Safety and efficacy of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett's neoplasia recurrence after radiofrequency ablation.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for Barrett's neoplasia recurrence after radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS: Data from patients at 16 centers were collected for a multicenter retrospective study. Patients who underwent at least one RFA treatment for Barrett's esophagus and thereafter underwent further esophageal ESD for neoplasia recurrence were included. RESULTS: Data from 56 patients who underwent salvage ESD between April 2014 and November 2022 were collected. Immediate complications included one muscular tear (1.8%) treated with stent (Agree classification: grade IIIa). Two transmural perforations (3.6%; treated with clips) and five muscular tears (8.9%; two treated with clips) had no clinical impact and were not considered as adverse events. Seven patients (12.5%) developed strictures (grade IIIa), which were treated with balloon dilation. Histological analysis showed 36 adenocarcinoma, 17 high grade dysplasia, and 3 low grade dysplasia. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 89.3% and 66.1%, respectively. Resections were curative in 33 patients (58.9%), and noncurative in 22 patients (39.3%), including 11 "local risk" (19.6%) and 11 "high risk" (19.6%) resections. At the end of follow-up with a median time of 14 (0-75) months after salvage ESD, and with further endoscopic treatment if necessary (RFA, argon plasma coagulation, endoscopic mucosal resection, ESD), neoplasia remission ratio was 37/53 (69.8%) and the median remission time was 13 (1-75) months. CONCLUSION: In expert hands, salvage ESD was a safe and effective treatment for recurrence of Barrett's neoplasia after RFA treatment.

Low risk of local recurrence after a successful en bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection for noninvasive colorectal lesions with positive horizontal resection margins (R-ESD study).

BACKGROUND : During endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the normal mucosa is cut under constant optical control. We studied whether a positive horizontal resection margin after a complete en bloc ESD predicts local recurrence. METHODS: In this European multicenter cohort study, patients with a complete en bloc colorectal ESD were selected from prospective registries. Cases were defined by a horizontal resection margin that was positive or indeterminate for dysplasia (HM1), whereas controls had a free resection margin (HM0). Low risk lesions with submucosal invasion (T1) and margins free of carcinoma were analyzed separately. The main outcome was local recurrence. RESULTS: From 928 consecutive ESDs (2011-2020), 354 patients (40 % female; mean age 67 years, median follow-up 23.6 months), with 308 noninvasive lesions and 46 T1 lesions, were included. The recurrence rate for noninvasive lesions was 1/212 (0.5 %; 95 %CI 0.02 %-2.6 %) for HM0 vs. 2/96 (2.1 %; 95 %CI 0.57 %-7.3 %) for HM1. The recurrence rate for T1 lesions was 1/38 (2.6 %; 95 %CI 0.14 %-13.5 %) for HM0 vs. 2/8 (25 %; 95 %CI 7.2 %-59.1 %) for HM1. CONCLUSION: A positive horizontal resection margin after an en bloc ESD for noninvasive lesions is associated with a marginal nonsignificant increase in the local recurrence rate, equal to an ESD with clear horizontal margins. This could not be confirmed for T1 lesions.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2: ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3: ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4: ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5: ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6: ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8: ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9: ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B: ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C: ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D: ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E: ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11: After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

Painless chronic pancreatitis: experiences from a high-volume center.

INTRODUCTION: Although abdominal pain is the most prevalent and disabling symptom in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), there are also patients who have painless CP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with a diagnosis of CP. A total of 279 patients with definite CP with completed demographic and clinical data were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: There were 75 (26.9%) patients with painless CP. These patients had a significantly higher mean age at diagnosis, 61.7 years, than the 52.5 years of patients with pain (p < 0.001). Painless and painful CP had similar rates of diabetes mellitus (DM) (28.4% vs. 31.6%) and pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) (50.0% vs. 52.3%). Painless CP had lower rates of alcoholic etiology, 36.0%, than the 52.5% in painful CP (p < 0.05). Patients older than 55 at the time of CP diagnosis were associated with painless CP with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 3.27 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.62-6.60]. Alcoholic etiologies were not associated with painless CP, aOR of 0.51 (95% CI: 0.25-0.91). CONCLUSION: Patients with painless CP had a significantly higher mean age than patients with painful CP and increased aOR for those older than 55 at CP diagnosis. Painless and painful CP patients had similar rates of DM and PEI, confirming the necessity of routine follow up in all patients with CP.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy With or Without Rapid On-site Evaluation for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The benefit of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has never been evaluated in a randomized study. This trial aimed to test the hypothesis that in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB without ROSE was not inferior to that of EUS-FNB with ROSE. METHODS: A noninferiority study (noninferiority margin, 5%) was conducted at 14 centers in 8 countries. Patients with SPLs requiring tissue sampling were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo EUS-FNB with or without ROSE using new-generation FNB needles. The touch-imprint cytology technique was used to perform ROSE. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy, and secondary endpoints were safety, tissue core procurement, specimen quality, and sampling procedural time. RESULTS: Eight hundred patients were randomized over an 18-month period, and 771 were analyzed (385 with ROSE and 386 without). Comparable diagnostic accuracies were obtained in both arms (96.4% with ROSE and 97.4% without ROSE, P = .396). Noninferiority of EUS-FNB without ROSE was confirmed with an absolute risk difference of 1.0% (1-sided 90% confidence interval, -1.1% to 3.1%; noninferiority P < .001). Safety and sample quality of histologic specimens were similar in both groups. A significantly higher tissue core rate was obtained by EUS-FNB without ROSE (70.7% vs. 78.0%, P = .021), with a significantly shorter mean sampling procedural time (17.9 ± 8.8 vs 11.7 ± 6.0 minutes, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNB demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy in evaluating SPLs independently on execution of ROSE. When new-generation FNB needles are used, ROSE should not be routinely recommended. (ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT03322592.).

Paraduodenal pancreatitis - problem in the groove.

BACKGROUND: Paraduodenal pancreatitis (PDP) is a particular form of chronic pancreatitis (CP) occurring in and around the duodenal wall. Despite its low prevalence, this rare condition presents a significant challenge in clinical practice. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the electronic medical charts of all patients with a diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis and identified those with PDP, between January 1999 and December 2020. RESULTS: There were 35 patients diagnosed with PDP (86% males and 14% females); median age of 56 ± 11 (range 38-80). Alcohol overconsumption was reported in 81% and smoking in 90% of patients. Abdominal pain was the leading symptom (71%), followed by weight loss, nausea and vomiting, jaundice, and diarrhoea. In 23 patients (66%), recurrent acute pancreatitis attacks were noted. Focal duodenal wall thickening was present in 34 patients (97%), cystic lesions in 80%, pancreatic duct dilatation in 54% and common bile duct dilatation in 46%. Endoscopic treatment was performed on nine patients (26%) and five patients (14%) underwent surgery. Complete symptom relief was reported in 12 patients (34%), partial symptom relief in three (9%), there was no improvement in five (14%), data were not available in three (9%) and 12 (34%) patients died before data analysis. CONCLUSIONS: PDP is a rare form of pancreatitis, most commonly occurring in the 5th or 6th decade of life, with a predominance in males and patients with a history of smoking and high alcohol consumption. Focal thickening and cystic lesions of the duodenal wall are the most common imaging findings, followed by pancreatic duct and common bile duct dilatation. A minority of patients requires surgery.

Surgery in Autoimmune Pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a disease that may mimic malignant pancreatic lesions both in terms of symptomatology and imaging appearance. The aim of the present study is to analyze experiences of surgery in patients with AIP in one of the largest European cohorts. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective study of patients diagnosed with AIP at the Department of Abdominal Diseases at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden, between January 2001 and October 2020. RESULTS: There were 159 patients diagnosed with AIP, and among them, 35 (22.0%) patients had surgery: 20 (57.1%) males and 15 (42.9%) females; median age at surgery was 59 years (range 37-81). Median follow-up period after surgery was 50 months (range 1-235). AIP type 1 was diagnosed in 28 (80%) patients and AIP type 2 in 7 (20%) patients. Malignant and premalignant lesions were diagnosed in 8 (22.9%) patients for whom AIP was not the primary differential diagnosis, but in all cases, it was described as a simultaneous finding and recorded in retrospective analysis in histological reports of surgical specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of AIP is not always straightforward, and in some cases, it is not easy to differentiate it from the malignancy. Surgery is generally not indicated for AIP but might be considered in patients when suspicion of malignant/premalignant lesions cannot be excluded after complete diagnostic workup.

When needles are not enough, forceps delivers!

A 35-year-old male with a history of recurrent pleuritic chest pain was referred for evaluation of a mediastinal mass detected on CT. MRI showed a 10.5 x 7 x 3 cm lesion in the posterior mediastinum. EUS revealed a multicystic lesion with thin septa and clear anechoic content that extended from the lower posterior mediastinum to the upper retroperitoneum. EUS-FNA was performed using a 22-gauge needle with aspiration of a serosanguineous fluid. Fluid analysis showed low values of amylase, triglycerides, CEA, and CA19-9. Cytology tests identified small mature lymphocytes without malignancy.

The role of endoscopic submucosal dissection in the management of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps constitute only 0.1 % of all gastric polyps. They are usually amenable to resection by snare polypectomy. However, on rare occasions, these lesions may require resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection in the management of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps not amenable to resection with snare polypectomy. METHODS: a retrospective observational study of all consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps between January 2011 and December 2020 was performed. RESULTS: there were nine cases of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Most patients were female (7/9) with a mean age of 62.2 years. All gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps were described as solitary antral subepithelial lesions with a mean diameter of 16.7 mm, which appeared well-circumscribed and homogeneous lesions located at muscularis mucosa and submucosa without deeper invasion on endoscopic ultrasound. All lesions were successfully resected by en bloc and complete resection with free margins obtained in 8/9 specimens. Adverse events were reported in 2/9 cases including one intra-procedural bleeding successfully controlled with hemostatic clips and one aspiration pneumonia that evolved favorably. Mean follow-up duration was 33.7 months and no delayed complications or cases of recurrence were reported. CONCLUSIONS: endoscopic submucosal dissection appears safe and effective for the resection of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps that present as large subepithelial lesions, if performed by experienced endoscopists after adequate characterization by endoscopic ultrasound, with high rates of technical success and low recurrence rates.

Deep-Learning System Detects Neoplasia in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus With Higher Accuracy Than Endoscopists in a Multistep Training and Validation Study With Benchmarking.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to develop and validate a deep-learning computer-aided detection (CAD) system, suitable for use in real time in clinical practice, to improve endoscopic detection of early neoplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). METHODS: We developed a hybrid ResNet-UNet model CAD system using 5 independent endoscopy data sets. We performed pretraining using 494,364 labeled endoscopic images collected from all intestinal segments. Then, we used 1704 unique esophageal high-resolution images of rigorously confirmed early-stage neoplasia in BE and nondysplastic BE, derived from 669 patients. System performance was assessed by using data sets 4 and 5. Data set 5 was also scored by 53 general endoscopists with a wide range of experience from 4 countries to benchmark CAD system performance. Coupled with histopathology findings, scoring of images that contained early-stage neoplasia in data sets 2-5 were delineated in detail for neoplasm position and extent by multiple experts whose evaluations served as the ground truth for segmentation. RESULTS: The CAD system classified images as containing neoplasms or nondysplastic BE with 89% accuracy, 90% sensitivity, and 88% specificity (data set 4, 80 patients and images). In data set 5 (80 patients and images) values for the CAD system vs those of the general endoscopists were 88% vs 73% accuracy, 93% vs 72% sensitivity, and 83% vs 74% specificity. The CAD system achieved higher accuracy than any of the individual 53 nonexpert endoscopists, with comparable delineation performance. CAD delineations of the area of neoplasm overlapped with those from the BE experts in all detected neoplasia in data sets 4 and 5. The CAD system identified the optimal site for biopsy of detected neoplasia in 97% and 92% of cases (data sets 4 and 5, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We developed, validated, and benchmarked a deep-learning computer-aided system for primary detection of neoplasia in patients with BE. The system detected neoplasia with high accuracy and near-perfect delineation performance. The Netherlands National Trials Registry, Number: NTR7072.

A computer-assisted algorithm for narrow-band imaging-based tissue characterization in Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The endoscopic evaluation of narrow-band imaging (NBI) zoom imagery in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is associated with suboptimal diagnostic accuracy and poor interobserver agreement. Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems may assist endoscopists in the characterization of Barrett's mucosa. Our aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of a deep-learning CAD system for tissue characterization of NBI zoom imagery in BE. METHODS: The CAD system was first trained using 494,364 endoscopic images of general endoscopic imagery. Next, 690 neoplastic BE and 557 nondysplastic BE (NDBE) white-light endoscopy overview images were used for refinement training. Subsequently, a third dataset of 112 neoplastic and 71 NDBE NBI zoom images with histologic correlation was used for training and internal validation. Finally, the CAD system was further trained and validated with a fourth, histologically confirmed dataset of 59 neoplastic and 98 NDBE NBI zoom videos. Performance was evaluated using fourfold cross-validation. The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of the CAD system for classification of neoplasia in NBI zoom videos. RESULTS: The CAD system demonstrated accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for detection of BE neoplasia using NBI zoom images of 84%, 88%, and 78%, respectively. In total, 30,021 individual video frames were analyzed by the CAD system. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the video-based CAD system were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78%-89%), 85% (95% CI, 76%-94%), and 83% (95% CI, 76%-90%), respectively. The mean assessment speed was 38 frames per second. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated promising diagnostic accuracy of predicting the presence/absence of Barrett's neoplasia on histologically confirmed unaltered NBI zoom videos with fast corresponding assessment time.

Development and validation of the international Blue Light Imaging for Barrett's Neoplasia Classification.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Detecting subtle Barrett's neoplasia during surveillance endoscopy can be challenging. Blue-light imaging (BLI) is a novel advanced endoscopic technology with high-intensity contrast imaging that may improve the identification of Barrett's neoplasia. The aim of this study was to develop and validate the first classification to enable characterization of neoplastic and non-neoplastic Barrett's esophagus using BLI. METHODS: In phase 1, descriptors pertaining to neoplastic and non-neoplastic Barrett's esophagus were identified to form the classification, named the Blue Light Imaging for Barrett's Neoplasia Classification (BLINC). Phase 2 involved validation of these component criteria by 10 expert endoscopists assessing 50 BLI images. In phase 3, a web-based training module was developed to enable 15 general (nonexpert) endoscopists to use BLINC. They then validated the classification with an image assessment exercise in phase 4, and their pre- and post-training results were compared. RESULTS: In phase 1 the descriptors were grouped into color, pit, and vessel pattern categories to form the classification. In phase 2 the sensitivity of neoplasia identification was 96.0% with a very good level of agreement among the experts (κ = .83). In phase 3, 15 general endoscopists completed the training module. In phase 4 their pretraining sensitivity (85.3%) improved significantly to 95.7% post-training with a good level of agreement (κ = .67). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a new classification system (BLINC) for the optical diagnosis of Barrett's neoplasia using BLI. Despite the limitations of this image-based study with a high prevalence of neoplasia, we believe it has the potential to improve the optical diagnosis of Barrett's neoplasia given the high degree of sensitivity (96%) noted. It is also a promising tool for training in Barrett's esophagus optical diagnosis using BLI.

Combined versus single use 20 G fine-needle biopsy and 25 G fine-needle aspiration for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling of solid gastrointestinal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Instead of choosing one endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) needle over the other, some advocate the use of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) consecutively. We explored the yield of combined use of 20 G FNB and 25 G FNA needles in patients with a suspicious solid gastrointestinal lesion. METHODS: Patients from the ASPRO study who were sampled with both needles during the same procedure were included. The incremental yield of dual sampling compared with the yield of single needle use on the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was assessed for both dual sampling approaches - FNA followed by FNB, and vice versa. RESULTS: 73 patients were included. There were 39 (53 %) pancreatic lesions, 18 (25 %) submucosal masses, and 16 (22 %) lymph nodes. FNA was used first in 24 patients (33 %) and FNB was used first in 49 (67 %). Generally, FNB was performed after FNA to collect tissue for ancillary testing (75 %), whereas FNA was used after FNB to allow for on-site pathological assessment (76 %). Diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of single needle use increased from 78 % to 92 % with dual sampling (P = 0.002). FNA followed by FNB improved the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy (P = 0.03), whereas FNB followed by FNA did not (P = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Dual sampling only improved diagnostic accuracy when 25 G FNA was followed by 20 G FNB and not vice versa. As the diagnostic benefit of the 20 G FNB over the 25 G FNA needle has recently been proven, sampling with the FNB needle seems a logical first choice.

A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P = .043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P < .001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P = .002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P = .002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P = .004), and did not differ among centers (P = .836). CONCLUSION: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.).

Complications and outcome of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in a high-volume centre.

Introduction: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice for long-term enteral feeding for patients with swallowing disorders and normal gut function. There is limited data regarding the demographics and clinical characteristics of patients from whom PEG was removed. Patients and methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive adult patients who underwent first placement of PEG between 1 August 2013 and 31 December 2015 at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. Results: In total, 495 PEG were inserted in 495 patients during the study period, 56% male, mean age at insertion 67 years (range 19-95). Most patients belonged to the neurologic group (52%), followed by the oncologic (32%), another diagnosis (9%) and trauma (7%). Major complications occurred in 10 (2.0%) patients. There were no differences in the age or BMI of patients with either minor or major complications but both parameters were risk factors in terms of survival. PEG was removed from 165 (33.3%) patients, most of them from the oncology group, due to the improvement of general status of patients after specific oncologic treatment. Conclusion: Increased age and low BMI were identified as risk factors for mortality but did not correspond with the rate of complications. Antibiotic prophylaxis with sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim provides good protection for patients with PEG.

Agreement on endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue specimens: Comparing a 20-G fine-needle biopsy to a 25-G fine-needle aspiration needle among academic and non-academic pathologists.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: A recently carried out randomized controlled trial showed the benefit of a novel 20-G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) over a 25-G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle. The current study evaluated the reproducibility of these findings among expert academic and non-academic pathologists. METHODS: This study was a side-study of the ASPRO (ASpiration versus PROcore) study. Five centers retrieved 74 (59%) consecutive FNB and 51 (41%) FNA samples from the ASPRO study according to randomization; 64 (51%) pancreatic and 61 (49%) lymph node specimens. Samples were re-reviewed by five expert academic and five non-academic pathologists and rated in terms of sample quality and diagnosis. Ratings were compared between needles, expert academic and non-academic pathologists, target lesions, and cytology versus histological specimens. RESULTS: Besides a higher diagnostic accuracy, FNB also provided for a better agreement on diagnosing malignancy (ĸ = 0.59 vs ĸ = 0.76, P < 0.001) and classification according to Bethesda (ĸ = 0.45 vs ĸ = 0.61, P < 0.001). This equally applied for expert academic and non-academic pathologists and for pancreatic and lymph node specimens. Sample quality was also rated higher for FNB, but agreement ranged from poor (ĸ = 0.04) to fair (ĸ = 0.55). Histology provided better agreement than cytology, but only when a core specimen was obtained with FNB (P = 0.004 vs P = 0.432). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the 20-G FNB outperforms the 25-G FNA needle in terms of diagnostic agreement, independent of the background and experience of the pathologist. This endorses use of the 20-G FNB needle in both expert and lower volume EUS centers.