ABSTRACT
At the end of the last century, a far-sighted 'working party' held in Sydney, Australia addressed the clinicopathological issues related to gastric inflammatory diseases. A few years later, an international conference held in Houston, Texas, USA critically updated the seminal Sydney classification. In line with these initiatives, Kyoto Global Consensus Report, flanked by the Maastricht-Florence conferences, added new clinical evidence to the gastritis clinicopathological puzzle.The most relevant topics related to the gastric inflammatory diseases have been addressed by the Real-world Gastritis Initiative (RE.GA.IN.), from disease definitions to the clinical diagnosis and prognosis. This paper reports the conclusions of the RE.GA.IN. consensus process, which culminated in Venice in November 2022 after more than 8 months of intense global scientific deliberations. A forum of gastritis scholars from five continents participated in the multidisciplinary RE.GA.IN. consensus. After lively debates on the most controversial aspects of the gastritis spectrum, the RE.GA.IN. Faculty amalgamated complementary knowledge to distil patient-centred, evidence-based statements to assist health professionals in their real-world clinical practice. The sections of this report focus on: the epidemiology of gastritis; Helicobacter pylori as dominant aetiology of environmental gastritis and as the most important determinant of the gastric oncogenetic field; the evolving knowledge on gastric autoimmunity; the clinicopathological relevance of gastric microbiota; the new diagnostic horizons of endoscopy; and the clinical priority of histologically reporting gastritis in terms of staging. The ultimate goal of RE.GA.IN. was and remains the promotion of further improvement in the clinical management of patients with gastritis.
Subject(s)
Gastritis , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Helicobacter Infections/complications , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , Helicobacter Infections/pathology , Gastritis/diagnosis , Gastritis/epidemiology , Gastritis/pathology , Endoscopy , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Gastric Mucosa/pathologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: During the last decade, the management of gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) has been addressed by several distinct international evidence-based guidelines. In this review, we aimed to synthesise these guidelines and provide clinicians with a global perspective of the current recommendations for managing patients with GIM, as well as highlight evidence gaps that need to be addressed with future research. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of the literature for guidelines and consensus statements published between January 2010 and February 2023 that address the diagnosis and management of GIM. RESULTS: From 426 manuscripts identified, 15 guidelines were assessed. There was consistency across guidelines regarding the purpose of endoscopic surveillance of GIM, which is to identify prevalent neoplastic lesions and stage gastric preneoplastic conditions. The guidelines also agreed that only patients with high-risk GIM phenotypes (eg, corpus-extended GIM, OLGIM stages III/IV, incomplete GIM subtype), persistent refractory Helicobacter pylori infection or first-degree family history of gastric cancer should undergo regular-interval endoscopic surveillance. In contrast, low-risk phenotypes, which comprise most patients with GIM, do not require surveillance. Not all guidelines are aligned on histological staging systems. If surveillance is indicated, most guidelines recommend a 3-year interval, but there is some variability. All guidelines recommend H. pylori eradication as the only non-endoscopic intervention for gastric cancer prevention, while some offer additional recommendations regarding lifestyle modifications. While most guidelines allude to the importance of high-quality endoscopy for endoscopic surveillance, few detail important metrics apart from stating that a systematic gastric biopsy protocol should be followed. Notably, most guidelines comment on the role of endoscopy for gastric cancer screening and detection of gastric precancerous conditions, but with high heterogeneity, limited guidance regarding implementation, and lack of robust evidence. CONCLUSION: Despite heterogeneous populations and practices, international guidelines are generally aligned on the importance of GIM as a precancerous condition and the need for a risk-stratified approach to endoscopic surveillance, as well as H. pylori eradication when present. There is room for harmonisation of guidelines regarding (1) which populations merit index endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and GIM detection/staging; (2) objective metrics for high-quality endoscopy; (3) consensus on the need for histological staging and (4) non-endoscopic interventions for gastric cancer prevention apart from H. pylori eradication alone. Robust studies, ideally in the form of randomised trials, are needed to bridge the ample evidence gaps that exist.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited evidence exists regarding the impact of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) on upper endoscopy. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to comprehensively review the available evidence on this subject. METHODS: A systematic bibliographic search was carried out until May 2024. Pooled estimates were analyzed using a random-effects model, with results presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary outcome assessed was the rate of retained gastric content (RGC), while secondary outcomes included rates of aborted and repeated procedures, adverse event (AE) rate, and rates of aspiration. RESULTS: This analysis included 13 studies involving a total of 84,065 patients. Patients receiving GLP-1RA therapy exhibited significantly higher rates of RGC (OR 5.56, 3.35-9.23), a trend that was consistent among patients with diabetes (OR 2.60, 2.23-3.02). Adjusted analysis, accounting for variables such as sex, age, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, and other therapies, confirmed the elevated rates of RGC in the GLP-1RA user group (aOR 4.20, 3.42-5.15). Furthermore, rates of aborted and repeated procedures were higher in the GLP-1RA user group (OR 5.13, 3.01-8.75, and OR 2.19, 1.43-3.35; respectively). However, no significant differences were found in AE and aspiration rates between the two groups (OR 4.04, 0.63-26.03, and OR 1.75, 0.64-4.77; respectively). CONCLUSION: Use of GLP-1RAs is associated with increased retention of gastric contents and more frequent aborted procedures during upper endoscopy. However, the AEs and aspiration rates do not seem different, therefore adjusting fasting time instead of routinely withholding GLP-1RAs could be reasonable in these patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ampullary lesions (ALs) of the minor duodenal papilla are extremely rare. Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is a routinely used treatment for AL of the major duodenal papilla, but the role of EP for minor AL has not been accurately studied. METHODS: We identified 20 patients with ALs of minor duodenal papilla in the multicentric database from the Endoscopic Papillectomy vs Surgical Ampullectomy vs Pancreatitcoduodenectomy for Ampullary Neoplasm study, which included 1422 EPs. We used propensity score matching (nearest-neighbor method) to match these cases with ALs of the major duodenal papilla based on age, sex, histologic subtype, and size of the lesion in a 1:2 ratio. Cohorts were compared by means of chi-square or Fisher exact test as well as Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Propensity score-based matching identified a cohort of 60 (minor papilla 20, major papilla 40) patients with similar baseline characteristics. The most common histologic subtype of lesions of minor papilla was an ampullary adenoma in 12 patients (3 low-grade dysplasia and 9 high-grade dysplasia). Five patients revealed nonneoplastic lesions. Invasive cancer (T1a), adenomyoma, and neuroendocrine neoplasia were each found in 1 case. The rate of complete resection, en-bloc resection, and recurrences were similar between the groups. There were no severe adverse events after EP of lesions of minor papilla. One patient had delayed bleeding that could be treated by endoscopic hemostasis, and 2 patients showed a recurrence in surveillance endoscopy after a median follow-up of 21 months (interquartile range, 12-50 months). CONCLUSIONS: EP is safe and effective in ALs of the minor duodenal papilla. Such lesions could be managed according to guidelines for EP of major duodenal papilla.
Subject(s)
Ampulla of Vater , Common Bile Duct Neoplasms , Duodenal Neoplasms , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Treatment Outcome , Ampulla of Vater/surgery , Ampulla of Vater/pathology , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Pancreatic Ducts/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Duodenal Neoplasms/pathology , Common Bile Duct Neoplasms/surgery , Common Bile Duct Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (cESD) in the esophagus has been reported to be feasible in small Eastern case series. We assessed the outcomes of cESD in the treatment of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Western countries. METHODS: We conducted an international study at 25 referral centers in Europe and Australia using prospective databases. We included all patients with ESCC treated with cESD before November 2022. Our main outcomes were curative resection according to European guidelines and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 171 cESDs were performed on 165 patients. En bloc and R0 resections rates were 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.0-99.4) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.3-76.0), respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 49.1% (95% CI, 41.7-56.6) of the lesions. The most common reason for noncurative resection was deep submucosal invasion (21.6%). The risk of stricture requiring 6 or more dilations or additional techniques (incisional therapy/stent) was high (71%), despite the use of prophylactic measures in 93% of the procedures. The rates of intraprocedural perforation, delayed bleeding, and adverse cardiorespiratory events were 4.1%, 0.6%, and 4.7%, respectively. Two patients died (1.2%) of a cESD-related adverse event. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 2 years were 91% and 79%. CONCLUSIONS: In Western referral centers, cESD for ESCC is curative in approximately half of the lesions. It can be considered a feasible treatment in selected patients. Our results suggest the need to improve patient selection and to develop more effective therapies to prevent esophageal strictures.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Humans , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Esophagoscopy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer) in answering patients' questions about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, with the ultimate goal of enhancing patients' awareness and adherence to national screening programs. METHODS: 15 questions on CRC screening were posed to ChatGPT4. The answers were rated by 20 gastroenterology experts and 20 non-experts in three domains (accuracy, completeness, and comprehensibility), and by 100 patients in three dichotomic domains (completeness, comprehensibility and trustability). RESULTS: According to expert rating, the mean accuracy score was 4.8±1.1 on a scale ranging from 1 to 6. Men completeness score was 2.1±0.7 and mean comprehensibility score was 2.8±0.4 on a scale ranging from 1 to 3. Overall, accuracy (4.8±1.1 vs 5.6±0.7, P<0.001) and completeness (2.1±0.7 vs 2.7±0.4, P<0.001) scores were significantly lower for expert compared to non-expert, while comprehensibility was comparable among the two groups (2.7±0.4 vs 2.8±0.3, P=0.546). Patients rated all questions as complete, comprehensible and trustable in 97 to 100% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT shows good performance with the potential to enhance awareness about CRC and improve screening outcomes. Generative language systems may be further improved after proper training in accordance with scientific evidence and current guidelines.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality indicator set at a minimum of 25% in unselected populations by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Nevertheless, a lack of pooled observational data resembling real-world practice limits support for this threshold. We aimed to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate the pooled rates for conventional adenoma detection, polyp detection (PDR), cecal intubation, bowel preparation, and complications in population-based studies. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched until May 2023 for populational-based studies reporting overall ADR in unselected individuals. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: 31 studies were included, comprising 3 644 561 subjects. A high quality of procedures was noticeable, with a high cecal intubation rate and low complication rate. The overall pooled ADR, PDR, and rate of cancer detection were 26.5% (95%CI 23.3% to 29.7%), 38.3% (95%CI 32.5% to 44.1%), and 2.7% (95%CI 1.5% to 3.9%), respectively. ADR varied according to indication: screening 33.3% (95%CI 24.5% to 42.2%), surveillance 42.9% (95%CI 36.9% to 49.0%), and diagnostic 24.7% (95%CI 19.5% to 29.9%), with subgroup analysis revealing rates of 34.4% (95%CI 22.0% to 40.5%) for post-fecal occult blood test and 26.6% (95%CI 22.6% to 30.5%) for primary colonoscopy screening. Diminutive conventional adenomas yielded a pooled rate of 59.9% (95%CI 43.4% to 76.3%). The pooled rate for overall serrated lesion detection was 12.4% (95%CI 8.8% to 16.0%). Male sex and higher age were significantly associated with an ADR above the benchmark. CONCLUSION: This first meta-analysis relying on real-world observational studies supports the ESGE benchmark for ADR, while suggesting that different benchmarks might be used according to indication, sex, and age.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pan-intestinal capsule endoscopy (PCE) evaluates the small bowel and colon noninvasively. This study evaluated diagnostic accuracy and safety of PCE vs. colonoscopy as first-line examination in suspected mid-lower gastrointestinal bleeding (MLGIB). METHODS: In this prospective, single-center, single-blinded cohort study, consecutive patients with suspected MLGIB underwent PCE followed by same-day colonoscopy. Diagnostic accuracy for potentially hemorrhagic lesions (PHLs; combined diagnosis by PCE + colonoscopy) and incidence of adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: 100 patients were included (median age 70 [range 18-92] years; 65% female). PHLs were diagnosed in 46 patients, including small-bowel and/or colon angioectasias in 32. PCE correctly identified 54 individuals without PHLs, and 95.7% (44/46) of those with PHLs vs. 50.0% (23/46) for colonoscopy (P<0.01). PHLs were detected by PCE alone in 65.2% (30/46), both examinations in 28.3% (13/46), and colonoscopy alone in 6.5% (3/46). PHLs were diagnosed at the ileocolonic region in 28% of patients, with PCE diagnosing 25/28 cases (89.3%) and colonoscopy diagnosing 23/28 (82.1%; P=0.13). Interventional procedures were performed at colonoscopy in 13/81 patients with iron-deficiency anemia (16.0%) vs. 6/19 patients with overt bleeding (31.6%; P<0.01). No significant adverse events occurred with PCE vs. 2% with colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MLGIB, PCE avoided further invasive procedures in >50% of patients. PCE was safe and more effective than colonoscopy in identifying PHL both in the small bowel and colon. These results support the potential use of PCE as first-line examination in patients with suspected MLGIB.
Subject(s)
Capsule Endoscopy , Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Humans , Capsule Endoscopy/methods , Female , Male , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Aged , Middle Aged , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonoscopy/adverse effects , Adult , Prospective Studies , Aged, 80 and over , Adolescent , Single-Blind Method , Young Adult , Intestine, Small/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1: ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2: ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤â10âmm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4: Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5: ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7: ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.
Subject(s)
Gastroenterology , Humans , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Endoscopes, Gastrointestinal , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare's main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy. METHODS: The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023. RESULTS: 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Climate Change , Middle Aged , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Endoscopes, GastrointestinalABSTRACT
1: ESGE recommends cold snare polypectomy (CSP), to include a clear margin of normal tissue (1-2âmm) surrounding the polyp, for the removal of diminutive polyps (≤â5âmm).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 2: ESGE recommends against the use of cold biopsy forceps excision because of its high rate of incomplete resection.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 3: ESGE recommends CSP, to include a clear margin of normal tissue (1-2âmm) surrounding the polyp, for the removal of small polyps (6-9âmm).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 4: ESGE recommends hot snare polypectomy for the removal of nonpedunculated adenomatous polyps of 10-19âmm in size.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5: ESGE recommends conventional (diathermy-based) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for large (≥â20âmm) nonpedunculated adenomatous polyps (LNPCPs).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE suggests that underwater EMR can be considered an alternative to conventional hot EMR for the treatment of adenomatous LNPCPs.Weak recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 7: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) may also be suggested as an alternative for removal of LNPCPs of ≥â20âmm in selected cases and in high-volume centers.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that, after piecemeal EMR of LNPCPs by hot snare, the resection margins should be treated by thermal ablation using snare-tip soft coagulation to prevent adenoma recurrence.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 9: ESGE recommends (piecemeal) cold snare polypectomy or cold EMR for SSLs of all sizes without suspected dysplasia.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 10: ESGE recommends prophylactic endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of LNPCPs in the right colon to reduce to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 11: ESGE recommends that en bloc resection techniques, such as en bloc EMR, ESD, endoscopic intermuscular dissection, endoscopic full-thickness resection, or surgery should be the techniques of choice in cases with suspected superficial invasive carcinoma, which otherwise cannot be removed en bloc by standard polypectomy or EMR.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/standards , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy/standards , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonoscopy/instrumentation , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Margins of Excision , Adenomatous Polyps/surgery , Adenomatous Polyps/pathology , Europe , Societies, Medical/standardsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: While piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for T1a oesophageal adenocarcinoma is acceptable, enbloc-R0 excision is advocated for T1b disease as it may offer a potential cure and mitigate recurrence. Thus, distinguishing between T1a and T1b disease is imperative under current treatment paradigms. We sought to ascertain whether expert Barrett's endoscopists were able to make this distinction based on optical evaluation. METHODS: Sixty sets of endoscopic images of histologically confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD), T1a and T1b disease (n=20 for each) were compiled from consecutive patients at a single institution. Each set contained four images, and were standardized to include an overview, a close-up in high-definition white light, a near-focus magnification image, and a narrow-band image. Experts were invited to predict histology for each set. RESULTS: 19 experts from 8 countries (Australia, USA, Italy, Netherlands, Germany, Canada, Belgium, and Portugal) participated. The majority had been practicing for >20 years, with a median annual case volume for Barrett's EMR of 50 (IQR 18-75), and Barrett's ESD of 25 (IQR 10-45). Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (T1a/b) could be distinguished from HGD, with a pooled sensitivity of 89.1% (95% CI:84.7-93.4. When predicting T-stage for T1b adenocarcinoma cases, pooled sensitivity was 43.8% (95% CI:29.9-57.7). Fleiss' kappa was 0.421 (95% CI:0.399-0.442, P<0.001), indicating fair-to-moderate agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Expert Barrett's endoscopists can reliably differentiate T1a/T1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma from HGD. Although there is fair-to-moderate agreement for T-staging, T1b disease cannot be reliably distinguished from T1a disease. This may have implications on clinical decision making and selection of endoscopic treatment methods.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The incidence of local recurrence following gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains a clinical concern. We aimed to evaluate the impact of narrow safety margin (< 1 mm) on the recurrence rate. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted across two centers. Cases of R0-ESD with subsequent recurrence were compared to matched controls in a 1:2 ratio in a case-cohort analysis. RESULTS: Over a median period of 25 months (IQR 14-43), a recurrence rate of 3% (95%CI 1.7-4.3) was observed, predominantly (13/21) following R0 resections with favourable histology. Endoscopic retreatment was feasible in 18 of 21 recurrences. The proportion of R0-cases where the safety margin in both horizontal (HM) and vertical (VM) margin exceeded 1 mm was similarly distributed in the recurrence and non-recurrence group, representing nearly 20% of cases. However, cases with HM less than 1 mm, despite VM greater than 1 mm, nearly doubled in the recurrence group (7.7% vs. 3.9%), and tripled when both margins were under 1 mm (23.1% vs. 7.7%). Despite this trend, statistical significance was not achieved (p = 0.05). In the overall cohort, the only independent risk factor significantly associated with local recurrence was the presence of residual tumor at the HM (HM1) or not assessable HM (HMx) (OR 16.5 (95%CI 4.4-61.7), and OR 11.7 (95%CI 1.1-124.1), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: While not common or typically challenging to manage, recurrence post-ESD warrants attention and justifies rigorous post-procedural surveillance, especially in patients with HM1, HMx, and probably also in those with R0 resections but narrow safety margin.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Margins of Excision , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Male , Female , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Aged , Risk Factors , Gastric Mucosa/surgery , Gastric Mucosa/pathology , Case-Control Studies , Gastroscopy/methods , Logistic ModelsABSTRACT
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relies primarily on stool analysis to identify occult blood. However, its sensitivity for detecting precancerous lesions is limited, requiring the development of new tools to improve CRC screening. Carcinogenesis involves significant alterations in mucosal epithelium glycocalyx that decisively contribute to disease progression. Building on this knowledge, we examined patient series comprehending premalignant lesions, colorectal tumors, and healthy controls for the T-antigen-a short-chain O-glycosylation of proteins considered a surrogate marker of malignancy in multiple solid cancers. We found the T-antigen in the secretions of dysplastic lesions as well as in cancer. In CRC, T-antigen expression was associated with the presence of distant metastases. In parallel, we analyzed a broad number of stools from individuals who underwent colonoscopy, which showed high T expressions in high-grade dysplasia and carcinomas. Employing mass spectrometry-based lectin-affinity enrichment, we identified a total of 262 proteins, 67% of which potentially exhibited altered glycosylation patterns associated with cancer and advanced pre-cancerous lesions. Also, we found that the stool (glyco)proteome of pre-cancerous lesions is enriched for protein species involved in key biological processes linked to humoral and innate immune responses. This study offers a thorough analysis of the stool glycoproteome, laying the groundwork for harnessing glycosylation alterations to improve non-invasive cancer detection.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Precancerous Conditions , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Hyperplasia , Carcinogenesis , Antigens, Viral, TumorABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) after a non-curative (NC) gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and to validate and eventually refine the eCura scoring system in the Western setting. Also, to assess the rate and risk factors for parietal residual disease. DESIGN: Retrospective multicentre multinational study of prospectively collected registries from 19 Western centres. Patients who had been submitted to surgery or had at least one follow-up endoscopy were included. The eCura system was applied to assess its accuracy in the Western setting, and a modified version was created according to the results (W-eCura score). The discriminative capacities of the eCura and W-eCura scores to predict LNM were assessed and compared. RESULTS: A total of 314 NC gastric ESDs were analysed (72% high-risk resection (HRR); 28% local-risk resection). Among HRR patients submitted to surgery, 25% had parietal disease and 15% had LNM in the surgical specimen. The risk of LNM was significantly different across the eCura groups (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.900 (95% CI 0.852 to 0.949)). The AUC-ROC of the W-eCura for LNM (0.916, 95% CI 0.870 to 0.961; p=0.012) was significantly higher compared with the original eCura. Positive vertical margin, lymphatic invasion and younger age were associated with a higher risk of parietal residual lesion in the surgical specimen. CONCLUSION: The eCura scoring system may be applied in Western countries to stratify the risk of LNM after a gastric HRR. A new score is proposed that may further decrease the number of unnecessary surgeries.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Gastrectomy/methods , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastric Mucosa/surgery , Gastric Mucosa/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the significant advances made in the diagnosis and treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE), there is still a need for standardized definitions, appropriate recognition of endoscopic landmarks, and consistent use of classification systems. Current controversies in basic definitions of BE and the relative lack of anatomic knowledge are significant barriers to uniform documentation. We aimed to provide consensus-driven recommendations for uniform reporting and global application. METHODS: The World Endoscopy Organization Barrett's Esophagus Committee appointed leaders to develop an evidence-based Delphi study. A working group of 6 members identified and formulated 23 statements, and 30 internationally recognized experts from 18 countries participated in 3 rounds of voting. We defined consensus as agreement by ≥80% of experts for each statement and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool to assess the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting, experts achieved consensus on 6 endoscopic landmarks (palisade vessels, gastroesophageal junction, squamocolumnar junction, lesion location, extraluminal compressions, and quadrant orientation), 13 definitions (BE, hiatus hernia, squamous islands, columnar islands, Barrett's endoscopic therapy, endoscopic resection, endoscopic ablation, systematic inspection, complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia, complete eradication of dysplasia, residual disease, recurrent disease, and failure of endoscopic therapy), and 4 classification systems (Prague, Los Angeles, Paris, and Barrett's International NBI Group). In round 1, 18 statements (78%) reached consensus, with 12 (67%) receiving strong agreement from more than half of the experts. In round 2, 4 of the remaining statements (80%) reached consensus, with 1 statement receiving strong agreement from 50% of the experts. In the third round, a consensus was reached on the remaining statement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed evidence-based, consensus-driven statements on endoscopic landmarks, definitions, and classifications of BE. These recommendations may facilitate global uniform reporting in BE.
Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Esophageal Neoplasms , Barrett Esophagus/diagnosis , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Barrett Esophagus/therapy , Brazil , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Esophagoscopy , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surveillance after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is recommended for all patients owing to the persistent risk of metachronous gastric lesions (MGLs). We developed and validated a prediction score to estimate MGL risk after ESD for early neoplastic gastric lesions, to define an individualized and cost-saving approach. METHODS: Clinical predictors and a risk score were derived from meta-analysis data. A retrospective, single-center, cohort study including patients with ≥â3 years of standardized surveillance after ESD was conducted for score validation. Predictive accuracy of the score by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was assessed and cumulative probabilities of MGL were estimated. RESULTS: The risk score (0-9 points) included six clinical predictors (scored 0-3): positive family history of gastric cancer, older age, male sex, corpus intestinal metaplasia, synchronous gastric lesions, and persistent Helicobacter pylori infection (FAMISH). The study population included 263 patients. The MGL rate was 16â%. The score diagnostic accuracy for predicting MGL at 3 years' follow-up, measured by the AUC, was 0.704 (95â%CI 0.603-0.806). At 3 years and a cutoff <â2, the score achieved maximal sensitivity and negative predictive value; 15â% of patients could be assigned to a low-risk group, in which the progression to MGL was significantly lower than for the high-risk group (Pâ=â0.04). CONCLUSION: The FAMISH score might be a useful tool to accurately identify patients with low-to-intermediate risk for MGL at 3 years of follow-up who could have surveillance intervals extended to reduce the burden of care.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Stomach Neoplasms , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Cohort Studies , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Gastric Mucosa/surgery , Gastric Mucosa/pathology , Gastroscopy/adverse effects , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common neoplasm in Western countries. Prioritizing access to colonoscopy appears of critical relevance. Alarm features are considered to increase the likelihood of CRC. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic performance of alarm features for CRC diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of alarm features (rectal bleeding, anemia, change in bowel habit, and weight loss) for CRC, published up to September 2021.âColonoscopy was required as the reference diagnostic test. Diagnostic accuracy measures were pooled by a bivariate mixed-effects regression model. The number needed to scope (NNS; i.âe. the number of patients who need to undergo colonoscopy to diagnose one CRC) according to each alarm feature was calculated. RESULTS: 31 studies with 45 100 patients (mean age 31-88 years; men 36â%-63â%) were included. The prevalence of CRC ranged from 0.2â% to 22â%. Sensitivity was suboptimal, ranging from 12.4â% for weight loss to 49â% for rectal bleeding, whereas specificity ranged from 69.8â% for rectal bleeding to 91.9â% for weight loss. Taken individually, rectal bleeding and anemia would be the only practical alarm features mandating colonoscopy (NNS 5.3 and 6.7, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When considered independently, alarm features have variable accuracy for CRC, given the high heterogeneity of study populations reflected by wide variability in CRC prevalence. Rectal bleeding and anemia are the most practical to select patients for colonoscopy. Integration of alarm features in a comprehensive evaluation of patients should be considered.
Subject(s)
Anemia , Colorectal Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Rectum , Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Anemia/etiology , Weight Loss , Early Detection of CancerABSTRACT
BACKGROUND : Current guidelines suggest that routine biopsy of post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) scars can be abandoned, provided that a standardized imaging protocol with virtual chromoendoscopy is used. However, few studies have examined the accuracy of advanced endoscopic imaging, such as narrow-band imaging (NBI) vs. white-light endoscopy (WLE) for prediction of histological recurrence. We aimed to assess whether NBI accuracy is superior to that of WLE and whether one or both techniques can replace biopsies. METHODS : The study was a multicenter, randomized, pathologist-blind, crossover trial, with consecutive patients undergoing first colonoscopy after EMR of lesions ≥â20âmm. Computer-generated randomization and opaque envelope concealed allocation. Patients were randomly assigned to scar examination with NBI followed by WLE (NBIâ+âWLE), or WLE followed by NBI (WLEâ+âNBI). Histology was the reference method, with biopsies being performed for all tissues. RESULTS : The study included 203 scars (103 in the NBIâ+âWLE group, 100 in the WLEâ+âNBI group). Recurrence was confirmed histologically in 29.6â% of the scars. The diagnostic accuracy of NBI was not statistically different from that of WLE (95â% [95â%CI 92â%-98â%] vs. 94â% [95â%CI 90â%-97â%]; Pâ=â0.48). The negative predictive values (NPVs) were 96â% (95â%CI 93â%-99â%) for NBI and 93â% (95â%CI 89â%-97â%) for WLE (Pâ=â0.06). CONCLUSIONS : The accuracy of NBI for the diagnosis of recurrence was not superior to that of WLE. Endoscopic assessment of EMR scars with WLE and NBI achieved an NPV that would allow routine biopsy to be avoided in cases of negative optical diagnosis.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Cicatrix/diagnostic imaging , Cicatrix/etiology , Cicatrix/pathology , Cross-Over Studies , Single-Blind Method , Biopsy , Narrow Band Imaging/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of â>â50â% of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin >â2âg/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.