Palliation of Gastric Outlet Obstruction in Case of Biliary Obstruction-A Retrospective, Multicenter Study: The B-GOOD Study.

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel and effective procedure for the management of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) with more durable results when compared to enteral stenting (ES). However, data comparing EUS-GE to ES in patients already treated with EUS-guided choledocoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) for distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) are lacking. We aimed to compare outcomes of EUS-GE and ES for the palliation of GOO in this specific population of patients. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients with DMBO treated by EUS-CDS and subsequent GOO treated by EUS-GE or ES from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were overall AEs rate and dysfunction of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment. Secondary outcomes included clinical success, technical success, procedure duration, length of hospital stay and relapse of GOO symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 77 consecutive patients were included in the study: 25 patients underwent EUS-GE and 52 underwent ES. AEs rate and patency outcomes of the EUS-CDS after GOO treatment were comparable between the two groups (12.5% vs. 17.3%; p = 0.74). No recurrence of GOO symptoms was registered in the EUS-GE group while 11.5% of ES patients had symptoms recurrence, even if not statistically significant (p = 0.16), after a mean follow-up period of 63.5 days. CONCLUSION: EUS-GE and ES are both effective and safe for the palliation of GOO in patients already treated by EUS-CDS for DMBO with no difference in the biliary stent dysfunction rate and overall AEs. EUS-GE is associated with less recurrence of GOO symptoms.

QUAIDE - Quality assessment of AI preclinical studies in diagnostic endoscopy.

Artificial intelligence (AI) holds significant potential for enhancing quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, but the adoption of AI in clinical practice is hampered by the lack of rigorous standardisation and development methodology ensuring generalisability. The aim of the Quality Assessment of pre-clinical AI studies in Diagnostic Endoscopy (QUAIDE) Explanation and Checklist was to develop recommendations for standardised design and reporting of preclinical AI studies in GI endoscopy.The recommendations were developed based on a formal consensus approach with an international multidisciplinary panel of 32 experts among endoscopists and computer scientists. The Delphi methodology was employed to achieve consensus on statements, with a predetermined threshold of 80% agreement. A maximum three rounds of voting were permitted.Consensus was reached on 18 key recommendations, covering 6 key domains: data acquisition and annotation (6 statements), outcome reporting (3 statements), experimental setup and algorithm architecture (4 statements) and result presentation and interpretation (5 statements). QUAIDE provides recommendations on how to properly design (1. Methods, statements 1-14), present results (2. Results, statements 15-16) and integrate and interpret the obtained results (3. Discussion, statements 17-18).The QUAIDE framework offers practical guidance for authors, readers, editors and reviewers involved in AI preclinical studies in GI endoscopy, aiming at improving design and reporting, thereby promoting research standardisation and accelerating the translation of AI innovations into clinical practice.

Endoscopic Ultrasound and Gastric Sub-Epithelial Lesions: Ultrasonographic Features, Tissue Acquisition Strategies, and Therapeutic Management.

Background and objectives: Subepithelial lesions (SELs) of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract present a diagnostic challenge due to their heterogeneous nature and varied clinical manifestations. Usually, SELs are small and asymptomatic; generally discovered during routine endoscopy or radiological examinations. Currently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the best tool to characterize gastric SELs. Materials and methods: For this review, the research and the study selection were conducted using the PubMed database. Articles in English language were reviewed from August 2019 to July 2024. Results: This review aims to summarize the international literature to examine and illustrate the progress in the last five years of endosonographic diagnostics and treatment of gastric SELs. Conclusions: Endoscopic ultrasound is the preferred option for the diagnosis of sub-epithelial lesions. In most of the cases, EUS-guided tissue sampling is mandatory; however, ancillary techniques (elastography, CEH-EUS, AI) may help in both diagnosis and prognostic assessment.

Correction: Green endoscopy, one step toward a sustainable future: Literature review.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-2303-8621.].

Computer-aided diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy for colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The resect-and-discard strategy allows endoscopists to replace post-polypectomy pathology with real-time prediction of polyp histology during colonoscopy (optical diagnosis). We aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of implementing computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for polyp pathology into the resect-and-discard strategy. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from database inception to June 5, 2024, without language restrictions, for diagnostic accuracy studies that assessed the performance of real-time CADx systems, compared with histology, for the optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps (≤5 mm) in the entire colon. We synthesised data for three strategies: CADx-alone, CADx-unassisted, and CADx-assisted; when the endoscopist was involved in the optical diagnosis, we synthesised data exclusively from diagnoses for which confidence in the prediction was reported as high. The primary outcomes were the proportion of polyps that would have avoided pathological assessment (ie, the proportion optically diagnosed with high confidence; main benefit) and the proportion of polyps incorrectly predicted due to false positives and false negatives (main harm), directly compared between CADx-assisted and CADx-unassisted strategies. We used DerSimonian and Laird's random-effects model to calculate all outcomes. We used Higgins I2 to assess heterogeneity, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rate certainty, and funnel plots and Egger's test to examine publication bias. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024508440. FINDINGS: We found 1019 studies, of which 11 (7400 diminutive polyps, 3769 patients, and 185 endoscopists) were included in the final meta-analysis. Three studies (1817 patients and 4086 polyps [2148 neoplastic and 1938 non-neoplastic]) provided data to directly compare the primary outcome measures between the CADx-unassisted and CADx-assisted strategies. We found no significant difference between the CADx-assisted and CADx-unassisted strategies for the proportion of polyps that would have avoided pathological assessment (90% [88-93], 3653 [89·4%] of 4086 polyps diagnosed with high confidence vs 90% [95% CI 85-94], 3588 [87·8%] of 4086 polyps diagnosed with high confidence; risk ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·99-1·04; I2=53·49%; low-certainty evidence; Egger's test p=0·18). The proportion of incorrectly predicted polyps was lower with the CADx-assisted strategy than with the CADx-unassisted strategy (12% [95% CI 7-17], 523 [14·3%] of 3653 polyps incorrectly predicted with a CADx-assisted strategy vs 13% [6-20], 582 [16·2%] of 3588 polyps incorrectly diagnosed with a CADx-unassisted strategy; risk ratio 0·88 [95% CI 0·79-0·98]; I2=0·00%; low-certainty evidence; Egger's test p=0·18). INTERPRETATION: CADx did not produce benefit nor harm for the resect-and-discard strategy, questioning its value in clinical practice. Improving the accuracy and explainability of CADx is desired. FUNDING: European Commission (Horizon Europe), the Japan Society of Promotion of Science, and Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro.

Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference.

BACKGROUND: Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular. METHODS: The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

Green endoscopy, one step toward a sustainable future: Literature review.

Rapid climate change or climate crisis is one of the most serious emergencies of the 21st century, accounting for highly impactful and irreversible changes worldwide. Climate crisis can also affect the epidemiology and disease burden of gastrointestinal diseases because they have a connection with environmental factors and nutrition. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a highly intensive procedure with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Moreover, endoscopy is the third highest generator of waste in healthcare facilities with significant contributions to carbon footprint. The main sources of direct carbon emission in endoscopy are use of high-powered consumption devices (e.g. computers, anesthesia machines, wash machines for reprocessing, scope processors, and lighting) and waste production derived mainly from use of disposable devices. Indirect sources of emissions are those derived from heating and cooling of facilities, processing of histological samples, and transportation of patients and materials. Consequently, sustainable endoscopy and climate change have been the focus of discussions between endoscopy providers and professional societies with the aim of taking action to reduce environmental impact. The term "green endoscopy" refers to the practice of gastroenterology that aims to raise awareness, assess, and reduce endoscopy´s environmental impact. Nevertheless, while awareness has been growing, guidance about practical interventions to reduce the carbon footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy are lacking. This review aims to summarize current data regarding the impact of endoscopy on GHG emissions and possible strategies to mitigate this phenomenon. Further, we aim to promote the evolution of a more sustainable "green endoscopy".

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Rendezvous Technique Versus Precut Sphincterotomy as Salvage Technique in Patients With Benign Biliary Disease and Difficult Biliary Cannulation : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard salvage technique used for difficult bile duct cannulation is precut sphincterotomy, whereas endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous technique (EUS-RV) is a relatively newer method. Prospective comparative data between these 2 techniques as salvage for biliary access in patients with benign biliary disease and difficult bile duct cannulation is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare EUS-RV and precut sphincterotomy as salvage technique for difficult bile duct cannulation in benign biliary obstruction. DESIGN: Participant-masked, parallel-group, superiority, randomized controlled trial. (Clinical Trials Registry of India: CTRI/2020/07/026613). SETTING: Tertiary care academic institute from July 2020 to May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with benign biliary disease and difficult bile duct cannulation requiring salvage strategy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomized blocks sequence in 1:1 fashion to either EUS-RV or precut sphincterotomy. Patients with failure in EUS-RV were crossed over to precut sphincterotomy and vice versa. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was technical success. The other outcome measures included procedure time, radiation dose, and adverse events. RESULTS: In total, 100 patients were randomly assigned to EUS-RV (n = 50) and precut sphincterotomy (n = 50). The technical success rate (92% vs. 90%; P = 1.00; relative risk, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.16]), median procedure time (10.1 vs. 9.75 minutes), and overall complication rate (12% vs. 10%; relative risk, 1.20 [CI, 0.39 to 3.68]) were similar between the 2 groups. Five patients (10%) in the EUS-RV group and 5 patients (10%) in the precut sphincterotomy group had developed post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. All failed cases in either salvage group could be successfully cannulated when crossed over to the other group. LIMITATION: Single center study done by experts. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous technique and precut sphincterotomy have similar success rates as salvage techniques in the technically challenging cohort of difficult bile duct cannulation for benign biliary disease, with acceptable complications rates. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Accuracy of Computer-aided Diagnosis in Colonoscopy Varies According to Polyp Location: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) assists endoscopists in differentiating between neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of polyp location (proximal vs. distal colon) on the diagnostic performance of CADx for ≤5 mm polyps. METHODS: We searched for studies evaluating the performance of real-time CADx alone (ie, independently of endoscopist judgement) for predicting the histology of colorectal polyps ≤5 mm. The primary endpoints were CADx sensitivity and specificity in the proximal and distal colon. Secondary outcomes were the negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and the accuracy of the CADx alone. Distal colon was limited to the rectum and sigmoid. RESULTS: We included 11 studies for analysis with a total of 7782 polyps ≤5 mm. CADx specificity was significantly lower in the proximal colon compared with the distal colon (62% vs 85%; risk ratio (RR), 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.84). Conversely, sensitivity was similar (89% vs 87%); RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03). The NPV (64% vs 93%; RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64-0.79) and accuracy (81% vs 86%; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99) were significantly lower in the proximal than distal colon, whereas PPV was higher in the proximal colon (87% vs 76%; RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of CADx for polyps in the proximal colon is inadequate, exhibiting significantly lower specificity compared with its performance for distal polyps. Although current CADx systems are suitable for use in the distal colon, they should not be employed for proximal polyps until more performant systems are developed specifically for these lesions.

ENDOLUMINAL RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION WITH STENTING VS STENTING ONLY IN PATIENTS WITH MALIGNANT BILIARY OBSTRUCTION: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMISED TRIALS.

INTRODUCTION: Endoluminal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a palliative treatment for patients suffering from malignant biliary obstruction. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of RFA on stent patency, patient survival, and adverse events. METHODS: Major databases were searched through November 2023 for patients who underwent stenting with or without RFA for extra-hepatic malignant biliary obstruction. A random effects model was employed for analysis and results conveyed using relative risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 750 subjects (n=374 RFA plus stent vs. n=376 stent only) with malignant biliary obstruction were included. Meta-analysis revealed similar risks of stent patency at 3 months (RR = 1.01; 95% CI [0.92 - 1.11], I2=4% for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only). Meta-analysis showed improved survival at 6 months (RR = 0.84; 95% CI [0.73 - 0.96], I2=21%, P=0.01 for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only). Subgroup analysis comparing plastic vs uncovered metal stents showed that stent patency was unaffected at 3 months (RR = 1.06; 95% CI [0.91 - 1.23]; I2=17%). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with cholangiocarcinoma experienced an overall survival benefit with RFA plus stenting vs. stent only (P<0.001), however, stent patency remained unaffected (P=0.08). An increased incidence of cholecystitis was noted with RFA plus stent vs. stent only (5.1%; 95% CI [3.1% - 7.8%] vs 0.3%; 95% CI [0.01% - 1.5%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Combining endoluminal RFA and stenting may improve overall survival in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. RFA did not impact stent patency significantly.

The i-EUS consensus on the management of pancreatic fluid collections - Part 1.

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), including pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), are common complications of pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Historically, the treatment of these conditions has relied on surgical and radiological approaches; however, it has later shifted toward an endoscopy-based approach. With the development of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures have become the standard approach for PFC drainage. However, there is still limited consensus on several aspects of the multidisciplinary management of PFCs. The interventional endoscopy and ultrasound (i-EUS) group is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with special interest in biliopancreatic interventional endoscopy, especially interventional EUS. This manuscript describes the first part of the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance on aspects such as indications for treating PFCs, the timing of intervention, and different technical strategies for managing patients with PFCs.

The 1st i-EUS consensus on the management of pancreatic fluid collections - Part 2.

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), including pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON), are common complications of pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Historically, the treatment of these conditions has relied on surgical and radiological approaches. The treatment of patients with PFCs has already focused toward an endoscopy-based approach, and with the development of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), it has almost totally shifted towards interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures. However, there is still limited consensus on several aspects of PFCs treatment within the multidisciplinary management. The interventional endoscopy and ultrasound (i-EUS) group is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with special interest in biliopancreatic interventional endoscopy, especially interventional EUS. This manuscript focuses on the second part of the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS, with the aim of providing evidence-based guidance on several intra- and post-procedural aspects of PFCs drainage, such as clinical management and follow-up.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for Barrett's-associated neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature.

BACKGROUND: The role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of Barrett esophagus-associated neoplasia (BEN) has been evolving. We examined the efficacy and safety of ESD and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for BEN. METHODS: A database search was performed for studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes of ESD and EMR for BEN. Pooled proportional and comparative meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: 47 studies (23 ESD, 19 EMR, 5 comparative) were included. The mean lesion sizes for ESD and EMR were 22.5 mm and 15.8 mm, respectively; most lesions were Paris type IIa. For ESD, pooled analysis showed rates of en bloc, R0, and curative resection, and local recurrence of 98%, 78%, 65%, and 2%, respectively. Complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia were achieved in 94% and 59% of cases, respectively. Pooled rates of perforation, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, and stricture were 1%, 1%, 2%, and 10%, respectively. For EMR, pooled analysis showed rates of en bloc, R0, and curative resection, and local recurrence of 37%, 67%, 62%, and 6%, respectively. Complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia were achieved in 94% and 75% of cases. Pooled rates of perforation, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, and stricture were 0.1%, 1%, 0.4%, and 8%, respectively. The mean procedure times for ESD and EMR were 113 and 22 minutes, respectively. Comparative analysis showed higher en bloc and R0 resection rates with ESD compared with EMR, with comparable adverse events. CONCLUSION: ESD and EMR can both be employed to treat BEN depending on lesion type and size, and center expertise.

Diagnostic Yield of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy in Comparison to Percutaneous Liver Biopsy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) compared to percutaneous liver biopsy (PC-LB) remains uncertain. METHODS: Our data consist of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-LB to PC-LB, found through a literature search via PubMed/Medline and Embase. The primary outcome was sample adequacy, whereas secondary outcomes were longest and total lengths of tissue specimens, diagnostic accuracy, and number of complete portal tracts (CPTs). RESULTS: Sample adequacy did not significantly differ between EUS-LB and PC-LB (risk ratio [RR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-2.38; p = 0.65), with very low evidence quality and inadequate sample size as per trial sequential analysis (TSA). The two techniques were equivalent with respect to diagnostic accuracy (RR: 1; CI: 0.95-1.05; p = 0.88), mean number of complete portal tracts (mean difference: 2.29, -4.08 to 8.66; p = 0.48), and total specimen length (mean difference: -0.51, -20.92 to 19.9; p = 0.96). The mean maximum specimen length was significantly longer in the PC-LB group (mean difference: -3.11, -5.51 to -0.71; p = 0.01), and TSA showed that the required information size was reached. CONCLUSION: EUS-LB and PC-LB are comparable in terms of diagnostic performance although PC-LB provides longer non-fragmented specimens.

Management of perforations during endoscopic resection.

Despite the evolution in tools and techniques, perforation is still one of the most pernicious adverse events of therapeutic endoscopy with potentially huge consequences. As advanced endoscopic resection techniques are worldwide spreading, endoscopists must be ready to manage intraprocedural perforations. In fact, immediate endoscopic closure through a prompt diagnosis represents the first-line option, saving patients from surgery, long hospitalizations and worse outcomes. Traditional and novel endoscopic closure modalities, including clips, suturing devices, stents and vacuum therapy, are increasingly expanding the therapeutic armamentarium for closing these defects. Nevertheless, available literature on this topic is currently limited. In this review our goal is to give an overview on the management of perforations occurring during endoscopic resections, with particular attention to characteristics, advantages, disadvantages and new horizons of endoscopic closure tools.

Computer-Aided Diagnosis for Leaving Colorectal Polyps In Situ : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) allows prediction of polyp histology during colonoscopy, which may reduce unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps. However, the potential benefits and harms of CADx are still unclear. PURPOSE: To quantify the benefit and harm of using CADx in colonoscopy for the optical diagnosis of small (≤5-mm) rectosigmoid polyps. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched for articles published before 22 December 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Histologically verified diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated the real-time performance of physicians in predicting neoplastic change of small rectosigmoid polyps without or with CADx assistance during colonoscopy. DATA EXTRACTION: The clinical benefit and harm were estimated on the basis of accuracy values of the endoscopist before and after CADx assistance. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. The outcome measure for benefit was the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal with the use of CADx. The outcome measure for harm was the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be not resected and left in situ due to an incorrect diagnosis with the use of CADx. Histology served as the reference standard for both outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ten studies, including 3620 patients with 4103 small rectosigmoid polyps, were analyzed. The studies that assessed the performance of CADx alone (9 studies; 3237 polyps) showed a sensitivity of 87.3% (95% CI, 79.2% to 92.5%) and specificity of 88.9% (CI, 81.7% to 93.5%) in predicting neoplastic change. In the studies that compared histology prediction performance before versus after CADx assistance (4 studies; 2503 polyps), there was no difference in the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal (55.4% vs. 58.4%; risk ratio [RR], 1.06 [CI, 0.96 to 1.17]; moderate-certainty evidence) or in the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be erroneously left in situ (8.2% vs. 7.5%; RR, 0.95 [CI, 0.69 to 1.33]; moderate-certainty evidence). LIMITATION: The application of optical diagnosis was only simulated, potentially altering the decision-making process of the operator. CONCLUSION: Computer-aided diagnosis provided no incremental benefit or harm in the management of small rectosigmoid polyps during colonoscopy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: European Commission. (PROSPERO: CRD42023402197).

Establishing the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB for diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions: Prospective multicenter study.

Background and study aims The optimal number of needle passes during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is not yet established. We aimed to perform a per-pass analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic lesions using a 22G Franseen needle. Patients and methods Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions referred to 11 Italian centers were prospectively enrolled. Three needle passes were performed; specimens were collected after each pass and processed individually as standard histology following macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) by the endoscopist. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy of each sequential pass. Final diagnosis was established based on surgical pathology or a clinical course of at least 6 months. Secondary endpoints were specimen adequacy, MOSE reliability, factors impacting diagnostic accuracy, and procedure-related adverse events. Results A total of 504 samples from 168 patients were evaluated. Diagnostic accuracy was 90.5% (85.0%-94.1%) after one pass and 97.6% (94.1%-99.3%) after two passes ( P =0.01). Similarly, diagnostic sensitivity and sample adequacy were significantly higher adding the second needle pass (90.2%, 84.6%-94.3% vs 97.5%, 93.8%-99.3%, P =0.009 and 91.1%, 85.7%-94.9% vs 98.2%, 95.8%-99.3%, P =0.009, one pass vs two passes, respectively). Accuracy, sensitivity, and adequacy remained the same after the third pass. The concordance between MOSE and histological evaluation was 89.9%. The number of passes was the only factor associated with accuracy. One case of mild acute pancreatitis (0.6%) was managed conservatively. Conclusions At least two passes should be performed for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. MOSE is a reliable tool to predict the histological adequacy of specimens.

Management of Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Comprehensive Review on the Old, the Classic and the Innovative Approaches.

Gastrojejunostomy is the principal method of palliation for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstructions (GOO). Gastrojejunostomy was traditionally performed as a surgical procedure with an open approach butrecently, notable progress in the development of minimally invasive procedures such as laparoscopic gastrojejunostomies have emerged. Additionally, advancements in endoscopic techniques, including endoscopic stenting (ES) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), are becoming more prominent. ES involves the placement of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) to restore luminal patency. ES is commonly the first choice for patients deemed unfit for surgery or at high surgical risk. However, although ES leads to rapid improvement of symptoms, it carries limitations like higher stent dysfunction rates and the need for frequent re-interventions. Recently, EUS-GE has emerged as a potential alternative, combining the minimally invasive nature of the endoscopic approach with the long-lasting effects of a gastrojejunostomy. Having reviewed the advantages and disadvantages of these different techniques, this article aims to provide a comprehensive review regarding the management of unresectable malignant GOO.

Outcomes predictors in endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy with lumen-apposing metal stent: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and study aims EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) by transduodenal placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) into the extrahepatic bile duct. To identify factors that contribute to safe and effective EUS-CDS using LAMS, we performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Methods The methodology of our analysis was based on PRISMA recommendations. Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to November 2022. Full articles that included patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS using LAMS after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were eligible. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed reporting pooled rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) by means of a random model. Multivariate meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to assess possible associations between the outcomes and selected variables to assess the correlation between outcomes and different variables. Results were also stratified according to stent size. Results Twelve studies with 845 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled technical and clinical success rates were 96% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94%-98%; I 2 = 52.29%) and 96% (95%CI 95%-98%), respectively, with no significant association with baseline characteristics, such are sex, age, common bile duct diameter, or stent size. The pooled AE rate was 12% (95%CI: 8%-16%; I 2 = 71.62%). The AE rate was significantly lower when using an 8 × 8 mm stent as compared with a 6 × 8 mm LAMS (odds ratio 0.59, 0.35-0.99; P = 0.04), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). Conclusions EUS-CDS with LAMS is a safe and effective option for relief of MBO. Selecting an appropriate stent size is crucial for achieving optimal safety outcomes.

Outcomes of ERCP in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis: A Nationwide Inpatient Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem disorder that leads to abnormal transport of chloride and sodium across secretory epithelia resulting in thickened, viscous secretions in the bronchi, biliary tract, pancreas, intestine, and the reproductive system. Defects in the biliary tract can predispose to stone formation requiring endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, there is a paucity of data assessing ERCP outcomes in patients with CF. METHODS: We identified patients from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)-National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between the years 2016 and 2020. Our study group included patients with CF of all ages who underwent an inpatient ERCP. We used ICD10 diagnostic and procedural codes to identify patients, procedures, and complications of the procedure. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2020, a total of 860,679 inpatient ERCPs were identified. Of these procedures, 535 (0.06%) were performed in patients with CF. The mean age of patients with CF undergoing ERCP was 60.62 years, of which 48% were males and 52% were females. Patients in the CF group had a higher incidence of post-ERCP pneumothorax (0.93%) than the patients in the non-CF group (0.15%). The occurrence of other ERCP-related adverse events was similar in both groups (P>0.05). On multivariate regression analysis, patients with CF were 1.75 times more likely to develop post-ERCP infections [odds ratio (OR): 1.75; 95% CI: 1.03-2.94; P=0.035) and 7.64 times more likely to develop post-ERCP pneumothorax (OR: 7.64; 95% CI: 1.03-56.5; P=0.046) compared to patients without CF after adjusting for confounders. The groups had no significant difference in mortality, post-ERCP pancreatitis, bleeding, perforation, pneumoperitoneum, and gas embolism. There was also no significant difference in the length of stay between the study and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP is a safe procedure in patients with CF with a comparable risk of postprocedural complications and mortality to those who do not have cystic fibrosis. However, patients with CF may experience a higher risk of post-ERCP infections and post-ERCP pneumothorax. Further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate outcomes of ERCP in patients with CF and to determine methods of mitigating adverse events.