Prolonged Gastrointestinal Manifestations After Recovery From COVID-19.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Acute enteric infections are well known to result in long-term gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. Although COVID-19 is principally a respiratory illness, it demonstrates significant GI tropism, possibly predisposing to prolonged gut manifestations. We aimed to examine the long-term GI impact of hospitalization with COVID-19. METHODS: Nested within a large-scale observational cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 across North America, we performed a follow-up survey of 530 survivors 12-18 months later to assess for persistent GI symptoms and their severity, and for the development of disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBIs). Eligible patients were identified at the study site level and surveyed electronically. The survey instrument included the Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaire for DGBI, a rating scale of 24 COVID-related symptoms, the Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale, and the Impact of Events-Revised trauma symptom questionnaire (a measure of posttraumatic stress associated with the illness experience). A regression analysis was performed to explore the factors associated with GI symptom severity at follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 530 invited patients, 116 responded (52.6% females; mean age, 55.2 years), and 73 of those (60.3%) met criteria for 1 or more Rome IV DGBI at follow-up, higher than the prevalence in the US general population (P < .0001). Among patients who experienced COVID-related GI symptoms during the index hospitalization (abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea), 42.1% retained at least 1 of these symptoms at follow-up; in comparison, 89.8% of respondents retained any (GI or non-GI) COVID-related symptom. The number of moderate or severe GI symptoms experienced during the initial COVID-19 illness by self-report correlated with the development of DGBI and severity of GI symptoms at follow-up. Posttraumatic stress disorder (Impact of Events-Revised score ≥33) related to the COVID-19 illness experience was identified in 41.4% of respondents and those individuals had higher DGBI prevalence and GI symptom severity. Regression analysis revealed that higher psychological trauma score (Impact of Events-Revised) was the strongest predictor of GI symptom severity at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this follow-up survey of patients 12-18 months after hospitalization with COVID-19, there was a high prevalence of DGBIs and persistent GI symptoms. Prolonged GI manifestations were associated with the severity of GI symptoms during hospitalization and with the degree of psychological trauma related to the illness experience.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on management of post-liver transplant biliary strictures: methodology and review of evidence.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage biliary strictures in liver transplant recipients. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the role of ERCP versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and covered self-expandable metal stents (cSEMSs) versus multiple plastic stents for therapy of strictures, use of MRCP for diagnosing post-transplant biliary strictures, and administration of antibiotics versus no antibiotics during ERCP. In patients with post-transplant biliary strictures, we suggest ERCP as the initial intervention and cSEMSs as the preferred stent. In patients with unclear diagnosis or intermediate probability of a stricture, we suggest MRCP as the diagnostic modality. We suggest that antibiotics should be administered during ERCP when biliary drainage cannot be assured.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on management of post-liver transplant biliary strictures: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage biliary strictures in liver transplant recipients. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the role of ERCP versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and covered self-expandable metal stents (cSEMSs) versus multiple plastic stents for therapy of post-transplant strictures, use of MRCP for diagnosing post-transplant biliary strictures, and administration of antibiotics versus no antibiotics during ERCP. In patients with post-transplant biliary strictures, we suggest ERCP as the initial intervention and cSEMSs as the preferred stent for extrahepatic strictures. In patients with unclear diagnoses or intermediate probability of a stricture, we suggest MRCP as the diagnostic modality. We suggest that antibiotics should be administered during ERCP when biliary drainage cannot be ensured.

Factors predictive of persistent fistulas in EUS-directed transgastric ERCP: a multicenter matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) is an established method for managing pancreaticobiliary pathology in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients, with high rates of technical success and low rates of serious adverse events (AEs). However, widespread adoption of the technique has been limited because of concerns about the development of persistent gastrogastric or jejunogastric fistulas. Gastrogastric and jejunogastric fistulas have been reported in up to 20% of cases in some series, but predictive risk factors and long-term management and outcomes are lacking. Therefore, our aims were to assess factors associated with the development of persistent fistulas and the technical success of endoscopic fistula closure. METHODS: This is a case-control study involving 9 centers (8 USA, 1 Europe) from February 2015 to September 2021. Cases of persistent fistulas were defined as endoscopic or imaging evidence of fistula more than 8 weeks after lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) removal. Control subjects were defined as endoscopic or imaging confirmation of no fistula more than 8 weeks after LAMS removal. AEs were defined and graded according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients identified to have evidence of a persistent fistula on follow-up surveillance (cases) were matched with 50 patients with no evidence of a persistent fistula on follow-up surveillance (control subjects) based on age and sex. Mean LAMS dwell time was 74.7 ± 106.2 days. After LAMS removal, argon plasma coagulation (APC) ablation of the fistula was performed in 46 patients (61.3%). Primary closure of the fistula was performed in 26.7% of patients (20: endoscopic suturing in 17, endoscopic tacking in 2, and over-the-scope clips + endoscopic suturing in 1). When comparing cases with control subjects, there was no difference in baseline demographics, fistula site, LAMS size, or primary closure frequency between the 2 groups (P > .05). However, in the persistent fistula group, the mean LAMS dwell time was significantly longer (127 vs 48 days, P = .02) and more patients had ≥5% total body weight gain (33.3% vs 10.3%, P = .03). LAMS dwell time was a significant predictor of persistent fistula (odds ratio, 4.5 after >40 days in situ, P = .01). The odds of developing a persistent fistula increased by 9.5% for every 7 days the LAMS was left in situ. In patients with a persistent fistula, endoscopic closure was attempted in 19 (76%) with successful resolution in 14 (73.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Longer LAMS dwell time was found to be associated with a higher risk of persistent fistulas in EDGE patients. APC or primary closure of the fistula on LAMS removal was not found to be protective against developing a persistent fistula, which, if present, can be effectively managed through endoscopic closure in most cases.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of ergonomics for prevention of endoscopy-related injury: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach to strategies to prevent endoscopy-related injury (ERI) in GI endoscopists. It is accompanied by the article subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline estimates the rates, sites, and predictors of ERI. Additionally, it addresses the role of ergonomics training, microbreaks and macrobreaks, monitor and table positions, antifatigue mats, and use of ancillary devices in decreasing the risk of ERI. We recommend formal ergonomics education and neutral posture during the performance of endoscopy, achieved through adjustable monitor and optimal procedure table position, to reduce the risk of ERI. We suggest taking microbreaks and scheduled macrobreaks and using antifatigue mats during procedures to prevent ERI. We suggest the use of ancillary devices in those with risk factors predisposing them to ERI.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: methodology and review of evidence.

This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. It is accompanied by the document subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well- or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, we suggest surgical evaluation over endoscopic approaches.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the role of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures. In the endoscopic workup of these patients, we suggest the use of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling in addition to brush cytology over brush cytology alone, especially for hilar strictures. We suggest the use of cholangioscopic and EUS-guided biopsy sampling especially for patients who undergo nondiagnostic sampling, cholangioscopic biopsy sampling for nondistal strictures and EUS-guided biopsy sampling distal strictures or those with suspected spread to surrounding lymph nodes and other structures.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: methodology and review of evidence.

Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, whereas the accompanying article subtitled "Summary and Recommendations" contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.

Musculoskeletal injury and ergonomics in pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic practice.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries (ERI) are increasingly prevalent in adult endoscopists; however, there are no studies that have evaluated ERI and ergonomic practices among pediatric gastroenterologists and trainees. We aimed to examine the prevalence, nature, and impact of musculoskeletal injuries in pediatric endoscopic practice and assess attitudes towards ergonomic training needs. METHODS: Pediatric gastroenterologists and trainees were surveyed to collect information on endoscopist and practice characteristics, the prevalence, nature, and impacts of ERI, ergonomics strategies employed in practice, previous ergonomics training, and perceptions of ergonomics training (elicited using a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) Likert scale). Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and bivariate analyses were conducted to explore correlates of ERI. RESULTS: Among 146 survey respondents, 50 (34.2%) were trainees and 96 (65.8%) were practicing endoscopists with a mean duration of endoscopic practice of 9.7 ± 9.4 years. Overall, 55.6% (n = 80/144) reported experiencing a musculoskeletal injury, with 34.7% (n = 50/144) reporting an injury attributable to endoscopy. Among those with ERI, the most common sites were the neck/upper back (44.0%), thumb (42.0%), hand/finger (38.0%), and lower back (36.0%). Women were more likely to experience ERI compared to men (43.4% vs. 23.4%; p = 0.013). Only 20.9% of participants had formal training in ergonomics. Respondents reported being motivated to implement practice changes to prevent ERI (4.41 ± 0.95) and perceived ergonomics training as important (4.37 ± 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric endoscopists, and particularly women, experience significant ERI; however, formal endoscopy ergonomics training is rare. Improved ergonomics training is needed for both practicing pediatric gastroenterologists and trainees.

EUS-directed transgastric interventions in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) between the gastric pouch and the excluded stomach allows for EUS-guided transgastric interventions (EDGIs) in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Although EUS-guided transgastric ERCP (EDGE) outcomes have been reported, data are scant on other endoscopic interventions. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes and safety of EDGIs. METHODS: This retrospective study involved 9 centers (United States, 8; Europe, 1) and included patients with RYGB who underwent EDGIs between June 2015 and September 2021. The primary outcome was the technical success of EDGIs. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay, and fistula follow-up and management. RESULTS: Fifty-four EDGI procedures were performed in 47 patients (mean age, 61 years; 72% women), most commonly for the evaluation of a pancreatic mass (n = 16) and management of pancreatic fluid collections (n = 10). A 20-mm LAMS was used in 26 patients and a 15-mm LAMS in 21, creating a gastrogastrostomy in 37 patients and jejunogastrostomy in 10. Most patients (n = 30, 64%) underwent a dual-session EDGI, with a median interval of 17 days between the 2 procedures. Single-session EDGI was performed in 17 patients, of whom 10 (59%) had anchoring of the LAMS. The most common interventions were diagnostic EUS (with or without FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling; n = 28) and EUS-guided cystgastrostomy (n = 8). The mean procedural time was 97.6 ± 78.9 minutes. Technical success was achieved in 52 patients (96%). AEs occurred in 5 patients (10.6%), of which only 1 AE (2.1%) was graded as severe. Intraprocedural LAMS migration was the most common AE, occurring in 3 patients (6.4%), whereas delayed spontaneous LAMS migration occurred in 2 (4.3%). Four of the 5 LAMS migration events were managed endoscopically, and 1 required surgical repair. LAMS anchoring was found to be protective against LAMS migration (P = .001). The median duration of hospital stay was 2.1 ± 3.7 days. Of the 17 patients who underwent objective fistula assessment endoscopically or radiologically after LAMS removal, 2 (11.7%) were found to have persistent fistulas. In 1 case the fistula was intentionally left open to assist with weight gain. The other fistula was successfully closed endoscopically. CONCLUSIONS: EDGI is effective and safe for the diagnosis and management of pancreaticobiliary and foregut disorders in RYGB patients. It is associated with high rates of technical success and low rates of severe AEs. LAMS migration is the most common AE with evidence that anchoring can be protective against its occurrence. Persistent fistulas may occur, but endoscopic closure seems to be effective.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on informed consent for GI endoscopic procedures.

Informed consent is the cornerstone of the ethical practice of procedures and treatments in medicine. The purpose of this document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee is to provide an update on best practice of the informed consent process and other issues around informed consent and shared decision-making for endoscopic procedures. The principles of informed consent are based on longstanding legal doctrine. Several new concepts and clinical trials addressing the best practice of informed consent will help guide practitioners of the burgeoning field of GI endoscopic procedures. After a literature review and an iterative discussion and voting process by the ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, this document was produced to update our guidance on informed consent for the practicing endoscopist. Because this document was designed by considering the laws and broad practice of endoscopy in the United States, legal requirements may differ by state and region, and it is the responsibility of the endoscopist, practice managers, and other healthcare organizations to be aware of local laws. Our recommendations are designed to improve the informed consent experience for both physicians and patients as they work together to diagnose and treat GI diseases with endoscopy.

Novel 15-mm-long lumen-apposing metal stent for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections located ≥10 mm from the luminal wall.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) by cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has largely been limited to collections located < 10 mm from the luminal wall. We present outcomes of the use of a novel 15-mm-long cautery-enhanced LAMS for drainage of PFCs located ≥ 10 mm away. METHODS: This international, multicenter study analyzed all adults with PFCs located ≥ 10 mm from the luminal wall who were treated by EUS-guided drainage using the 15-mm-long cautery-enhanced LAMS. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes included clinical success (decrease in PFC size by ≥ 50 % at 30 days and resolution of clinical symptoms without surgical intervention), complications, and recurrence. RESULTS: 35 patients (median age 57 years; interquartile range [IQR] 47-64 years; 49 % male) underwent novel LAMS placement for drainage of PFCs (26 walled-off necrosis, 9 pseudocysts), measuring 85 mm (IQR 64-117) maximal diameter and located 11.8 mm (IQR 10-12.3; range 10-14) from the gastric/duodenal wall. Technical and clinical success were high (both 97 %), with recurrence in one patient (3 %) at a median follow-up of 123 days (58-236). Three complications occurred (9 %; one mild, two moderate). CONCLUSIONS: The 15-mm-long cautery-enhanced LAMS was feasible and safe for drainage of PFCs located 10-14 mm from the luminal wall.

Long-term transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with double pigtail stents following lumen-apposing metal stent placement improves recurrence-free survival in disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is the most common cause of pancreatic fluid collection (PFC) recurrence. While long-term transmural drainage with plastic stents is the preferred endoscopic approach, there is a paucity of literature on patients undergoing initial drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS). We describe our experience managing patients with DPDS. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database (November 2015-September 2020) was performed looking at clinical outcomes and overall survival for patients undergoing endoscopic management of PFCs using LAMS. The primary outcome was to assess recurrence-free survival in PFC patients with DPDS managed with or without double pigtail stents (DPS) replacement after LAMS removal. RESULTS: Of 96 patients with PFCs, 48 with DPDS were included in the study. The median follow-up was 20.1 months. LAMS replacement with DPS was successful in 21/48 (43.8%) patients. Recurrence was seen in 1/21 (5%) patients with DPS replacement and 10/27 (37%) without DPS replacement. In multivariable models, a longer duration of LAMS placement was negatively associated with successful DPS replacement (odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11, 1.59, P = 0.0019) and successful LAMS replacement with DPS in patients with DPDS improved recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 0.09, 95% CI 0.01, 0.83, P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: In patients with PFCs and DPDS, early replacement of LAMS with DPS improves the likelihood of successful long-term transmural drainage and decreases recurrences.

Digestive Manifestations in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80-2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Are All Endoscopy-Related Musculoskeletal Injuries Created Equal? Results of a National Gender-Based Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopy-related injury (ERI) is common in gastroenterologists (GI). The study aim was to assess the prevalence of self-reported ERI, patterns of injury, and endoscopist knowledge of preventative strategies in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: A 38-item electronic survey was sent to 15,868 American College of Gastroenterology physician members. The survey was completed by 1,698 members and was included in analyses. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate the likelihood of ERI based on workload parameters and gender. RESULTS: ERI was reported by 75% of respondents. ERI was most common in the thumb (63.3%), neck (59%), hand/finger (56.5%), lower back (52.6%), shoulder (47%), and wrist (45%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of ERI between men and women GI. However, women GI were significantly more likely to report upper extremity ERI while men were more likely to report lower-back pain-related ERI. Significant gender differences were noted in the reported mechanisms attributed to ERI. Most respondents did not discuss ergonomic strategies in their current practice (63%). ERI was less likely to be reported in GI who took breaks during endoscopy (P = 0.002). DISCUSSION: ERI is highly prevalent in GI physicians. Significant gender differences regarding specific sites affected by ERI and the contributing mechanisms were observed. Results strongly support institution of training in ergonomics for all GI as a strategy to prevent its impact on providers of endoscopy.

ASGE guideline on the management of cholangitis.

Cholangitis is a GI emergency requiring prompt recognition and treatment. The purpose of this document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee is to provide an evidence-based approach for management of cholangitis. This document addresses the modality of drainage (endoscopic vs percutaneous), timing of intervention (<48 hours vs >48 hours), and extent of initial intervention (comprehensive therapy vs decompression alone). Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was used to formulate recommendations on these topics. The ASGE suggests endoscopic rather than percutaneous drainage and biliary decompression within 48 hours. Additionally, the panel suggests that sphincterotomy and stone removal be combined with drainage rather than decompression alone, unless patients are too unstable to tolerate more extensive endoscopic treatment.

ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of malignant hilar obstruction.

This clinical guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the management of patients with malignant hilar obstruction (MHO). This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses primary drainage modality (percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage [PTBD] vs endoscopic biliary drainage [EBD]), drainage strategy (unilateral vs bilateral), and stent selection (plastic stent [PS] vs self-expandable metal stent [SEMS]). Regarding drainage modality, in patients with MHO undergoing drainage before potential resection or transplantation, the panel suggests against routine use of PTBD as first-line therapy compared with EBD. In patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative drainage, the panel suggests PTBD or EBD. The final decision should be based on patient preferences, disease characteristics, and local expertise. Regarding drainage strategy, in patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative stent placement, the panel suggests placement of bilateral stents compared with a unilateral stent in the absence of liver atrophy. Finally, regarding type of stent, in patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative stent placement, the panel suggests placing SEMSs or PSs. However, in patients who have a short life expectancy and who place high value on avoiding repeated interventions, the panel suggests using SEMSs compared with PSs. If optimal drainage strategy has not been established, the panel suggests placing PSs. This document clearly outlines the process, analyses, and decision processes used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.

ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of benign and malignant gastroduodenal obstruction.

This American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the endoscopic management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). We applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to address key clinical questions. These include the comparison of (1) surgical gastrojejunostomy to the placement of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) for malignant GOO, (2) covered versus uncovered SEMS for malignant GOO, and (3) endoscopic and surgical interventions for the management of benign GOO. Recommendations provided in this document were founded on the certainty of the evidence, balance of benefits and harms, considerations of patient and caregiver preferences, resource utilization, and cost-effectiveness.

Plans to Reactivate Gastroenterology Practices Following the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of North American Centers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Practices dramatically reduced endoscopy services due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because practices now are considering reintroduction of elective endoscopy, we conducted a survey of North American practices to identify reactivation barriers and strategies. METHODS: We designed and electronically distributed a web-based survey to North American gastroenterologists consisting of 7 domains: institutional demographics, impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy practice, elective endoscopy resumption plans, anesthesia modifications, personal protective equipment policies, fellowship training, and telemedicine use. Responses were stratified by practice type: ambulatory surgery center (ASC) or hospital-based. RESULTS: In total, 123 practices (55% ASC-based and 45% hospital-based) responded. At the pandemic's peak (as reported by the respondents), practices saw a 90% decrease in endoscopy volume, with most centers planning to resume elective endoscopy a median of 55 days after initial restrictions. Declining community prevalence of COVID-19, personal protective equipment availability, and preprocedure severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing availability were ranked as the 3 primary factors influencing reactivation timing. ASC-based practices were more likely to identify preprocedure testing availability as a major factor limiting elective endoscopy resumption (P = .001). Preprocedure SARS-CoV-2 testing was planned by only 49.2% of practices overall; when testing is performed and negative, 52.9% of practices will continue to use N95 masks. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights barriers and variable strategies for reactivation of elective endoscopy services after the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results suggest that more widespread access to preprocedure SARS-CoV-2 tests with superior performance characteristics is needed to increase provider and patient comfort in proceeding with elective endoscopy.