Computer-Aided Detection Improves Adenomas per Colonoscopy for Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening is endoscopist dependent, and colonoscopy quality improvement programs aim to improve efficacy. This study evaluated the clinical benefit and safety of using a computer-aided detection (CADe) device in colonoscopy procedures. METHODS: This randomized study prospectively evaluated the use of a CADe device at 5 academic and community centers by US board-certified gastroenterologists (n = 22). Participants aged ≥40 scheduled for screening or surveillance (≥3 years) colonoscopy were included; exclusion criteria included incomplete procedure, diagnostic indication, inflammatory bowel disease, and familial adenomatous polyposis. Patients were randomized by endoscopist to the standard or CADe colonoscopy arm using computer-generated, random-block method. The 2 primary endpoints were adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), the total number of adenomas resected divided by the total number of colonoscopies; and true histology rate (THR), the proportion of resections with clinically significant histology divided by the total number of polyp resections. The primary analysis used a modified intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: Between January and September 2021, 1440 participants were enrolled to be randomized. After exclusion of participants who did not meet the eligibility criteria, 677 in the standard arm and 682 in the CADe arm were included in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. APC increased significantly with use of the CADe device (standard vs CADe: 0.83 vs 1.05, P = .002; total number of adenomas, 562 vs 719). There was no decrease in THR with use of the CADe device (standard vs CADe: 71.7% vs 67.4%, P for noninferiority < .001; total number of non-neoplastic lesions, 284 vs 375). Adenoma detection rate was 43.9% and 47.8% in the standard and CADe arms, respectively (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: For experienced endoscopists performing screening and surveillance colonoscopies in the United States, the CADe device statistically improved overall adenoma detection (APC) without a concomitant increase in resection of non-neoplastic lesions (THR). CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration: NCT04754347.

Endoscopist-Level and Procedure-Level Factors Associated With Increased Adenoma Detection With the Use of a Computer-Aided Detection Device.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate the impact of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors on the effectiveness of a computer-aided detection (CADe) device in adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) detection. METHODS: The SKOUT clinical trial was conducted at 5 US sites. We present prespecified analyses of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors, and association with APC across treatment and control cohorts. RESULTS: There were numeric increases in APC between SKOUT vs standard colonoscopy in community-based endoscopists, withdrawal time of ≥8 minutes, for endoscopists with >20 years of experience, and endoscopists with baseline adenoma detection rate <45%. DISCUSSION: The application of CADe devices in clinical practice should be carefully evaluated. Larger studies should explore differences in endoscopist-related factors for CADe.

ACG-CAG provided suggestions for periendoscopic management of anticoagulants and antiplatelets.

SOURCE CITATION: Abraham NS, Barkun AN, Sauer BG, et al. American College of Gastroenterology-Canadian Association of Gastroenterology clinical practice guideline: management of anticoagulants and antiplatelets during acute gastrointestinal bleeding and the periendoscopic period. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022;117:542-58. 35297395.

Devices and techniques for flexible endoscopic management of Zenker's diverticulum (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Zenker's diverticulum (ZD) has traditionally been treated with open surgery or rigid endoscopy. With the advances in endoscopy, alternative flexible endoscopic treatments have been developed. METHODS: This document reviews current endoscopic techniques and devices used to treat ZD. RESULTS: The endoscopic techniques may be categorized as the traditional flexible endoscopic septal division and the more recent submucosal tunneling endoscopic septum division, also known as peroral endoscopic myotomy for ZD. This document also addresses clinical outcomes, safety, and financial considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible endoscopic approaches treat symptomatic ZD with results that are favorable compared with traditional open surgical or rigid endoscopic alternatives.

Single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with disposable end caps.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Multidrug-resistant infectious outbreaks associated with duodenoscopes have been documented internationally. Single-use duodenoscopes, disposable distal ends, or distal end cap sealants could eliminate or reduce exogenous patient-to-patient infection associated with ERCP. METHODS: This document reviews technologies that have been developed to help reduce or eliminate exogenous infections because of duodenoscopes. RESULTS: Four duodenoscopes with disposable end caps, 1 end sheath, and 2 disposable duodenoscopes are reviewed in this document. The evidence regarding their efficacy in procedural success rates, reduction of duodenoscope bacterial contamination, clinical outcomes associated with these devices, safety, and the financial considerations are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Several technologies discussed in this document are anticipated to eliminate or reduce exogenous infections during endoscopy requiring a duodenoscope. Although disposable duodenoscopes can eliminate exogenous ERCP-related risk of infection, data regarding effectiveness are needed outside of expert centers. Additionally, with more widespread adoption of these new technologies, more data regarding functionality, medical economics, and environmental impact will accrue. Disposable distal end caps facilitate duodenoscope reprocessing; postmarketing surveillance culture studies and real-life patient infection analyses are important areas of future research.

Endoscopic therapies for gallbladder drainage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis has expanded in patients who are considered nonoperative candidates. Traditionally managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC), improvement in techniques and devices has led to increased use of endoscopic methods for gallbladder drainage. This document reviews technical aspects of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) and EUS-guided GBD (EUS-GBD) as well as their respective technical/clinical success and adverse event rates. Available comparative data are also reviewed among nonsurgical gallbladder drainage techniques (PC, ET-GBD, and EUS-GBD). METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through March 2021 for relevant articles by using keywords including "acute cholecystitis," "interventional EUS," "percutaneous cholecystostomy," "transpapillary gallbladder drainage," "EUS-guided gallbladder drainage," "lumen-apposing metal stent," "gallbladder stenting," and "endoscopic gallbladder drainage." The manuscript was drafted by 2 authors and reviewed by members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and subsequently by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Governing Board. RESULTS: Multiple studies have demonstrated acceptable outcomes comparing PC and both endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques, ET-GBD and EUS-GBD. Published data suggest that endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques may be associated with lower rates of adverse events and improved quality of life. However, there are important clinical considerations for choosing among these treatment options, requiring a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach to therapeutic decision-making in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of EUS-GBD and ET-GBD in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis may result in favorable outcomes when compared with PC. Further improvements in techniques and training should lead to more widespread acceptance and dissemination of these treatment options.

Lumen-apposing metal stents (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are a novel class of devices that have expanded the spectrum of endoscopic GI interventions. LAMSs with their dumbbell configuration, short saddle length, and large inner luminal diameter provide favorable stent characteristics to facilitate anastomosis formation between the gut lumen and adjacent structures. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2021 for articles related to LAMSs by using additional relevant keywords such as "walled-off pancreatic necrosis," "pseudocysts," "pancreatic fluid collection," "cholecystitis," "gastroenterostomy," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others. RESULTS: This technology review describes the full spectrum of LAMS designs and delivery systems, techniques for deployment, procedural outcomes, safety, training issues, and financial considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Although LAMSs were initially introduced for drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis, the versatility of these devices has led to a variety of off-label uses including gallbladder drainage, enteric bypass with the creation of gastroenterostomies, and treatment of luminal GI strictures.

Enhanced EUS imaging (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS remains a primary diagnostic tool for the evaluation of pancreaticobiliary disease. Although EUS combined with FNA or biopsy sampling is highly sensitive for the diagnosis of neoplasia within the pancreaticobiliary tract, limitations exist in specific clinical settings such as chronic pancreatitis. Enhanced EUS imaging technologies aim to aid in the detection and diagnosis of lesions that are commonly evaluated with EUS. METHODS: We reviewed technologies and methods for enhanced imaging during EUS and applications of these methods. Available data regarding efficacy, safety, and financial considerations are summarized. RESULTS: Enhanced EUS imaging methods include elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS). Both technologies have been best studied in the setting of pancreatic mass lesions. Robust data indicate that neither technology has adequate specificity to serve as a stand-alone test for pancreatic malignancy. However, there may be a role for improving the targeting of sampling and in the evaluation of peritumoral lymph nodes, inflammatory pancreatic masses, and masses with nondiagnostic FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling. Further, novel applications of these technologies have been reported in the evaluation of liver fibrosis, pancreatic cysts, and angiogenesis within neoplastic lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Elastography and CE-EUS may improve the real-time evaluation of intra- and extraluminal lesions as an adjunct to standard B-mode and Doppler imaging. They are not a replacement for EUS-guided tissue sampling but provide adjunctive diagnostic information in specific clinical situations. The optimal clinical use of these technologies continues to be a focus of ongoing research.

In high-risk patients with acute upper GI bleeding, urgent vs. early endoscopy did not differ for 30-day mortality.

SOURCE CITATION: Lau JY, Yu Y, Tang RS, et al. Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1299-308. 32242355.

Techniques and devices for the endoscopic treatment of gastroparesis (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastroparesis is a symptomatic chronic disorder of the stomach characterized by delayed gastric emptying in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Several endoscopic treatment modalities have been described that aim to improve gastric emptying and/or symptoms associated with gastroparesis refractory to dietary and pharmacologic management. METHODS: In this report we review devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of gastroparesis, the evidence regarding their efficacy and safety, and the financial considerations for their use. RESULTS: Endoscopic modalities for treatment of gastroparesis can be broadly categorized into pyloric, nonpyloric, and nutritional therapies. Pyloric therapies such as botulinum toxin injection, stent placement, pyloroplasty, and pyloromyotomy specifically focus on pylorospasm as a therapeutic target. These interventions aim to reduce the pressure gradient across the pyloric sphincter, with a resultant improvement in gastric emptying. Nonpyloric therapies, such as venting gastrostomy and gastric electrical stimulation, are intended to improve symptoms. Nutritional therapies, such as feeding tube placement, aim to provide nutritional support. CONCLUSIONS: Several endoscopic interventions have shown utility in improving the quality of life and symptoms of select patients with refractory gastroparesis. Methods to identify which patients are best suited for a specific treatment are not well established. Endoscopic pyloromyotomy is a relatively recent development that may prove to be the preferred pyloric-directed intervention, although additional and longer-term outcomes are needed.

Endoscopic devices and techniques for the management of bariatric surgical adverse events (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: As the prevalence of obesity continues to rise, increasing numbers of patients undergo bariatric surgery. Management of adverse events of bariatric surgery may be challenging and often requires a multidisciplinary approach. Endoscopic intervention is often the first line of therapy for management of these adverse events. This document reviews technologies and techniques used for endoscopic management of adverse events of bariatric surgery, organized by surgery type. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through May 2018 for articles related to endoscopic management of adverse events of bariatric interventions by using relevant keywords such as adverse events related to "gastric bypass," "sleeve gastrectomy," "laparoscopic adjustable banding," and "vertical banded sleeve gastroplasty," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others. Available data regarding efficacy, safety, and financial considerations are summarized. RESULTS: Common adverse events of bariatric surgery include anastomotic ulcers, luminal stenoses, fistulae/leaks, and inadequate initial weight loss or weight regain. Devices used for endoscopic management of bariatric surgical adverse events include balloon dilators (hydrostatic, pneumatic), mechanical closure devices (clips, endoscopic suturing system, endoscopic plication platform), luminal stents (covered esophageal stents, lumen-apposing metal stents, plastic stents), and thermal therapy (argon plasma coagulation, needle-knives), among others. Available data, composed mainly of case series and retrospective cohort studies, support the primary role of endoscopic management. Multiple procedures and techniques are often required to achieve clinical success, and existing management algorithms are evolving. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy is a less invasive alternative for management of adverse events of bariatric surgery and for revisional procedures. Endoscopic procedures are frequently performed in the context of multidisciplinary management with bariatric surgeons and interventional radiologists. Treatment algorithms and standards of practice for endoscopic management will continue to be refined as new dedicated technology and data emerge.

Devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of residual and fibrotic colorectal polyps (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Residual neoplasia after macroscopically complete EMR of large colon polyps has been reported in 10% to 32% of resections. Often, residual polyps at the site of prior polypectomy are fibrotic and nonlifting, making additional resection challenging. METHODS: This document reviews devices and methods for the endoscopic treatment of fibrotic and/or residual polyps. In addition, techniques reported to reduce the incidence of residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection are discussed. RESULTS: Descriptions of technologies and available outcomes data are summarized for argon plasma coagulation ablation, snare-tip coagulation, avulsion techniques, grasp-and-snare technique, EndoRotor endoscopic resection system, endoscopic full-thickness resection device, and salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection. CONCLUSIONS: Several technologies and techniques discussed in this document may aid in the prevention and/or resection of fibrotic and nonlifting polyps.

Endoscopic simulators.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Simulation refers to educational tools that allow for repetitive instruction in a nonpatient care environment that is risk-free. In GI endoscopy, simulators include ex vivo animal tissue models, live animal models, mechanical models, and virtual reality (VR) computer simulators. METHODS: After a structured search of the peer-reviewed medical literature, this document reviews commercially available GI endoscopy simulation systems and clinical outcomes of simulation in endoscopy. RESULTS: Mechanical simulators and VR simulators are frequently used early in training, whereas ex vivo and in vivo animal models are more commonly used for advanced endoscopy training. Multiple studies and systematic reviews show that simulation-based training appears to provide novice endoscopists with some advantage over untrained peers with regard to endpoints such as independent procedure completion and performance time, among others. Data also suggest that simulation training may accelerate the acquisition of specific technical skills in colonoscopy and upper endoscopy early in training. However, the available literature suggests that the benefits of simulator training appear to attenuate and cease after a finite period. Further studies are needed to determine if meeting competency metrics using simulation will predict actual clinical competency. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation training is a promising modality that may aid in endoscopic education. However, for widespread incorporation of simulators into gastroenterology training programs to occur, simulators must show a sustained advantage over traditional mentored teaching in a cost-effective manner. Because most studies evaluating simulation have focused on novice learners, the role of simulation training in helping practicing endoscopists gain proficiency using new techniques and devices should be further explored.

Advances in the diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Most patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma do not carry a known diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE), suggesting that an improved approach to screening may potentially be of benefit. The use of dysplasia as a biomarker and random biopsy protocols for its detection has limitations. In addition, detecting and appropriately classifying dysplasia in patients with known BE can be difficult. METHODS: This document reviews several technologies with a recently established or potential role in the diagnosis and/or surveillance of BE as well as risk stratification for progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Two technologies were reviewed for imaging or tissue sampling: (1) wide-area transepithelial sampling and (2) volumetric laser endomicroscopy. Four technologies were reviewed for molecular and biomarker technologies for diagnosis and risk stratification: (1) Cytosponge, (2) mutational load, (3) fluorescence in situ hybridization, and (4) immunohistochemistry. CONCLUSION: Several technologies discussed in this document may improve dysplasia detection in BE in a wide-field manner. Moreover, the addition of different biomarkers may aid in enhanced risk stratification to optimize approaches to surveillance or treatment for patients with BE.

Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis: A Concise Review of Diagnosis and Management.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis is a rare, chronic cholestatic liver disease characterized by progressive idiopathic stricturing of the biliary system, typically leading to cirrhosis, end-stage liver disease, and colonic or hepatobiliary malignancy. Its presentation is often that of asymptomatic alkaline phosphatase elevation. When symptoms are present, they typically include fatigue, pruritus, or jaundice. The diagnosis can be confirmed via cholangiography, either magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRCP) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiography if the former is inconclusive. The clinical course is marked by progressive liver disease leading to cirrhosis with its attendant complications of portal hypertension, often including recurrent episodes of cholangitis. Greater elevation in alkaline phosphatase or liver stiffness is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Management includes endoscopic treatment of symptomatic biliary strictures and evaluation of dominant strictures as no adequate medical treatment is available. Multiple medical therapies are under evaluation. Ultimately, liver transplantation may be necessary for management of decompensated cirrhosis or disabling symptoms. There is also a markedly increased risk of cancer, notably including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder and colorectal cancers (particularly in patients with colitis). Cancer screening can be done with semi-annual liver imaging (MRCP or ultrasound) and colonoscopy every 1-2 years in those with colitis.