Navigating the Predictive Landscape: DiaRem's Role in Unveiling Outcomes for Diabetes Remission following ESG.

PURPOSE: Rising obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) rates can be mitigated by various strategies, with a 10% total body weight loss (TBWL) threshold often required for T2DM remission. T2DM remission rates after bariatric surgery like Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are well established; endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a less invasive option that averages 15% TBWL and allows for T2DM remission. This study explores the DiaRem (Diabetes Remission post-RYGB) score's ability to predict T2DM remission 1-year post-ESG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on 39 individuals with T2DM who underwent ESG. Age, utilization of diabetes medications, insulin administration, and hemoglobin A1c levels were used to calculate the DiaRem score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was employed to evaluate the discriminative ability of DiaRem in distinguishing diabetes remission. RESULTS: Among the 39 patients with a median hemoglobin A1c of 6.7, 12.8% required insulin, and 43.6% used diabetes medication. At 1-year post-ESG, 69.2% of patients experienced diabetes remission with a median %TWBL of 12.7. The DiaRem score's ability to detect diabetes resolution for ESG patients had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 58.3%, at the optimal cutoff value of 10. The AUC was 0.779 (95% CI 0.546-0.959). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated the DiaRem score's predictive value for T2DM remission post-ESG, highlighting its utility in clinical decision-making for ESG-related outcomes. Further investigation is needed to identify alternative indicators that may enhance predictive accuracy, thus refining personalized decision-making for this patient group.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Transmural Biliary Drainage With 6 mm and 8 mm Cautery-enhanced Lumen-apposing Metal Stents: A Multicenter Collaborative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may be unsuccessful in patients with duodenal stenosis or malignant ampullary infiltration. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been proposed as an alternative. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD for malignant distal bile duct obstruction using the newly introduced smaller caliber 6 or 8 mm cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on patients with unresectable malignant distal bile duct obstruction who underwent EUS-BD between 2021 and 2022 after unsuccessful ERCP. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included [7 (53.13%) males], with a mean age of 72.2 ± 12.5 years. The technical success rate was 100%. Altered anatomy was present in 2 (6.25%). The indication for drainage was biliary obstruction from pancreatic cancer in 26 patients (84.5%), cholangiocarcinoma in 3 (9.4%), and ampullary mass in 3 (9.4%). The procedure was performed mostly in an outpatient setting (n = 19, 59.38%). The clinical success rate was 92.3% [bilirubin: 14.1 (SD: 8.9) preprocedure vs 4.9 (SD: 1.1) postprocedure; P = 0.0001]. There was one early adverse event of a perforation, which was closed endoscopically and drained percutaneously. Delayed adverse events included food impaction of the stent (n = 1), which was resolved with a repeat procedure and insertion of a double pigtail stent. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of EUS-BD drainage using smaller caliber 6 or 8 mm lumen-apposing metal stent to relieve malignant distal bile duct obstruction in patients who fail conventional ERCP.

Risk of Pancreatitis After Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is frequently used to risk-stratify pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). Rising PCL incidence and developments in tissue acquisition and specimen analysis necessitate updated appraisal of EUS-FNA safety, particularly the risk of postprocedure pancreatitis, the most common EUS-FNA-related adverse event. Our systematic review aims to accurately quantify the risk of EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis to best inform decisions regarding EUS-FNA's optimal role in PCL workup. METHODS: We performed systematic searches in 4 databases from inception to April 2024 for original English-language studies investigating EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis. We extracted data on demographics and EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis risk, severity, and risk factors. These were meta-analyzed through the DerSimonian Laird Method using a random-effects model. Meta-regression of pancreatitis risk was performed to delineate associations with clinical and procedural characteristics. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies comprised 8,086 patients and reported 110 EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis events. Pooled risk of EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis was 1.4% (95% confidence intervals, -0.8% to 3.5%; I2 = 0.00), which was predominantly of mild severity (67%) and uniformly nonfatal. Pancreatitis risk lacked significant association with sample size, age, sex, cyst size, needle caliber, or passes, although we noted trends toward higher risk in studies published after 2015, those using higher gauge needles (19 G vs 22 G/25 G), and those performing EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy. DISCUSSION: We note with high certainty that pancreatitis after EUS-FNA of PCLs is infrequent and mild in severity with no mortality in the included cohort. EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy may serve as a significant risk factor for EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis risk; however, further studies are needed to delineate other predisposing characteristics.

Efficacy, Feasibility, and Safety of the X-Tack Endoscopic HeliX Tacking System: A Multicenter Experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The application of endoscopic suturing has revolutionized defect closures. Conventional over-the-scope suturing necessitates removal of the scope, placement of the device, and reinsertion. A single channel, single sequence, through-the-scope suturing device has been developed to improve this process. This study aims to describe the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of a through-the-scope suturing device for gastrointestinal defect closure. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter study involving 9 centers of consecutive adult patients who underwent suturing using the X-Tack Endoscopic HeliX Tacking System (Apollo Endosurgery). The primary outcomes were technical success and long-term clinical success. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence, and reintervention rates. RESULTS: In all, 56 patients (mean age 53.8, 33 women) were included. Suturing indications included fistula repair (n=22), leak repair (n=7), polypectomy defect closure (n=12), peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) site closure (n=7), perforation repair (n=6), and ulcers (n=2). Patients were followed at a mean duration of 74 days. Overall technical and long-term clinical success rates were 92.9% and 75%, respectively. Both technical and clinical success rates were 100% for polypectomies, POEM-site closures, and ulcers. Success rates were lower for the repair of fistulas (95.5% technical, 54.5% clinical), leaks (57.1%, 28.6%), and perforations (100%, 66.7%). No immediate adverse events were noted. CONCLUSION: This novel, through-the-scope endoscopic suturing system, is a safe and feasible method to repair defects that are ≤3 cm. The efficacy of this device may be better suited for superficial defects as opposed to full-thickness defects. Larger defects will need more sutures and probably a double closure technique to provide a reinforcement layer.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Biopsy Using a Novel Hydrostatic Stylet Tissue Acquisition Technique.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is frequently used to obtain core samples of solid lesions. Here, we describe and evaluate a novel hydrostatic stylet (HS) technique designed to optimize core sample acquisition, reporting diagnostic yield, efficacy, and safety relative to the conventional stylet slow-pull (SP) technique. METHODS: A novel HS technique was developed and validated retrospectively. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNB with core biopsy of solid lesions through either the HS or SP technique between January 2020 and April 2022 were included. Exclusion criteria included cystic lesions, nonlesional liver biopsies, and specimens sent for cytologic analysis only. Patient and lesion characteristics, number of passes, sample adequacy, and adverse events were compared between the two techniques. RESULTS: A total of 272 patients were included with 138 in the HS group and 134 in the SP group. Lesion size and anatomic distribution were similar in both groups. Compared with the SP approach, the HS technique demonstrated significantly higher sample adequacy (97.8% vs 83.6%, P < 0.001), higher sensitivity (97.1% vs 89.7%, P = 0.03), and lower mean number of passes (1.2 vs 3.3, P < 0.001). Rates and severity of adverse events in the HS group were comparable to the SP group and existing literature. Similar associations were observed in pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesion subanalyses. CONCLUSIONS: The novel HS technique demonstrated excellent biopsy sample adequacy and diagnostic yield while requiring fewer passes to obtain diagnostic specimens compared with a conventional EUS-FNB approach. Further prospective evaluation is needed to confirm these pilot findings and optimize EUS-FNB acquisition techniques.

Preferred techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy: a survey of expert endosonographers.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is an emerging procedure that lacks technical standardization with limited adoption beyond expert centers. We surveyed high-volume endosonographers about the technical aspects of EUS-GE to describe how the procedure is currently performed at expert centers and identify targets for standardization. Methods Invitations to complete an electronic survey were distributed to 21 expert EUS practitioners at 19 U.S. centers. Respondents were surveyed about technical aspects of EUS-GE, indications, efficacy, safety, and attitudes toward the procedure. Results All 21 (100%) invited expert endoscopists completed the survey. Nine (42.9%) reported performing >10 EUS-GEs in the last 12 months. About half (47.6%, 10/21) puncture the target loop prior to lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) introduction, most often to confirm the loop is jejunum. No respondents reported guidewire placement prior to LAMS introduction. Most (71.4%, 15/21) do not use a guidewire at any time, while 28.6% (6/21) reported wire placement after distal flange deployment to secure the tract during apposition. Eight (38.1%, 8/21) reported at least one major adverse event, most commonly intraperitoneal LAMS deployment (87.5%, 7/8). Factors most often reported as advantageous for EUS-GE over enteral stenting included lack of papilla interference (33.3%, 7/21) and decreased occlusion risk (23.8%, 5/21). Conclusions Significant variation in performance technique for EUS-GE exists among expert US endoscopists, which may hinder widespread adoption and contribute to inconsistencies in reported patient outcomes. The granularity provided by these survey results may identify areas to focus standardization efforts and guide future studies on developing an ideal EUS-GE protocol.

Global prospective case series of ERCPs using a single-use duodenoscope.

BACKGROUND: The first commercialized single-use duodenoscope was cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration in December 2019. Data regarding endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) using a single-use duodenoscope are needed on a broader range of cases conducted by endoscopists with varying levels of experience in a wide range of geographic areas. METHODS: 61 endoscopists at 22 academic centers in 11 countries performed ERCP procedures in adult patients aged ≥ 18. Outcomes included ERCP completion for the intended indication, rate of crossover to a reusable endoscope, device performance ratings, and serious adverse events (SAEs). RESULTS: Among 551 patients, 236 (42.8 %) were aged > 65, 281 (51.0 %) were men, and 256 (46.5 %) had their procedure as an inpatient. ERCPs included 196 (35.6 %) with American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy complexity of grades 3-4. A total of 529 ERCPs (96.0 %) were completed: 503 (91.3 %) using only the single-use duodenoscope, and 26 (4.7 %) with crossover to a reusable endoscope. There were 22 ERCPs (4.0 %) that were not completed, of which 11 (2.0 %) included a crossover and 11 (2.0 %) were aborted cases (no crossover). Median ERCP completion time was 24.0 minutes. Median overall satisfaction with the single-use duodenoscope was 8.0 (scale of 1 to 10 [best]). SAEs were reported in 43 patients (7.8 %), including 17 (3.1 %) who developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS: In academic medical centers over a wide geographic distribution, endoscopists with varying levels of experience using the first marketed single-use duodenoscope had good ERCP procedural success and reported high performance ratings for this device.

EUS-guided liver biopsy using a novel hydrostatic stylet technique.

Video 1Hydrostatic stylet technique for the performance of EUS-guided liver biopsy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided ileosigmoidostomy using a lumen-apposing metal stent for palliation of malignant small-bowel obstruction.

Video 1Endoscopic ultrasound-guided ileosigmoidostomy for relief of small bowel obstruction.

Management of early gastric cancer meeting criteria for endoscopic resection: US population-based study.

Background and study aims The goal of this study was to assess surgical resection (SR) of early gastric cancer (EGC) fitting Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (JGCA) endoscopic resection (ER) criteria. Patients and methods We analyzed EGC data from the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015. Results A total of 2219 EGC cases were identified (1074 T1a and 1145 T1b). Of them, 409 met absolute criteria, 219 met expanded 1, 529 expanded 2, and 229 expanded 3. 259 lesions were treated endoscopically while 1007 were surgically resected (20.5 % vs 79.5 %, P  = 0.0001). Temporal analysis showed that the frequency of ER steadily increased while SR proportionally decreased during the study period. Cox proportion regression analysis adjusting for confound variables (including age, gender, and race) showed no significant difference in the risk of mortality following either surgery or endoscopy. Conclusions EGC can be safely treated with ER. However, EGC meeting JGCA ER criteria is largely treated with SR in the United States.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Endoscopic Management of Perforations in Gastrointestinal Tract: Expert Review.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: For all procedures, especially procedures carrying an increased risk for perforation, a thorough discussion between the endoscopist and the patient (preferably together with the patient's family) should include details of the procedural techniques and risks involved. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: The area of perforation should be kept clean to prevent any spillage of gastrointestinal contents into the perforation by aspirating liquids and, if necessary, changing the patient position to bring the perforation into a non-dependent location while minimizing insufflation of carbon dioxide to avoid compartment syndrome. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Use of carbon dioxide for insufflation is encouraged for all endoscopic procedures, especially any endoscopic procedure with increased risk of perforation. If available, carbon dioxide should be used for all endoscopic procedures. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: All endoscopists should be aware of the procedures that carry an increased risk for perforation such as any dilation, foreign body removal, any per oral endoscopic myotomy (Zenker's, esophageal, pyloric), stricture incision, thermal coagulation for hemostasis or tumor ablation, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, ampullectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoluminal stenting with self-expanding metal stent (SEMS), full-thickness endoscopic resection, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in surgically altered anatomy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary and pancreatic access, EUS-guided cystogastrostomy, and endoscopic gastroenterostomy using a lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Urgent surgical consultation should be highly considered in all cases with perforation even when endoscopic repair is technically successful. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: For all upper gastrointestinal perforations, the patient should be considered to be admitted for observation, receive intravenous fluids, be kept nothing by mouth, receive broad-spectrum antibiotics (to cover Gram-negative and anaerobic organisms), nasogastric tube (NGT) placement (albeit some exceptions), and surgical consultation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: For upper gastrointestinal tract perforations, a water-soluble upper gastrointestinal series should be considered to confirm the absence of continuing leak at the perforation site before initiating a clear liquid diet. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Endoscopic closure of esophageal perforations should be pursued when feasible, utilizing through-the-scope clips (TTSCs) or over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) for perforations <2 cm and endoscopic suturing for perforations >2 cm, reserving esophageal stenting with SEMS for cases where primary closure is not possible. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Endoscopic closure of gastric perforations should be pursued when feasible, utilizing TTSCs or OTSCs for perforations <2 cm and endoscopic suturing or combination of TTSCs and endoloop for perforations >2 cm. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: For large type 1 duodenal perforations (lateral duodenal wall tear >3 cm), being cognizant of the difficulty in closing them endoscopically, urgent surgical consultation should be made while the feasibility of endoscopic closure is assessed. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Because type 2 periampullary (retroperitoneal) perforations are subtle and can be easily missed, the endoscopist should carefully assess the gas pattern on fluoroscopy to avoid delays in treatment and request a computed tomography scan if there is a concern for such a perforation; identified perforations of this type at the time of ERCP may be closed with TTSCs if feasible and/or by placing a fully covered SEMS into the bile duct across the ampulla. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: For the management of large duodenal polyps, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) should only be performed by experienced endoscopists and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) only by experts because both EMR and ESD in the duodenum require proficiency in resection and mucosal defect closure techniques to manage immediate and/or delayed perforations (caused by the proteolytic enzymes of the pancreas). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Endoscopists should be aware that colon perforations occurring during diagnostic colonoscopy are most commonly located in the sigmoid colon due to direct trauma from forceful advancement of the colonoscope. Such tears recognized at the time of colonoscopy may be closed by TTSCs or OTSCs if the bowel preparation is good and the patient is stable. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Although colon perforation is responsive to various endoscopic tools such as TTSC, OTSC, and endoscopic suturing, perforations in the right colon, especially in the cecum, have been relegated to using only TTSCs because of inability to reach the site of the perforation with an endoscopic suturing device or OTSC if the colon is tortuous or unclean. Recently a new suture-based device for defect closure has been introduced allowing deep submucosal and intramuscular enhanced fixation through a standard gastroscope or colonoscope. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: Patients with perforations who are hemodynamically unstable or who have suffered a delayed perforation with peritoneal signs or frank peritonitis should be surgically managed without any attempt at endoscopic closure. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 16: In any adverse event including perforation, it is paramount to ensure accurate documentation, prompt discussion with the patient and family, and swift reporting to the quality officer (or equivalent) and risk management team of the institution (in major adverse events).

Expert consensus on endoscopic papillectomy using a Delphi process.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Consensus regarding an optimal algorithm for endoscopic treatment of papillary adenomas has not been established. We aimed to assess the existing degree of consensus among international experts and develop further concordance by means of a Delphi process. METHODS: Fifty-two international experts in the field of endoscopic papillectomy were invited to participate. Data were collected between August and December 2019 using an online survey platform. Three rounds were conducted. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement. RESULTS: Sixteen experts (31%) completed the full process, and consensus was achieved on 47 of the final 79 statements (59%). Diagnostic workup should include at least an upper endoscopy using a duodenoscope (100%) and biopsy sampling (94%). There should be selected use of additional abdominal imaging (75%-81%). Patients with (suspected) papillary malignancy or over 1 cm intraductal extension should be referred for surgical resection (76%). To prevent pancreatitis, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be administered before resection (82%) and a pancreatic stent should be placed (100%). A biliary stent is indicated in case of ongoing bleeding from the papillary region (76%) or concerns for a (micro)perforation after resection (88%). Follow-up should be started 3 to 6 months after initial papillectomy and repeated every 6 to 12 months for at least 5 years (75%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first step in developing an international consensus-based algorithm for endoscopic management of papillary adenomas. Surprisingly, in many areas consensus could not be achieved. These aspects should be the focus of future studies.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Superficial Gastric Neoplasia in a Large Cohort in North America.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely accepted treatment option for superficial gastric neoplasia in Asia, but there are few data on outcomes of gastric ESD from North America. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of gastric ESD in North America. METHODS: We analyzed data from 347 patients who underwent gastric ESD at 25 centers, from 2010 through 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, lesion characteristics, procedure details and related adverse events, treatment outcomes, local recurrence, and vital status at the last follow up. For the 277 patients with available follow-up data, the median interval between initial ESD and last clinical or endoscopic evaluation was 364 days. The primary endpoint was the rate of en bloc and R0 resection. Secondary outcomes included curative resection, rates of adverse events and recurrence, and gastric cancer-related death. RESULTS: Ninety patients (26%) had low-grade adenomas or dysplasia, 82 patients (24%) had high-grade dysplasia, 139 patients (40%) had early gastric cancer, and 36 patients (10%) had neuroendocrine tumors. Proportions of en bloc and R0 resection for all lesions were 92%/82%, for early gastric cancers were 94%/75%, for adenomas and low-grade dysplasia were 93%/ 92%, for high-grade dysplasia were 89%/ 87%, and for neuroendocrine tumors were 92%/75%. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 6.6% of patients; 82% of these were treated successfully with endoscopic therapy. Delayed bleeding occurred in 2.6% of patients. No delayed perforation or procedure-related deaths were observed. There were local recurrences in 3.9% of cases; all occurred after non-curative ESD resection. Metachronous lesions were identified in 14 patients (6.9%). One of 277 patients with clinical follow up died of metachronous gastric cancer that occurred 2.5 years after the initial ESD. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is a highly effective treatment for superficial gastric neoplasia and should be considered as a viable option for patients in North America. The risk of local recurrence is low and occurs exclusively after non-curative resection. Careful endoscopic surveillance is necessary to identify and treat metachronous lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage as a rescue therapy for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often unsuccessful in patients with duodenal stenosis or malignant ampullary infiltration. While endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been proposed as an alternative, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is an attractive option when both approaches fail. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of EUS-GBD as rescue therapy for malignant distal bile duct obstruction. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on patients with unresectable malignant distal bile duct obstruction who underwent EUS-GBD between 2014 and 2019 after unsuccessful ERCP and EUS-BD. Clinical success was defined as a decrease in serum bilirubin of > 50 % within 2 weeks. RESULTS: 28 patients were included, with a lumen-apposing metal stent used in 26 (93 %) and a self-expandable metal stent in two (7 %). The technical success rate was 100 %. The clinical success rate was 93 %, with an improvement in bilirubin (7.3 [SD 5.4] pre-procedure vs. 2.8 [SD 1.1] post-procedure; P = 0.001). Delayed adverse events included food impaction of the stent (n = 3), with a further two patients developing cholecystitis and bleeding. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of gallbladder drainage to relieve malignant distal bile duct obstruction in patients with failed ERCP and EUS-BD.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy during the coronavirus pandemic in the New York area: results from a multi-institutional survey.

Background and study aims The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and measures taken to mitigate its impact, have profoundly affected the clinical care of gastroenterology patients and the work of endoscopy units. We aimed to describe the clinical care delivered by gastroenterologists and the type of procedures performed during the early to peak period of the pandemic. Methods Endoscopy leaders in the New York region were invited to participate in an electronic survey describing operations and clinical service. Surveys were distributed on April 7, 2020 and responses were collected over the following week. A follow-up survey was distributed on April 20, 2020. Participants were asked to report procedure volumes and patient characteristics, as well protocols for staffing and testing for COVID-19. Results Eleven large academic endoscopy units in the New York City region responded to the survey, representing every major hospital system. COVID patients occupied an average of 54.5 % (18 - 84 %) of hospital beds at the time of survey completion, with 14.5 % (2 %-23 %) of COVID patients requiring intensive care. Endoscopy procedure volume and the number of physicians performing procedures declined by 90 % (66 %-98 %) and 84.5 % (50 %-97 %) respectively following introduction of restricted practice. During this period the most common procedures were EGDs (7.9/unit/week; 88 % for bleeding; the remainder for foreign body and feeding tube placement); ERCPs (5/unit/week; for cholangitis in 67 % and obstructive jaundice in 20 %); Colonoscopies (4/unit/week for bleeding in 77 % or colitis in 23 %) and least common were EUS (3/unit/week for tumor biopsies). Of the sites, 44 % performed pre-procedure COVID testing and the proportion of COVID-positive patients undergoing procedures was 4.6 % in the first 2 weeks and up to 19.6 % in the subsequent 2 weeks. The majority of COVID-positive patients undergoing procedures underwent EGD (30.6 % COVID +) and ERCP (10.2 % COVID +). Conclusions COVID-19 has profoundly impacted the operation of endoscopy units in the New York region. Our data show the impact of a restricted emergency practice on endoscopy volumes and the proportion of expected COVID positive cases during the peak time of the pandemic.

Confocal endomicroscopy for evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and international Delphi consensus report.

Background and study aims The aim of thi systematic review and consensus report is to standardize the practice of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-guided needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) for pancreatic cystic lesion (PCL) evaluation. Methods We performed an international, systematic, evidence-based review of the applications, outcomes, procedural processes, indications, training, and credentialing of EUS-nCLE in management of PCLs. Based on available clinical evidence, preliminary nCLE consensus statements (nCLE-CS) were developed by an international panel of 15 experts in pancreatic diseases. These statements were then voted and edited by using a modified Delphi approach. An a priori threshold of 80 % agreement was used to establish consensus for each statement. Results Sixteen nCLE-CS were discussed. Thirteen (81 %) nCLE-CS reached consensus addressing indications (non-communication PCL meeting criteria for EUS-FNA or with prior non-diagnostic EUS-FNA), diagnostic outcomes (improved accuracy for mucinous PCLs and serous cystadenomas with substantial interobserver agreement of image patterns), low incidence of adverse events (fluorescein-associated and pancreatitis), procedural processes (nCLE duration, manipulation of needle with probe), and training (physician knowledge and competence). Conclusion Based on a high level of agreement pertaining to expert consensus statements, this report standardizes the practice of EUS-nCLE. EUS-nCLE should be systematically considered when EUS-FNA is indicated for PCL evaluation.

Full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for treatment of upper gastrointestinal tract lesions: the first international experience.

Background and study aims The Full-Thickness Resection Device (FTRD) provides a novel treatment option for lesions not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection techniques. There are limited data on the efficacy and safety of FTRD for resection of upper gastrointestinal tract (GIT) lesions. Patients and methods This was an international multicenter retrospective study, including patients who had an endoscopic resection of an upper GIT lesion using the FTRD between January 2017 and February 2019. Results Fifty-six patients from 13 centers were included. The most common lesions were mesenchymal neoplasms (n = 23, 41 %), adenomas (n = 7, 13 %), and hamartomas (n = 6, 11 %). Eighty-four percent of lesions were located in the stomach, and 14 % in the duodenum. The average size of lesions was 14 mm (range 3 to 33 mm). Deployment of the FTRD was technically successful in 93 % of patients (n = 52) leading to complete and partial resection in 43 (77 %) and 9 (16 %) patients, respectively. Overall, the FTRD led to negative histological margins (R0 resection) in 38 (68 %) of patients. A total of 12 (21 %) mild or moderate adverse events (AEs) were reported. Follow-up endoscopy was performed in 31 patients (55 %), on average 88 days after the procedure (IQR 68-138 days). Of these, 30 patients (97 %) did not have any residual or recurrent lesion on endoscopic examination and biopsy, with residual adenoma in one patient (3 %). Conclusions Our results suggest a high technical success rate and an acceptable histologically complete resection rate, with a low risk of AEs and early recurrence for FTRD resection of upper GIT lesions.

Morning versus afternoon adenoma detection rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality marker of colonoscopy and operator performance. Prior studies evaluating the effect of an extended workday on the ADR reported variable outcomes that remain controversial. Given the variable results of prior studies and the potential legal implications of reduced ADR in the afternoon, we aimed to further evaluate this parameter and its effect on ADR. We performed a systematic review of the PubMed, CINAHL and Scopus electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported ADR in patients undergoing colonoscopy in the morning session and the afternoon session. Afternoon sessions included both sessions following a morning shift and half-day block shifts. Subgroup analyses were performed for ADR comparing morning and afternoon colonoscopies in a continuous workday, advanced ADRs (AADRs) and polyp detection rates (PDRs) were also compared. Thirteen articles with 17 341 (61.2%) performed in the morning session and 10 994 (38.8%) performed in the afternoon session were included in this study. There was no statistical significance in the ADR or AADR between morning and afternoon sessions, respectively [relative risk (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.14] and (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.5). Afternoon procedures had a significantly higher PDR than morning procedures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98). ADR was not significantly influenced in the afternoon session when operators continued to perform procedures throughout the day or on a half-day block schedule.