ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The combination of rectally administered indomethacin and placement of a prophylactic pancreatic stent is recommended to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients. Preliminary evidence suggests that the use of indomethacin might eliminate or substantially reduce the need for stent placement, a technically complex, costly, and potentially harmful intervention. METHODS: In this randomised, non-inferiority trial conducted at 20 referral centres in the USA and Canada, patients (aged ≥18 years) at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive rectal indomethacin alone or the combination of indomethacin plus a prophylactic pancreatic stent. Patients, treating clinicians, and outcomes assessors were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis. To declare non-inferiority, the upper bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis (indomethacin alone minus indomethacin plus stent) would have to be less than 5% (non-inferiority margin) in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02476279), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2015, and Jan 25, 2023, a total of 1950 patients were randomly assigned. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 145 (14·9%) of 975 patients in the indomethacin alone group and in 110 (11·3%) of 975 in the indomethacin plus stent group (risk difference 3·6%; 95% CI 0·6-6·6; p=0·18 for non-inferiority). A post-hoc intention-to-treat analysis of the risk difference between groups showed that indomethacin alone was inferior to the combination of indomethacin plus prophylactic stent (p=0·011). The relative benefit of stent placement was generally consistent across study subgroups but appeared more prominent among patients at highest risk for pancreatitis. Safety outcomes (serious adverse events, intensive care unit admission, and hospital length of stay) did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: For preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients, a strategy of indomethacin alone was not as effective as a strategy of indomethacin plus prophylactic pancreatic stent placement. These results support prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in addition to rectal indomethacin administration in high-risk patients, in accordance with clinical practice guidelines. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.
Subject(s)
Indomethacin , Pancreatitis , Adolescent , Adult , Humans , Administration, Rectal , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/adverse effects , Indomethacin/therapeutic use , Pancreatitis/epidemiology , Pancreatitis/etiology , Pancreatitis/prevention & control , Risk Factors , StentsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Thermal treatment of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions reduces the recurrence rate. Both snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) and argon plasma coagulation (APC) have been used for thermal margin treatment, but there are few data directly comparing STSC with APC for this indication. METHODS: We performed a randomized 3-arm trial in 9 US centers comparing STSC with APC with no margin treatment (control) of defects after EMR of colorectal nonpedunculated lesions ≥15 mm. The primary end point was the presence of residual lesion at first follow-up. RESULTS: There were 384 patients and 414 lesions randomized, and 308 patients (80.2%) with 328 lesions completed ≥1 follow-up. The proportion of lesions with residual polyp at first follow-up was 4.6% with STSC, 9.3% with APC, and 21.4% with control subjects (no margin treatment). The odds of residual polyp at first follow-up were lower for STSC and APC when compared with control subjects (P = .001 and P = .01, respectively). The difference in odds was not significant between STSC and APC. STSC took less time to apply than APC (median, 3.35 vs 4.08 minutes; P = .019). Adverse event rates were low, with no difference between arms. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial STSC and APC were each superior to no thermal margin treatment after EMR. STSC was faster to apply than APC. Because STSC also results in lower cost and plastic waste than APC (APC requires an additional device), our study supports STSC as the preferred thermal margin treatment after colorectal EMR. (Clinicaltrials.gov, Number NCT03654209.).
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy/methods , Argon Plasma Coagulation , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/etiology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Accurate polyp size estimation during colonoscopy has an impact on clinical decision-making. A laser-based virtual scale endoscope (VSE) is available to allow measuring polyp size using a virtual adaptive scale. This study evaluates video-based polyp size measurement accuracy among expert endoscopists using either VSE or visual assessment (VA) with either snare as reference size or without any reference size information. METHODS: A prospective, video-based study was conducted with 10 expert endoscopists. Video sequences from 90 polyps with known reference size (fresh specimen measured using calipers) were distributed on three different slide sets so that each slide set showed the same polyp only once with either VSE, VA or snare-based information. A slide set was randomly assigned to each endoscopist. Endoscopists were asked to provide size estimation based on video review. RESULTS: Relative accuracies for VSE, VA, and snare-based estimation were 75.1% (95% CI [71.6-78.5]), 65.0% (95% CI [59.5-70.4]) and 62.0% (95% CI [54.8-69.0]), respectively. VSE yielded significantly higher relative accuracy compared to VA (p = 0.002) and to snare (p = 0.001). A significantly lower percentage of polyps 1-5 mm were misclassified as >5 mm using VSE versus VA and snare (6.52% vs. 19.6% and 17.5%, p = 0.004) and a significantly lower percentage of polyps >5 mm were misclassified as 1-5 mm using VSE versus VA and snare (11.4% vs. 31.9% and 14.9%, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists estimate polyp size with the highest accuracy when virtual adaptive scale information is displayed. Using a snare to assist sizing did not improve measurement accuracy compared to displaying visual information alone.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colonoscopy , Video Recording , Humans , Prospective Studies , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Clinical Competence , Male , FemaleABSTRACT
Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) needs "Mercedes Benz" or "J-shaped" incision, causing short and long-term complications. An upper midline incision (UMI) is less invasive alternative but technically challenging. Reporting UMI for recipients in LDLT vs. conventional J-shaped incision. Retrospective analysis, July 2021 to December 2022. Peri-operative details and post-transplant outcomes of 115 consecutive adult LDLT recipients transplanted with UMI compared with 140 recipients with J-shaped incision. Cohorts had similar preoperative and intraoperative variables. The UMI group had significant shorter time to ambulation (3 ± 1.6 vs. 3.6 ± 1.3 days, p = 0.001), ICU stay (3.8 ± 1.3 vs. 4.4 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.001), but a similar hospital stay (15.6±7.6 vs. 16.1±10.9 days, p = 0.677), lower incidence of pleural effusion (11.3% vs. 27.1% p = 0.002), and post-operative ileus (1.7% vs. 9.3% p = 0.011). The rates of graft dysfunction (4.3% vs. 8.5% p = 0.412), biliary complications (6.1% vs. 12.1% p = 0.099), 90-day mortality (7.8% vs. 12.1% p = 0.598) were similar. UMI-LDLT afforded benefits such as reduced pleuropulmonary complications, better early post-operative recovery and reduction in scar-related complaints in the medium-term. This is a safe, non-inferior and reproducible technique for LDLT.
Subject(s)
Liver Transplantation , Living Donors , Postoperative Complications , Humans , Liver Transplantation/methods , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Adult , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Length of Stay , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Groove pancreatitis (GP) is a rare and clinically distinct form of chronic pancreatitis affecting the pancreaticoduodenal groove comprising the head of the pancreas, duodenum, and the common bile duct. It is more prevalent in individuals in their 4-5th decade of life and disproportionately affects men compared with women. Excessive alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking, pancreatic ductal stones, pancreatic divisum, annular pancreas, ectopic pancreas, duodenal wall thickening, and peptic ulcers are significant risk factors implicated in the development of GP. The usual presenting symptoms include severe abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, weight loss, and jaundice. Establishing a diagnosis of GP is often challenging due to significant clinical and radiological overlap with numerous benign and malignant conditions affecting the same anatomical location. This can lead to a delay in initiation of treatment leading to increasing morbidity, mortality, and complication rates. Promising research in artificial intelligence (AI) has garnered immense interest in recent years. Due to its widespread application in diagnostic imaging with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity, AI has the potential of becoming a vital tool in differentiating GP from pancreatic malignancies, thereby preventing a missed or delayed diagnosis. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of GP, covering the etiology, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, radiological and endoscopic evaluation, management strategies, and future directions. This article also aims to increase awareness about this lesser known and often-misdiagnosed clinical entity amongst clinicians to ultimately improve patient outcomes.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There have been significant advances in the management of large (≥20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) or nonpedunculated colorectal polyps; however, there is a lack of clear consensus on the management of these lesions with significant geographic variability especially between Eastern and Western paradigms. We aimed to provide an international consensus to better guide management and attempt to homogenize practices. METHODS: Two experts in interventional endoscopy spearheaded an evidence-based Delphi study on behalf of the World Endoscopy Organization Colorectal Cancer Screening Committee. A steering committee comprising six members devised 51 statements, and 43 experts from 18 countries on six continents participated in a three-round voting process. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool was used to assess evidence quality and recommendation strength. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement (strongly agree or agree) on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Forty-two statements reached consensus after three rounds of voting. Recommendations included: three statements on training and competency; 10 statements on preresection evaluation, including optical diagnosis, classification, and staging of LSTs; 14 statements on endoscopic resection indications and technique, including statements on en bloc and piecemeal resection decision-making; seven statements on postresection evaluation; and eight statements on postresection care. CONCLUSIONS: An international expert consensus based on the current available evidence has been developed to guide the evaluation, resection, and follow-up of LSTs. This may provide guiding principles for the global management of these lesions and standardize current practices.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is strongly recommended as the optimal technique for the complete removal of small polyps. Though significant variability in polypectomy technique and quality has been established, the learning curve and impact of targeted training on CSP are unknown. Video feedback has shown promise as an effective pedagogy to improve performance among surgical trainees. We aimed to compare CSP performance between trainees who received video-based feedback and those who received conventional apprentice-based concurrent feedback. We hypothesized that video-based feedback would accelerate competence. METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial on competence for CSP of polyps <1 cm, comparing video-based feedback with conventional feedback. We randomly assigned deidentified consecutively recorded CSP videos to blinded raters to assess using the CSP Assessment Tool. We shared cumulative sum learning curves every 25 CSP with each trainee. The video feedback trainees also received biweekly individualized terminal feedback. Control trainees received conventional feedback during colonoscopy. The primary outcome was CSP competence. We also assessed competence across domains and change over polypectomy volume. RESULTS: We enrolled and randomized 22 trainees, 12 to video-based feedback and 10 to conventional feedback, and evaluated 2,339 CSP. The learning curve was long; 2 trainees (16.7%) in the video feedback achieved competence, after a mean of 135 polyps, and no one in the control ( P = 0.481) achieved competence. Overall and in all steps of CSP, a higher percentage of the video feedback group met competence, increasing 3% every 20 CSP ( P = 0.0004). DISCUSSION: Video feedback aided trainees to competence in CSP. However, the learning curve was long. Our findings strongly suggest that current training methods are not sufficient to support trainees to competency by the completion of their fellowship programs. The impact of new training methods, such as simulation-based mastery learning, should be assessed to determine whether such methods can result in achievement of competence at a faster rate; ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03115008.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colonoscopy , Humans , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonic Polyps/surgery , MicrosurgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Visible lesion (VL) detection is essential in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). We sought to assess the rate of VL detection by academic and community endoscopists using high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WLE) and narrow-band imaging (NBI) during surveillance endoscopy. METHODS: Fifty endoscopists were invited to participate in a prospective video survey study. Participants viewed 25 standardized clips of patients referred for endoscopic therapy. Participants noted identification of anatomic landmarks and VLs using HD-WLE and NBI and reported practice-level data. The criterion standard of VL identification was established by consensus of 5 BE experts. Our primary outcome was the rate of VL identification using HD-WLE and NBI. RESULTS: Forty-four of 50 participants completed the study (22 academic and 22 community). Compared with the criterion standard, participants did not identify 28% (HD-WLE) and 31% (NBI) of VLs. Community endoscopists had more experience (>5 years in practice: community 85% vs academic 54.5%, P = .041; >5 surveillance endoscopies a month: community 85% vs academic 31.8%, P = .046). Across all participants, VL detection using NBI improved significantly with a minimum of 5 surveillance endoscopies per month (area under the curve = .72; 95% confidence interval, .56-.85; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Despite improved endoscope resolution and availability of virtual chromoendoscopy, the overall rate of VL detection remains low. Identification of VLs using NBI may be volume dependent. Further education and training efforts focused on VL detection during BE surveillance endoscopy are needed.
Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Esophageal Neoplasms , Humans , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Prospective Studies , Esophagoscopy/methods , Narrow Band Imaging/methodsABSTRACT
Background and Aims: Increased burden of diabetes in India has resulted in a spurt in the number of patients with diabetes posted for surgeries. The paucity of national guidelines can lead to marked practice variations in the peri-operative management of diabetes. This survey intends to discern current peri-operative practices among anesthesiologists working in medical colleges, tertiary care government, and private health care institutes of the country. Material and Methods: An anonymous online survey comprising of 25 closed-ended questions was conducted using Google Forms® and disseminated through social media, emails, and messaging platforms. The questionnaire dealt primarily with the peri-operative management of diabetes in patients scheduled for elective surgery. The survey was conducted over a period of 1 month and targeted anesthesia resident trainees with more than 1-year experience, senior residents, and consultants working in India. Results: Statistically significant difference was observed between the three types of health facilities with respect to prior evaluation for diabetes (P = 0.007), prioritizing operative list (P = 0.006), hospital encouragement of day care surgery (P < 0.001), glycated hemoglobin level (HbA1c) level >8.5 for postponement of surgery (P < 0.05), insulin infusion preference (P < 0.001), hourly intra-operatively capillary blood glucose (CBG) assessment (P = 0.021), and avoiding peri-operative use of Ringer's lactate (RL) (P = 0.025). Conclusion: This survey primarily highlights the lack of prioritizing the operative list, early discontinuation of metformin, and reduced tendency to consider diabetics for day care surgeries.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Serrated polyps are important colorectal cancer precursors and are most commonly located in the proximal colon, where post-polypectomy bleeding rates are higher. There is limited clinical trial evidence to guide best practices for resection of large serrated polyps (LSPs). METHODS: In a multicenter trial, patients with large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated polyps undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) were randomized to clipping of the resection base or no clipping. This analysis is stratified by histologic subtype of study polyp(s), categorized as serrated [sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) or hyperplastic polyps (HPs)] or adenomatous, comparing clip vs control groups. The primary outcome was severe post-procedure bleeding within 30 days of colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 179 participants with 199 LSPs (191 SSLs and 8 HPs) and 730 participants with 771 adenomatous polyps were included in the study. Overall, 5 patients with LSPs (2.8%) experienced post-procedure bleeding compared with 42 (5.8%) of those with adenomas. There was no difference in post-procedure bleeding rates between patients in the clip vs control group among those with LSPs (2.3% vs 3.3%, respectively, difference 1.0%; P = NS). However, among those with adenomatous polyps, clipping was associated with a lower risk of post-procedure bleeding (3.9% vs 7.6%, difference 3.7%; P = .03) and overall serious adverse events (5.5% vs 10.6%, difference 5.1%; P = .01). CONCLUSION: The post-procedure bleeding risk for LSPs removed via EMR is low, and there is no discernable benefit of prophylactic clipping of the resection base in this group. This study indicates that the benefit of endoscopic clipping following EMR may be specific for >2 cm adenomatous polyps located in the proximal colon. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT01936948.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Adenomatous Polyps , Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Adenoma/pathology , Adenomatous Polyps/pathology , Adenomatous Polyps/surgery , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Humans , Postoperative Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is the standard of care for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated neoplasia. Previous data suggest the mean number of EET sessions required to achieve complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) is 3.âThis study aimed to define the threshold of EET sessions required to achieve CE-IM. METHODS: The TREAT-BE Consortium is a multicenter outcomes cohort including prospectively enrolled patients with BE undergoing EET. All patients achieving CE-IM were included. Demographic, endoscopic, and histologic data were recorded at treatment onset along with treatment details and surveillance data. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to define a threshold of EET sessions, with 95â%CI, required to achieve CE-IM. A secondary analysis examined predictors of incomplete response to EET using multiple logistic regression and recurrence rates. RESULTS: 623 patients (mean age 65.2 [SD 11.6], 79.6â% male, 86.5â% Caucasian) achieved CE-IM in a mean of 2.9 (SD 1.7) EET sessions (median 2) and a median total observation period of 2.7 years (interquartile range 1.4-5.0). After three sessions, 73â% of patients achieved CE-IM (95â%CI 70â%-77â%). Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95â%CI 1.05-1.50) and length of BE (OR 1.24, 95â%CI 1.17-1.31) were significant predictors of incomplete response. CONCLUSION: The current study found that a threshold of three EET sessions would achieve CE-IM in the majority of patients. Alternative therapies and further diagnostic testing should be considered for patients who do not have significant response to EET after three sessions.
Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Catheter Ablation , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Barrett Esophagus/surgery , Child, Preschool , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagoscopy , Female , Humans , Male , Metaplasia , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. RESULTS: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01936948.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps/surgery , Electrosurgery/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Aged , Colon/diagnostic imaging , Colon/pathology , Colon/surgery , Colonic Polyps/diagnosis , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy , Electrosurgery/instrumentation , Electrosurgery/methods , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/instrumentation , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Recurrence , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Conventional selection criteria for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are based on tumour size/number only, and do not consider vital surrogates of tumor biology such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and tumor [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18 F]FDG PET) avidity. We analyzed survival outcomes, and predictors of HCC recurrence in 405 patients with cirrhosis and HCC (HCC-cirr) who underwent living donor LT (LDLT) using our expanded selection criteria: no extrahepatic disease or major vascular invasion, irrespective of tumor size/number. Fifty-one percent patients had tumours beyond Milan, and 43% beyond the University of California San Francisco [UCSF] criteria. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were 64% and 70%, respectively. Three preoperatively available factors predicted recurrence: pre-LT AFP ≥100 ng/mL (P = 0.005; hazard ratio [HR], 2.190), tumor burden beyond the UCSF criteria (P = 0.001; HR, 2.640), and [18 F]FDG PET avidity (P = 0.004; HR, 2.442). A prognostic model based on the number and combination of the aforementioned preoperative risk factors was developed using a competing-risk RFS model. Three risk groups were identified: low (none or a single risk factor present, 9.3% recurrence), moderate (AFP ≥100 ng/mL and [18 F]FDG PET avidity, or beyond UCSF tumor and [18 F]FDG PET avidity, 25% recurrence), and high (AFP ≥100 ng/mL and beyond UCSF, or presence of all 3 risk factors, 46% recurrence). Acceptable long-term outcomes were achieved using our expanded selection criteria. Our prognostic model to predict recurrence based on preoperative biological and morphological factors could guide pretransplant management (downstaging versus upfront LDLT) with the aim of reducing post-LDLT recurrence.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Liver Transplantation , Biology , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/surgery , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Living Donors , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnostic imaging , Patient Selection , Retrospective Studies , San Francisco , alpha-FetoproteinsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM : Delayed bleeding is a common adverse event following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal polyps. Prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of nonpedunculated polyps larger than 20 mm reduces the incidence of severe delayed bleeding, especially in proximal polyps. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with complete prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of large polyps. METHODS : This is a post hoc analysis of the CLIP study (NCT01936948). All patients randomized to the clip group were included. Main outcome was complete clip closure of the mucosal resection defect. The defect was considered completely closed when no remaining mucosal defect was visible and clips were less than 1 cm apart. Factors associated with complete closure were evaluated in multivariable analysis. RESULTS : In total, 458 patients (age 65, 58â% men) with 494 large polyps were included. Complete clip closure of the resection defect was achieved for 338 polyps (68.4â%); closure was not complete for 156 (31.6â%). Factors associated with complete closure in adjusted analysis were smaller polyp size (odds ratio 1.06 for every millimeter decrease [95â% confidence interval 1.02-1.08]), good access (OR 3.58 [1.94-9.59]), complete submucosal lifting (OR 2.28 [1.36-3.90]), en bloc resection (OR 5.75 [1.48-22.39]), and serrated histology (OR 2.74 [1.35-5.56]). CONCLUSIONS : Complete clip closure was not achieved for almost one in three resected large nonpedunculated polyps. While stable access and en bloc resection facilitate clip closure, most factors associated with clip closure are not modifiable. This highlights the need for alternative closure options and measures to prevent bleeding.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Aged , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Surgical InstrumentsABSTRACT
Advanced endoscopy training programs (AETPs) were developed as a result of the lack of comprehensive endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) training during gastroenterology fellowships. There is no standardized curriculum for AETPs and the influence of program- and trainer-associated factors on trainee competence in ERCP has not been investigated adequately. In prior work, we showed that advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) achieve ERCP competence at varying rates.1,2 The aims of this study were to measure the variability in time given to AETs to attempt cannulation between AETPs and throughout the 1-year training period, and to determine the association between AET cannulation time and AET competence at the end of training.
Subject(s)
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Gastroenterology , Catheterization , Clinical Competence , Gastroenterology/education , Humans , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: There have been few studies describing the long-term durability of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia who received endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). Data are needed to guide surveillance interval protocols and identify patients at risk for recurrence. We assessed the rate of recurrence of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia, histologic features, and outcomes after recurrence of CE-IM, and identified factors associated with recurrence. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 807 patients with BE who underwent EET, which produced CE-IM, at 4 tertiary-care referral centers, from January 2013 to October 2018. Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence rates (IR) of recurrence were calculated for up to 5 years following CE-IM and were stratified by baseline level of histology. Density estimates of recurrence were used to determine the change in the rate of recurrence over time. We conducted logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with recurrence. RESULTS: Intestinal metaplasia recurred in 121 patients (15%; IR, 5.2/100 person-years), and dysplasia recurred in 41 patients (5.1%; IR, 1.8/100 person-years), after a median follow-up time of 2317 person-years. The rate of recurrence was not constant and the time to any recurrence converged to a normal distribution; recurrences peaked at 1.6 y after patients had CE-IM. Baseline high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.19), presence of reflux symptoms (aOR, 12.1) or hiatal hernia (aOR, 13.8), and number of sessions required to achieve CE-IM (aOR, 1.8) were associated with recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study of a large cohort of patients with BE undergoing EET, we found a low rate of recurrence after CE-IM. The rate of recurrence peaked at 1-2 y after CE-IM. These findings indicate that aggressive surveillance might not be necessary more than 1 y after CE-IM and should be considered in surveillance guidelines. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT02634645.
Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Esophageal Neoplasms , Barrett Esophagus/complications , Cohort Studies , Esophageal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Esophagoscopy , Humans , Metaplasia , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Prospective Studies , RecurrenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality assurance measure for colonoscopy. Some studies suggest that narrow-band imaging (NBI) may be more effective at detecting adenomas than white-light endoscopy (WLE) when bowel preparation is optimal. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of NBI to WLE in detection of adenomas. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through April 2017 for randomized controlled trials that assessed detection of colon polyps by high-definition WLE vs NBI and from which data on individual patients were available. The primary outcome measure was ADR adjusted for bowel preparation quality. Multilevel regression models were used with patients nested within trials, and trial included as a random effect. RESULTS: We collected data from 11 trials, comprising 4491 patients and 6636 polyps detected. Adenomas were detected in 952 of 2251 (42.3%) participants examined by WLE vs 1011 of 2239 (45.2%) participants examined by NBI (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] for detection of adenoma by WLE vs NBI, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29; P = .04). NBI outperformed WLE only when bowel preparation was best: adequate preparation OR, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.24; P = .38) vs best preparation OR, 1.30 (95% CI, 1.04-1.62; P = .02). Second-generation bright NBI had a better ADR than WLE (second-generation NBI OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.56; P = .02), whereas first-generation NBI did not. NBI detected more non-adenomatous polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44; P = .008) and flat polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials, we found NBI to have a higher ADR than WLE, and that this effect is greater when bowel preparation is optimal.
Subject(s)
Adenoma/diagnostic imaging , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Narrow Band Imaging/methods , Adenoma/epidemiology , Cathartics/administration & dosage , Colonoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Humans , Narrow Band Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01936948.
Subject(s)
Colectomy/adverse effects , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy/adverse effects , Hemostatic Techniques/instrumentation , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Surgical Instruments , Aged , Colectomy/methods , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Equipment Design , Female , Hemostatic Techniques/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , North America , Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology , Risk Factors , Spain , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Artificial intelligence (AI) is being implemented in colonoscopy practice, but no study has investigated whether AI is cost saving. We aimed to quantify the cost reduction using AI as an aid in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps. METHODS: This study is an add-on analysis of a clinical trial that investigated the performance of AI for differentiating colorectal polyps (ie, neoplastic versus non-neoplastic). We included all patients with diminutive (≤5 mm) rectosigmoid polyps in the analyses. The average colonoscopy cost was compared for 2 scenarios: (1) a diagnose-and-leave strategy supported by the AI prediction (ie, diminutive rectosigmoid polyps were not removed when predicted as non-neoplastic), and (2) a resect-all-polyps strategy. Gross annual costs for colonoscopies were also calculated based on the number and reimbursement of colonoscopies conducted under public health insurances in 4 countries. RESULTS: Overall, 207 patients with 250 diminutive rectosigmoid polyps (104 neoplastic, 144 non-neoplastic, and 2 indeterminate) were included. AI correctly differentiated neoplastic polyps with 93.3% sensitivity, 95.2% specificity, and 95.2% negative predictive value. Thus, 105 polyps were removed and 145 were left under the diagnose-and-leave strategy, which was estimated to reduce the average colonoscopy cost and the gross annual reimbursement for colonoscopies by 18.9% and US$149.2 million in Japan, 6.9% and US$12.3 million in England, 7.6% and US$1.1 million in Norway, and 10.9% and US$85.2 million in the United States, respectively, compared with the resect-all-polyps strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The use of AI to enable the diagnose-and-leave strategy results in substantial cost reductions for colonoscopy.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Artificial Intelligence , Colonic Polyps/diagnosis , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Cost Savings , England , Humans , JapanABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Microsatellite instability (MSI) testing is recommended for all colonic and endometrial carcinomas to screen for Lynch syndrome. The role of MSI testing in pancreatic adenocarcinoma has not been well-established. Screening can be done via immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2). We report our experience and the clinical utility of MMR IHC on pancreatic adenocarcinomas in fine-needle aspiration (FNA) specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review to identify all patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma by FNA at our institution between December 2017 and September 2019. For cases with sufficient tumor cells for testing, the MMR results and morphology were summarized, as well as corresponding clinical information, including age, clinical stage, treatment, and concurrent other cancers. RESULTS: From December 2017 to September 2019, there were a total of 184 pancreatic FNAs with a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma. Of these 184 FNAs, 65 (35%) contained sufficient material in the cell block to perform IHC for MMR. The cell block material was collected in either RPMI or CytoLyt. Poor technical quality precluded interpretation of PMS2 in 4 cases and MSH6 in 2 cases. All other cases showed intact expression of all four proteins. CONCLUSIONS: IHC for MMR proteins can be done on specimens collected in RPMI or CytoLyt, but RPMI appears to be more reliable. None of the pancreatic adenocarcinomas in this study showed loss of MMR protein expression. Routine testing of MMR loss may not be indicated in pancreatic adenocarcinomas in the general patient population.