumption of usual activity. We have prepared a number of practical recommendations regarding patient management and the stepwise resumption of healthcare activity. These recommendations are based on the sparse, changing evidence available, and will be updated in the future according to daily needs and the availability of expendable materials to suit them; in each department they will be implemented depending upon the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in each region, and the burden the pandemic has represented for each hospital. The general objectives of these recommendations include: • To protect our patients against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and to provide them with high-quality care. • To protect all healthcare professionals against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2. • To resume normal functioning of our departments in a setting of ongoing risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The Use of the Overstitch Beyond Bariatric Endoscopy: A Pictorial Description.

The overstitch endoscopic suturing system has opened a novel arena in endoscopy. To properly apply endoscopic suturing techniques, it is important to understand suture patterns and the different traction methods available. Applications beyond tissue compression in bariatric endoscopy include: closure, traction and fixation. Closure could be applied to perforations, suture dehiscences, fistulas and stoma reduction. Traction could be applied either as a pulley method to improver resection or as an improved method to decrease a defect size and help pull it into an over the scope clip. Fixation has been mainly used to secure stents.

Endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Updated August 2018.

ESGE suggests endoscopic therapy and/or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) as the first-line therapy for painful uncomplicated chronic pancreatitis (CP) with an obstructed main pancreatic duct (MPD) in the head/body of the pancreas. The clinical response should be evaluated at 6 - 8 weeks; if it appears unsatisfactory, the patient's case should be discussed again in a multidisciplinary team and surgical options should be considered.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests, for the selection of patients for initial or continued endoscopic therapy and/or ESWL, taking into consideration predictive factors associated with a good long-term outcome. These include, at initial work-up, absence of MPD stricture, a short disease duration, non-severe pain, absence or cessation of cigarette smoking and of alcohol intake, and, after initial treatment, complete removal of obstructive pancreatic stones and resolution of pancreatic duct stricture with stenting.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends ESWL for the clearance of radiopaque obstructive MPD stones larger than 5 mm located in the head/body of the pancreas and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for MPD stones that are radiolucent or smaller than 5 mm. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE suggests restricting the use of endoscopic therapy after ESWL to patients with no spontaneous clearance of pancreatic stones after adequate fragmentation by ESWL.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE suggests treating painful dominant MPD strictures with a single 10-Fr plastic stent for one uninterrupted year if symptoms improve after initial successful MPD drainage. The stent should be exchanged if necessary, based on symptoms or signs of stent dysfunction at regular pancreas imaging at least every 6 months. ESGE suggests consideration of surgery or multiple side-by-side plastic stents for symptomatic MPD strictures persisting beyond 1 year after the initial single plastic stenting, following multidisciplinary discussion. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic drainage over percutaneous or surgical treatment for uncomplicated chronic pancreatitis (CP)-related pseudocysts that are within endoscopic reach.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends retrieval of transmural plastic stents at least 6 weeks after pancreatic pseudocyst regression if MPD disruption has been excluded, and long-term indwelling of transmural double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests the temporary insertion of multiple side-by-side plastic stents or of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) for treating CP-related benign biliary strictures.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends maintaining a registry of patients with biliary stents and recalling them for stent removal or exchange.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Multicenter study of plastic vs. self-expanding metal stents in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis - PROMETHEUS: a randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: It seems that lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are displacing plastic stents in the therapy of pancreatic-fluid collection in walled-off necrosis (WON). To date, there is no quality of evidence to recommend LAMS as the standard treatment in the management of WON. The theoretical benefit of LAMS over plastic stents needs to be proven. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized controlled, multicenter, prospective clinical trial with two parallel groups, without masking. One-hundred and fourteen patients with WON will undergo endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural draining in nine tertiary hospitals in Spain and will be randomized to the LAMS or plastic-stent group. The primary endpoint is the short-term (4 weeks) clinical success determined by the reduction of the collection (to < 50% or < 5 cm in size), along with clinical improvement. Secondary endpoints: long-term (4 months) clinical success (total resolution or 5 cm), procedure duration, level of difficulty, safety, and recurrences. DISCUSSION: The PROMETHEUS trial has been designed to determine whether LAMS are superior to plastic stents in EUS-guided transmural drainage of WON. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03100578. Registered on 4 April 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home.

Use of over-the-scope-clip (OTSC) improves outcomes of high-risk adverse outcome (HR-AO) non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB).

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic treatment of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) with high-risk adverse outcome (HR-AO) features has a high risk of failure. We studied the safety and efficacy of over-the-scope clips (OTSC) to treat these lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included patients who were treated using OTSC for NVUGIB from January 2015 to October 2017. We studied rebleeding and mortality rates and used the Rockall data and our institution's prior data for comparison. We used descriptive and chi-square statistics. RESULTS: We studied 18 patients with 19 bleeding lesions: 9 (47 %) duodenal ulcers, 4 (21 %) Dieulafoy's lesion, 3 (16 %) gastric ulcer, and 3 (16 %) bleeding after gastric biopsy, gastric polypectomy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of peri-gastric mass. We applied OTSC as the first-line treatment in 10 (53 %) and as the second-line treatment in 9 (47 %) bleeding lesions. Continued bleeding after OTSC occurred in six patients, but we treated it successfully and achieved complete hemostasis in all patients. We found OTSC use significantly decreased (0 % vs. 53 %, P  < 0.01) and reduced (0 % vs. 24 %, P  = 0.08) the rebleeding rate in our high-risk (RS ≥ 8) and intermediate-risk (RS = 4 - 7) Rockall score patients as compared to the rates reported by the Rockall study, respectively. When compared to our institution's prior study, we found a decrease in the rebleeding rate with OTSC (0 % vs. 21 %, P  = 0.06) in our intermediate-to-high risk Rockall score patients (RS ≥ 4). There was no difference in mortality rates as compared to both control studies. CONCLUSION: Use of OTSC is safe, efficacious and appears superior to standard treatment for HR-AO NVUGIB. OTSC should be considered as first-line treatment for HR-AO bleeding.

Quality of sedation with propofol administered by non-anesthetists in a digestive endoscopy unit: the results of a one year experience.

INTRODUCTION: research has shown that an endoscopist-nurse clinical team can perform sedation with propofol effectively, safely and efficiently. To do so, it is essential to provide specific and appropriate training in the necessary skills. The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the quality of the sedation procedure administered by non-anesthetists in a digestive endoscopy unit, one year after its introduction. METHODS: a prospective cohort study was performed in patients given propofol sedation by non-anesthetists. Subsequently, a random sample of clinical records was selected in order to evaluate the adherence of professionals to the quality criteria and to assess the rate of adverse events related to sedation. RESULTS: a total of 595 procedures were performed under propofol sedation during the study period. The rate of adverse events was 2.4% (n = 507), mainly involving hypotension and hypoxemia. Adherence to the sedation procedure was above 80% for most of the applicable criteria, although it was lower for the completion of ASA risk evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: the results of the study suggest that propofol can be administered safely and effectively by a qualified endoscopist-nurse team, in patients with an ASA I-II risk. Audits of adherence by medical staff to the recommended procedure facilitate the identification of areas for improvement; further work is needed on the aspects that have not yet been consolidated.

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions.

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. / Guía clínica para la resección mucosa endoscópica de lesiones colorrectales no pediculadas.

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.