A single-center pilot study on the efficacy and safety of acetic acid-enhanced magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging for diagnosis of colorectal epithelial neoplasms.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We investigated the ideal acetic acid (AA) concentration for AA-enhanced narrow-band imaging magnifying endoscopy (ANBI-ME) in the diagnosis of superficial colorectal neoplasms and evaluated its clinical efficacy. METHODS: During the exploratory phase, we investigated 4 concentrations (1.5%, 2.25%, 3.0%, and 4.5%) in rotation by performing ANBI-ME on 50 superficial colorectal neoplasms at each concentration. A favorable AA concentration was determined by evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, AA whitening duration (AD), peristalsis, and bleeding after endoscopic resection. In the validation phase, we assessed interobserver agreements for ANBI-ME with the determined AA concentration and intermethodologic agreements between that and subsequently conducted crystal violet-stained magnifying endoscopy (CV-ME) with the exploratory set and 98 additional patients. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracies were 89.3% (42/47) for 1.5% AA, 92.0% (46/50) for 2.25% AA, 96.8% (61/63) for 3.0% AA, and 97.8% (46/47) for 4.5% AA, with no significant difference (P = .26). A significant positive correlation was observed between AA concentration and AD (P < .001). No significant differences in hyperperistalsis or post-resection bleeding were observed. The optimal AA concentration was determined to be 4.5%. In the validation analysis, the accuracy rates were 72.4% (105/145) with the use of AMBI-ME and 68.3% (99/145) with the use of CV-ME (P = .43). Strong agreements were noted between observers (κ: 0.87 for ANBI-ME, 0.83 for CV-ME) and between the methods (κ: 0.87 and 0.81 for each observer). CONCLUSIONS: For diagnosing colorectal lesions, an AA concentration of 4.5% in ANBI-ME was safe and effective. Its diagnostic performance was similar to CV-ME, and future large-sample studies may confirm its potential as a reliable alternative endoscopic diagnostic method.

Predictive Factors for Short-Term Survival after Non-Curative Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: For early gastric cancer (EGC) treated using endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with poor curability defined by the Japanese Guidelines (non-curative EGC, N-EGC), additional gastrectomy has been recommended. However, N-EGC patients without additional gastrectomy often die of other diseases within a relatively short interval after ESD. It has been unclear whether additional gastrectomy is beneficial or not for such patients. The aim of this study was to clarify predictors for short-term survival of N-EGC patients without additional gastrectomy after ESD. METHODS: One hundred six N-EGC patients without additional gastrectomy were included in this study. Factors related to short-term survival, defined as death within 3 years after ESD, were evaluated using uni- and multivariate analyses by comparing patients with and without short-term survival (Groups S and C, respectively). RESULTS: During the mean follow-up period of 89 months, 39 patients died (14 patients died within 3 years, being Group S). The cause of death was gastric cancer for only 1 patient in the Group C. The 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 86.8 and 81.8%, respectively, and the 3- and 5-years disease-specific survival rates were 100 and 98.9%, respectively. Univariate analyses showed that short-term survival was statistically associated with elevated morphology, high-risk status for lymph node metastases as defined by the eCura system, severe comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI] ≥3), low level of activity in daily living (being unable to go out by oneself), habitation (a nursing home), and several poor nutritional prognostic indices (neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio ≥2.5, geriatric nutritional risk index <92, C-reactive protein ≥1.0). In the multivariate analysis, a high CCI (≥3) was the independent predictor for short-term survival after ESD (odds ratio, 8.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-43.0; p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Severe comorbidity indicated by a high CCI score (≥3) was the independent predictor for short-term survival for EGC patients without additional gastrectomy after non-curative ESD. Since the cause of death for most patients was not gastric cancer, observational follow-ups without additional gastrectomy might be a reasonable option for patients with a poor general status indicated by a CCI ≥3.

Safety and Recipient Satisfaction of Propofol Sedation in Outpatient Endoscopy: A 24-Hour Prospective Investigation Using a Questionnaire Survey.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. METHODS: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. RESULTS: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20-200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. CONCLUSION: Propofol sedation was found to be safe-without severe adverse events or accidents-for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients' next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.