Managing radiation safety and protection in gastroenterology in Japan: insights from the REX-GI study.

Fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures, including gastrointestinal stenting, balloon-assisted endoscopy (BAE), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), are essential for diagnosis and treatment in gastroenterology. Such procedures involve radiation exposure that necessitates strict safety measures to protect patients, doctors, and medical staff. The April 2020 update to Japan's Ionizing Radiation Injury Prevention Regulations for occupational exposure reduced the lens exposure dose limit to approximately one-seventh of its previous level. This change highlights the need for improved safety protocols. Without adaptation, the sustainability of fluoroscopy-based endoscopic techniques could be at risk due to the potential to exceed these new limits. This review examines the current state of medical radiation exposure in the field of gastroenterology in Japan and discusses the findings of the REX-GI study.

Occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes and its protection during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

This study aimed to examine occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In this multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study, we collected data regarding occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during ERCP. We measured radiation exposure of patients and examined its correlation with occupational exposure. In dosimetrically-measured ERCPs (n = 631), the median air kerma at the patient entrance reference point, air kerma-area product, and fluoroscopy time were 49.6 mGy, 13.5 Gycm2, and 10.9 min, respectively. The median estimated annual radiation dose to the lens of the eyes was 3.7, 2.2, and 2.4 mSv for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. Glass badge over lead aprons and eye dosimeter results were similar in operators but differed in assistants and nurses. A strong correlation was shown between eye dosimeter measurements and patients' radiation exposure. The shielding rates of the lead glasses were 44.6%, 66.3%, and 51.7% for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. This study revealed the actual occupational exposure dose for the lens of the eyes during ERCP and the efficacy of lead glass. Values of radiation exposure to patients can help estimate exposure to the lens of the eyes of medical staff.

A follow-up questionnaire survey 2022 on radiation protection among 464 medical staff from 34 endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan.

Objectives: We surveyed and reported low protective equipment usage and insufficient knowledge among endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan in 2020. Two years later, we conducted a follow-up survey of doctors, nurses, and technologists in Japan. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire survey on radiation protection from May to June 2022. The participants were medical staff, including doctors, nurses, and radiological and endoscopy technicians in endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments. The questionnaire included 17 multiple-choice questions divided into three parts: background, equipment, and knowledge. Results: We surveyed 464 subjects from 34 institutions. There were 267 doctors (58%), 153 nurses (33%), and 44 technologists (9%). The rate of wearing a lead apron was 98% in this study. The rates of wearing a thyroid collar, lead glasses, and radiation dosimeter were 27%, 35%, and 74%, respectively. The trend of the protective equipment rate was similar to that of our previous study; however, radiation dosimetry among doctors was still low at 58%. The percentage of subjects who knew the radiation exposure (REX) dose of each procedure was low at 18%. Seventy-six percent of the subjects attended lectures on radiation protection, and 73% knew about the three principles of radiation protection; however, the concept of diagnostic reference levels was not well known (18%). Approximately 60% of the subjects knew about the exposure dose increasing cancer mortality (63%) and the 5-year lens REX limit (56%). Conclusions: There was some improvement in radiation protection equipment or education, but relatively little compared to the 2020 survey of endoscopy departments.

Radiation dose and factors related to exceeding the diagnostic reference level in 496 transnasal ileus tube placement procedures from the REX-GI study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the factors contributing to radiation exposure exceeding the DRL of the transnasal ileus tube placement in this post hoc analysis from the cohort of the REX-GI study. METHODS: Patients with transnasal ileus tubes were enrolled in the rex-gi study from may 2019 to december 2020. We investigated the endoscope insertion time (min), procedure time (min), tube insertion length (cm), fluoroscopy time (FT: min), air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (Ka.r: mGy), and air kerma-area product (PKA: Gycm2). The third quartile value of the PKA value was calculated as the diagnostic reference level (DRL) value. We explored the factors associated with radiation exposure exceeding the DRL. RESULTS: In the REX-GI study, 496 patients who underwent transnasal ileus tube placement were enrolled. The median age of the patients was 71 years. The median endoscopy insertion time, procedure time, and tube insertion length were 6 min, 20 min, and 170 cm, respectively. The third quartile/median FT, Ka.r, and PKA were 18/11.9 min, 99.2/54.4 mGy, and 46.9/28 Gycm2, respectively. The third quartile value of PKA (47 Gycm2) was set as the DRL value. There were differences in distribution by the hospital. Compared with procedures under the DRL, the FT (19 vs 10 min), procedure time (25 vs 18 min), and tube insertion length (185 vs 165 cm) were significantly longer for procedures above the DRL. CONCLUSION: We report the DRL for transnasal ileus tube placement in Japan. A longer procedure time and tube insertion length may be associated with DRL exceedance. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Transnasal ileus tube placement under fluoroscopy guidance is a standard clinical procedure for bowel obstruction. However, the appropriate radiation dose level has not yet been established.We report the (DRL) for transnasal ileus tube placement in Japan. A longer procedure time and tube insertion length may be associated with DRL exceedance.

Antithrombotic drug use does not affect the fecal immunochemical test PPV for colorectal cancer, but warfarin may have an impact in a Japanese cohort.

BACKGROUND: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Patients on antithrombotic drugs (ATs) are often screened for CRC, but the effect of ATs on FIT results is controversial. METHODS: We divided individuals with FIT-positive results into two groups, patients treated with and without ATs, and retrospectively compared invasive CRC rates, advanced neoplasia detection rates (ANDRs), adenoma detection rates (ADRs), and polyp detection rates (PDRs) between the two groups. We evaluated the factors influencing the FIT positive predictive value (PPV) using propensity matching, adjusting for age, sex, and bowel preparation. RESULTS: We enrolled 2327 individuals (54.9% male; mean age, 66.7  ± â€Š12.7 years). We grouped 463 individuals into the AT user group and 1864 into the nonuser group. Patients in the AT user group were significantly older and more likely to be male. After propensity score matching for age, sex, and Boston bowel preparation scale, the ADR and PDR in the AT user group were significantly lower than those in the nonuser group. Univariate logistic analysis revealed that multiple AT use (odds ratio [OR]: .39, p < 0.001) had the lowest OR for FIT PPV, followed by age- and sex-adjusted factors for the ADR and any AT use (OR: .67, p = 0.0007). No significant factors related to AT use were observed among age-adjusted predictive factors for invasive CRC, but warfarin use was a borderline significant positive predictive factor (OR: 2.23, p = 0.059). CONCLUSION: AT use may not affect the PPV for detecting invasive CRC in patients with positive FIT results, but warfarin may have an impact.

Stratification Based on Risk Factors at Diagnosis Could Predict Progression in Patients with Pancreatic Cysts.

BACKGROUND: Predicting the risk of malignant transformation in pancreatic cyst patients is challenging. AIM: We retrospectively investigated the risk factors for malignant transformation in pancreatic cyst patients. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cysts diagnosed using imaging tests were followed from November 2008 to December 2021. A significant change was defined as the additional development of high-risk stigmata (HRS), worrisome features (WFs), or pancreatic cancer during monitoring. RESULTS: In total, 479 patients were analyzed, with a median observation period of 50 months. Forty-four patients (9.2%) showed significant changes, and eight (1.7%) developed pancreatic cancer. The univariate analysis showed that the cyst diameter at diagnosis (≥ 14 mm), main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter at diagnosis (≥ 3 mm), presence of multilocular cysts, and an inconsistent MPD caliber were significant predictive factors for a significant change. One point was assigned for each significant factor. We grouped the patients into three groups: the low-risk group (total score 0), medium-risk group (score 1-2), and high-risk group (score 3-4). The high-risk group had a higher risk of a significant change than the medium- and low-risk groups (age-adjusted HRs for the medium-risk and high-risk groups were 3.0 and 5.2 compared with the low-risk group). CONCLUSION: Stratification based on risk factors may help predict the development of significant changes in pancreatic cyst patients.

Medical radiation exposure during gastrointestinal enteral metallic stent placement: Post hoc analysis of the REX-GI study.

Background and Aim: Recently, the use of various endoscopic procedures performed under X-ray fluoroscopy guidance has increased. With the popularization of such procedures, diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) have been widely accepted as the global standard for various procedures with ionizing radiation. The Radiation Exposure from Gastrointestinal Fluoroscopic Procedures (REX-GI) study aimed to prospectively collect actual radiation exposure (RE) data and establish DRLs in gastrointestinal endoscopy units. In this post hoc analysis of the REX-GI study, we established DRLs for each disease site by analyzing cases of gastrointestinal enteral metallic stent placement. Methods: The REX-GI study was a multicenter, prospective observational study conducted to collect actual RE data during gastrointestinal enteral metallic stent placement. To establish DRL values for three disease sites, namely the esophagus, gastroduodenum, and colon, we examined fluoroscopy time (FT; min), number of X-ray images, air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (K a,r; mGy), and the air kerma-area product (P KA; Gy cm2) during enteral metallic stent placement. Results: Five-hundred and twenty-three stenting procedures were performed. The DRL values of FT (min) and the number of X-ray images for the esophagus/gastroduodenum/colon were 9/16/18 min and 9/15/11 min, respectively. Furthermore, the DRL values of K a,r and P KA for each disease site were 43.3/120/124 mGy and 10.3/36.6/48.4 Gy cm2, respectively. Among the procedures, esophageal stents were significantly associated with the lowest values (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The characteristics of RE vary according to disease site among gastrointestinal enteral metallic stent placements. Thus, it is desirable to set DRL values based on the disease site.

Efficacy and Safety of a Strategy for Reviewing Intravenous Antibiotics for Hospitalized Japanese Patients with Uncomplicated Diverticulitis: A Single-center Observational Study.

Objective Treatment for uncomplicated diverticulitis (UD) is not well established. We evaluated the strategy of reviewing intravenous antibiotics for hospitalized Japanese patients with UD. Methods Treatment was based on the physician's choice until August 2018; the indications for hospitalization and treatment have been standardized since September 2018. In this study, we monitored the use of intravenous antibiotics administered to patients hospitalized for UD and then reviewed the need for them on hospital day 3. We compared patients' length of antibiotic use, hospital stay, health care cost, and complications via the review strategy from September 2018 to December 2020 and via the previous physicians' choice strategy from January 2016 to August 2018. Results Two hundred and forty-seven patients were admitted to our hospital because of acute colonic diverticulitis from January 2016 to December 2020. After excluding complicated cases, 106 individuals were enrolled during the period of physician's choice; 87 were enrolled when treatment review was employed. There were no significant differences in age, sex, inflammation site, or severity during the first hospital visit. The median duration of antibiotic use was significantly reduced from 5 to 4 days (p=0.0075), with no marked increase in rates of transfer to surgery, mortality, or readmission due to recurrence. A more significant proportion of patients completed 3-day antibiotic treatment with the review strategy than with the physician's choice strategy (6.6% vs. 25.3%, p=0.0004). However, the length of hospital stay and total medical costs did not decrease. Conclusion The strategy of reviewing treatment on day 3 after hospitalization for UD safety reduced the duration of antibiotic use, but the hospital stay and health care costs did not decrease.

Comparison of Radiation Exposure between Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy with Antegrade Stenting.

Fluoroscopy forms an essential part of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting (EUS-HGAS). To date, no study has assessed and compared radiation exposure between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study aimed to compare the radiation exposure parameters between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS from October 2017 to March 2019. The air kerma (AK: mGy), kerma-area product (KAP: Gycm2), fluoroscopy time (FT: min), and procedure time (PT: min) were assessed and compared between the two procedures. Altogether, 45 and 24 patients underwent EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS, respectively. The median AK, KAP, FT, and PT were higher in the EUS-HGAS group than in the EUS-HGS group. A comparison revealed no difference in the technical success rate, complications rate, adverse event occurrence rate, and re-intervention rate between both procedures. This is the first report in which radiation exposure was used as a comparative parameter between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study revealed that radiation exposure is significantly higher in EUS-HGAS than in EUS-HGS. Increased awareness on radiation exposure is warranted among gastroenterologists so that they choose the procedure with lower radiation exposure in cases where both procedures are indicated.

How should radiation exposure be handled in fluoroscopy-guided endoscopic procedures in the field of gastroenterology?

Fluoroscopy-guided endoscopic procedures (FGEPs) are rapidly gaining popularity in the field of gastroenterology. Radiation is a well-known health hazard. Gastroenterologists who perform FGEPs are required to protect themselves, patients, as well as nurses and radiologists engaged in examinations from radiation exposure. To achieve this, all gastroenterologists must first understand and adhere to the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication. In particular, it is necessary to understand the three principles of radiation protection (Justification, Optimization, and Dose Limits), the As Low As Reasonably Achievable principle, and the Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) according to them. This review will mainly explain the three principles of radiation exposure protection, DRLs, and occupational radiological protection in interventional procedures while introducing related findings. Gastroenterologists must gain knowledge of radiation exposure protection and keep it updated.

Comparison of radiation exposure between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage and transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for pancreatobiliary diseases.

OBJECTIVES: The transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP-D) cannot be performed without fluoroscopy, and there are many situations in which fluoroscopy is required even in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUS-D). Previous studies have compared the efficacy, but not the radiation exposure of EUS-D and ERCP-D. While radiation exposure in ERCP-D has been previously evaluated, there is a paucity of information regarding radiation doses in EUS-D. This study aimed to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. METHODS: This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-D and ERCP-D between October 2017 and March 2019. The air kerma (AK, mGy), kerma-area product (KAP, Gycm2 ), fluoroscopy time (FT, min), and procedure time (PT, min) were assessed. The invasive probability weighting method was used to qualify the comparisons. RESULTS: We enrolled 372 and 105 patients who underwent ERCP-D and EUS-D, respectively. The mean AK, KAP, and FT in the EUS-D group were higher by 53%, 28%, and 27%, respectively, than those in the ERCP-D group, whereas PT was shorter by approximately 11% (AK, 135.0 vs. 88.4; KAP, 28.1 vs. 21.9; FT, 20.4 vs. 16.0; PT, 38.7 vs. 43.5). The sub-analysis limited to biliary drainage cases showed the same trend (AK, 128.3 vs. 90.9; KAP, 27.0 vs. 22.2; FT, 16.4 vs. 16.1; PT, 32.5 vs. 44.4). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. Radiation exposure was significantly higher in EUS-D than in ERCP-D, despite the shorter procedure time.

The radiation doses and radiation protection on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures.

Although many interventions involving radiation exposure have been replaced to endoscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary fields, there remains no alternative for enteroscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which requires the use of radiation. In this review, we discuss the radiation doses and protective measures of endoscopic procedures, especially for ERCP. For the patient radiation dose, the average dose area product for diagnostic ERCP was 14-26 Gy.cm², while it increased to as high as 67-89 Gy.cm² for therapeutic ERCP. The corresponding entrance skin doses for diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP were 90 and 250 mGy, respectively. The mean effective doses were 3- 6 mSv for diagnostic ERCP and 12-20 mSv for therapeutic ERCP. For the occupational radiation dose, the typical doses were 94 µGy and 75 µGy for the eye and neck, respectively. However, with an over-couch-type X-ray unit, the eye and neck doses reached as high as 550 and 450 µGy, with maximal doses of up to 2.8 and 2.4 mGy/procedure, respectively.A protective lead shield was effective for an over couch X-ray tube unit. It lowered scattered radiation by up to 89.1% in a phantom study. In actual measurements, the radiation exposure of the endoscopist closest to the unit was reduced to approximately 12%. In conclusion, there is a clear need for raising awareness among medical personnel involved endoscopic procedures to minimise radiation risks to both the patients and staff.

Comparison of colonoscopy after colonic diverticulitis and positive fecal immunochemical tests for the detection of colorectal neoplasia.

Background and study aims The relationship between acute colonic diverticulitis and colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear, but colonoscopy is recommended to exclude malignancy. We compared the detection rates for colorectal neoplasia in patients with colonic diverticulitis and asymptomatic patients who had positive fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). Patients and methods In total, 282 patients with acute colonic diverticulitis were hospitalized in our hospital from February 2011 to December 2019. Of them, 143 patients with diverticulitis and 1819 with positive FITs patients during the same period underwent colonoscopy without a prior colonoscopy within 5 years. We retrospectively compared these patients in terms of the invasive CRC rate, advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR), and polyp detection rate (PDR). Results Compared to the diverticulitis group, the FIT-positive group had a significantly higher CRC rate (0 vs 2.7 %, P  = 0.0061), ANDR (5.6 vs. 14.0 %, P  = 0.0017), ADR (19.6 vs. 53.2 %, P  < .0001), and PDR (44.1 vs. 91.0 %, P  < .0001). Using 1:1 propensity score matching based on age and sex, we obtained 276 matched patients in both groups. After matching, no difference was found in the CRC rate (0 vs 0.7 %) or ANDR (5.8 vs 7.3 %) between groups, but the ADR and PDR were significantly higher in the FIT-positive group (20.3 vs 43.5 %, P  < .0001; 45.7 % vs 86.2 %, P  < .0001). Conclusion Patients with acute diverticulitis had lower ADRs and PDRs than patients with positive FITs.

Time Trend of the Radiation Exposure Dose in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Over an 8-Year Period: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: The global needs for a reduction in radiation exposure (RE) are increasing. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a significant fluoroscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal field. However, the actual RE in ERCP and its annual trend are still unclear. Therefore, we examined the yearly trend of RE in ERCP. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort study included consecutive cases of ERCP from September 2012 to June 2019. We measured the air kerma (AK, mGy), dose area product (DAP, Gycm2), and fluoroscopy time (FT, min). We also evaluated the annual trend of the RE before and after the fluoroscopy device update. RESULTS: In total, 2,174 patients receiving ERCP were enrolled. Among these, the mean age was 74.3 years, and 913 patients were women (42.0%). The median/third quartile values of AK (mGy), DAP (Gycm2), and FT (min) were 109/234 mGy, 13.3/25.8 Gycm2, and 18.2/27.7 minutes. The annual AK, DAP, and FT from 2012 to 2019 were 138, 207, 173, 177, 106, 71.0, 45.0, and 33.3 mGy; 23, 21.4, 19, 18.3, 11.9, 9.0, 6.8, and 6.4 Gycm2; and 12.5, 12.1, 9.7, 9.8, 8.2, 10.8, 9.4, and 10.3 minutes, respectively. The corresponding values before and after the update in July 2016 were 177 and 52 mGy (P < 0.0001), 19.2 and 7.6 Gycm2 (P < 0.0001), and 10.2, and 9.9 minutes (P = 0.05), respectively. DISCUSSION: The RE from ERCP tended to decrease every year, especially after fluoroscopy device updates.

A questionnaire survey on radiation protection among 282 medical staff from 26 endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan.

Background and aims: It is essential for endoscopists, technologists, and nurses to understand radiation protection. However, protective equipment usage is still low, and there is little awareness of radiation protection in practice. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire survey on radiation protection from January to February 2020. The participants were medical staff, including medical doctors, nurses, and radiological and endoscopy technician in endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments. The questionnaire included 14 multiple-choice questions divided among three parts: background, equipment, and knowledge. Results: We surveyed a total of 282 subjects from 26 institutions. There were 168 medical doctors (60%), 90 nurses (32%), and 24 technologists (9%). Although almost all staff members (99%) always wore a lead apron, only a few wore a thyroid collar (32%) and lead glasses (21%). The rate of wearing a radiation dosimeter was insufficient (69%), especially among doctors (52%). A few subjects knew the radiation exposure dose of each procedure (15%), and slightly over half had attended lectures on radiation protection (64%) and knew about the three principles of radiation protection (59%). Protection adherence did not differ by years of experience, knowledge of fluoroscopy, awareness of radiation exposure doses, or attendance at basic lectures on radiation protection. However, medical doctors who were aware of the radiation exposure dose of each procedure were significantly more likely to wear dosimeters than those who were not (p = 0.0008). Conclusion: Medical staff in endoscopy departments in Japan do not have enough radiation protection equipment or education.

Endoscopic placement of covered versus uncovered self-expandable metal stents for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Stenting is an established endoscopic therapy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). The choice of stent (covered vs uncovered) has been examined in prior randomised studies without clear results. DESIGN: In a multicentre randomised prospective study, we compared covered (CSEMS) with uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMS) in patients with mGOO; main outcomes were stent dysfunction and patient survival, with subgroup analyses of patients with extrinsic and intrinsic tumours. RESULTS: Overall survival was poor with no difference between groups (probability at 3 months 49.7% for covered vs 48.4% for uncovered stents; log-rank for overall survival p=0.26). Within that setting of short survival, the proportion of stent dysfunction was significantly higher for uncovered stents (35.2% vs 23.4%, p=0.01) with significantly shorter time to stent dysfunction. This was mainly relevant for patients with extrinsic tumours (stent dysfunction rates for uncovered stents 35.6% vs 17.5%, p<0.01). Subgrouping was also relevant with respect to tumour ingrowth (lower with covered stents for intrinsic tumours; 1.6% vs 27.7%, p<0.01) and stent migration (higher with covered stents for extrinsic tumours: 15.3% vs 2.5%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Due to poor patient survival, minor differences between covered and uncovered stents may be less relevant even if statistically significant; however, subgroup analysis would suggest to use covered stents for intrinsic and uncovered stents for extrinsic malignancies.

Clinical Utility of Bile Duct Axis Deviation for Differential Diagnosis Between Pancreatic Head Cancer and Bile Duct Cancer.

BACKGROUNDS: Differential diagnosis between pancreatic head cancer (PHC) and intrapancreatic bile duct cancer (BDC) is important, but no clinical standard has been established. Here we examine the diagnostic utility of bile duct axis deviation and other clinical factors for this differential diagnosis. METHODS: This study enrolled patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for PHC or BDC at our center between 2009 and 2016. PHCs in groove or uncinate portions were excluded from analysis. From contrast-enhanced computed tomography images, the bile duct angle (BDA) was measured using three points: the junction of intrahepatic bile ducts, upper pancreatic edge, and Vater papilla. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of BDA and other clinical factors for differential diagnosis. RESULTS: During the study period, 22 PHCs and 31 BDCs were resected. The combination of BDA ≤ 130°, main pancreatic duct diameter ≥ 4.3 mm, and absence of jaundice predicted PHC rather than BDC with an area under the curve of the receiver-operator characteristics curve of .856 (95% confidence interval, .766-.947). CONCLUSION: Clinical findings of larger bile duct axis deviation, main pancreatic duct dilation, and the absence of jaundice may be useful for distinguishing PHC from BDC.

Radiation exposure dose of fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures: A single-center retrospective study.

Background and study aims Fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures (FGPs) are increasingly common. However, the radiation exposure (RE) to patients undergoing FGPs is still unclear. We examined the actual RE of FGPs. Patients and methods This retrospective, single-center cohort study included consecutive FGPs, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), enteral stenting, balloon-assisted enteroscopy, tube placement, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS), esophageal balloon dilatation and repositioning for sigmoid volvulus, from September 2012 to June 2019. We measured the air kerma (AK, mGy), dose area product (DAP, Gycm 2 ), and fluoroscopy time (FT, min) for each procedure. Results In total, 3831 patients were enrolled. Overall, 2778 ERCPs were performed. The median AK, DAP, and FT were as follows: ERCP: 109 mGy, 13.3 Gycm 2 and 10.0 min; self-expandable enteral stenting (SEMS): 62 mGy, 12.4 Gycm 2 and 10.4 min; tube placement: 40 mGy, 13.8 Gycm 2 and 11.1 min; balloon-assisted enteroscopy: 43 mGy, 22.4 Gycm 2 and 18.2 min; EUS cyst drainage (EUS-CD): 96 mGy, 18.3 Gycm 2 and 10.4 min; EIS: 36 mGy, 8.1 Gycm 2 and 4.4 min; esophageal balloon dilatation: 9 mGy, 2.2 Gycm 2 and 1.8 min; and repositioning for sigmoid volvulus: 7 mGy, 4.7 Gycm 2 and 1.6 min. Conclusion This large series reporting actual RE doses of various FGPs could serve as a reference for future prospective studies.

Comparison of double-layer large-diameter and conventional small-diameter plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in resectable distal malignant biliary obstruction.

The use of a plastic stent (PS) in resectable patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) is uncommon due to the high failure rate of this method. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a double-layer, large-diameter PS as a bridge to surgery compared with a conventional PS. This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. In total, 129 consecutive patients with DMBO underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2011 and March 2018. Fifty-five patients who preoperatively underwent plastic biliary drainage were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups based on stent diameter: a large-diameter plastic stent (LPS) group and a small-diameter plastic stent (SPS) group. The primary endpoint was the stent patency period, and the secondary endpoint was the medical cost. Thirty-six patients received SPSs; 19 patients received LPSs. The patency rate until surgery was significantly higher in the LPS group than in the SPS group (89.5% vs. 41.7%, P = 0.0006). Multivariate analysis revealed that LPS use was significantly associated with sufficient stent patency. The total cost of LPS use was significantly lower than that of SPS use. LPSs had longer patency and reduced medical costs than SPSs. LPSs may be suitable for patients with DMBO who are scheduled to undergo surgery.

Multicentre prospective observational study protocol for radiation exposure from gastrointestinal fluoroscopic procedures (REX-GI study).

INTRODUCTION: Recently, the use of various endoscopic procedures under X-ray fluoroscopic guidance, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), enteral endoscopy and stenting, has been rapidly increasing because of the minimally invasive nature of these procedures compared with that of surgical intervention. With the spread of CT and fluoroscopic interventions, including endoscopic procedures under X-ray guidance, high levels of radiation exposure (RE) from medical imaging have led to major concerns throughout society. However, information about RE related to these image-guided procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy is scarce, and the RE reference levels have not been established. The aim of this study is to prospectively collect the actual RE dose and to help establish diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in the field of gastroenterology in Japan. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, prospective observational study that is being conducted to collect the actual RE from treatments and diagnostic procedures, including ERCP, interventional EUS, balloon-assisted enteroscopy, enteral metallic stent placement and enteral tube placement. We will measure the total fluoroscopy time (min), the total dose-area product (Gycm2) and air-kerma (mGy) of those procedures. Because we are collecting the actual RE data and identifying the influential factors through a prospective, nationwide design, this study will provide guidance regarding the DRLs of ERCP, interventional EUS, balloon-assisted enteroscopy, enteral metallic stent placement and enteral tube placement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Toyonaka Municipal Hospital (25 April 2019). The need for informed consent will be waived via the opt-out method of each hospital website. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000036525.