ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effect of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support system on the performance and diagnostic confidence of endoscopists in their assessment of Barrett's esophagus (BE). METHODS: 96 standardized endoscopy videos were assessed by 22 endoscopists with varying degrees of BE experience from 12 centers. Assessment was randomized into two video sets: group A (review first without AI and second with AI) and group B (review first with AI and second without AI). Endoscopists were required to evaluate each video for the presence of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) and then decide on a spot for a targeted biopsy. After the second assessment, they were allowed to change their clinical decision and confidence level. RESULTS: AI had a stand-alone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.2%, 68.9%, and 81.3%, respectively. Without AI, BE experts had an overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.3%, 58.1%, and 71.5%, respectively. With AI, BE nonexperts showed a significant improvement in sensitivity and specificity when videos were assessed a second time with AI (sensitivity 69.8% [95%CI 65.2%-74.2%] to 78.0% [95%CI 74.0%-82.0%]; specificity 67.3% [95%CI 62.5%-72.2%] to 72.7% [95%CI 68.2%-77.3%]). In addition, the diagnostic confidence of BE nonexperts improved significantly with AI. CONCLUSION: BE nonexperts benefitted significantly from additional AI. BE experts and nonexperts remained significantly below the stand-alone performance of AI, suggesting that there may be other factors influencing endoscopists' decisions to follow or discard AI advice.
ABSTRACT
Helicobacter pylori (Hp) is the main trigger of chronic gastric atrophy and the main leading cause of gastric cancer. Hp infects the normal gastric mucosa and can lead to chronic inflammation, glandular atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, dysplasia and finally adenocarcinoma. Chronic inflammation and gastric atrophy associated with Hp infection appear initially in the distal part of the stomach (the antrum) before progressing to the proximal part (the corpus-fundus). In recent years, endoscopic developments have allowed for the characterization of various gastric conditions including the normal mucosa (pyloric/fundic gland pattern and regular arrangement of collecting venules), Hp-related gastritis (Kyoto classification), glandular atrophy (Kimura-Takemoto classification), intestinal metaplasia (Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia), and dysplasia/adenocarcinoma (Vessel plus Surface classification). Despite being independent classifications, all these scales can be integrated into a single model: the endoscopic model for gastric carcinogenesis. This model would assist endoscopists in comprehending the process of gastric carcinogenesis and conducting a systematic examination during gastroscopy. Having this model in mind would enable endoscopists to promptly recognize the implications of Hp infection and the potential patient's risk of developing gastric cancer.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the esophagus have not been assessed in our country. Our primary aim was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of the technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of the prospectively maintained national registry of ESD. We included all superficial esophageal lesions removed by ESD in 17 hospitals (20 endoscopists) between January 2016 and December 2021. Subepithelial lesions were excluded. The primary outcome was curative resection. We conducted a survival analysis and used logistic regression analysis to assess predictors of non-curative resection. RESULTS: A total of 102 ESD were performed on 96 patients. The technical success rate was 100% and the percentage of en-bloc resection was 98%. The percentage of R0 and curative resection was 77.5% (n=79; 95%CI: 68%-84%) and 63.7% (n=65; 95%CI: 54%-72%), respectively. The most frequent histology was Barrett-related neoplasia (n=55 [53.9%]). The main reason for non-curative resection was deep submucosal invasion (n=25). The centers with a lower volume of ESD obtained worse results in terms of curative resection. The rate of perforation, delayed bleeding and post-procedural stenosis were 5%, 5% and 15.7%, respectively. No patient died or required surgery due to an adverse effect. After a median follow-up of 14months, 20patients (20.8%) underwent surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy, and 9 patients died (mortality 9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In Spain, esophageal ESD is curative in approximately two out of three patients, with an acceptable risk of adverse events.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Humans , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Spain , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are few scales with prospective validation for the assessment of the upper gastrointestinal mucosal cleanliness during an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The aim of this study was to develop a valid and reproducible cleanliness scale for use during an EGD. METHODS: We developed a cleanliness scale (Barcelona scale) with a score (0-2 points) of five segments of the upper gastrointestinal tract with thorough cleaning techniques (esophagus, fundus, body, antrum, and duodenum). First, 125 photos (25 of each area) were assessed, and a score was assigned to each image by consensus among 7 experts endoscopists. Subsequently, 100 of the 125 images were selected and the inter- and intra-observer variability of 15 previously trained endoscopists was evaluated using the same images at two different times. RESULTS: In total, 1500 assessments were performed. In 1336/1500 observations (89%) there was agreement with the consensus score, with a mean kappa value of 0.83 (0.45-0.96). In the second evaluation, in 1330/1500 observations (89%) there was agreement with the consensus score, with a mean kappa value of 0.82 (0.45-0.93). The intra-observer variability was 0.89 (0.76-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The Barcelona cleanliness scale is a valid measure and reproducible with minimal training. Its application in clinical practice is a significant step to standardize the quality of the EGD.
Subject(s)
Duodenum , Mucous Membrane , Humans , Consensus , Endoscopy, Digestive SystemABSTRACT
BACKGROUND : It is unknown whether there is an advantage to using the wet-suction or slow-pull technique during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) with new-generation needles. We aimed to compare the performance of each technique in EUS-FNB. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, crossover trial including patients with solid lesions of ≥â1âcm. Four needle passes with 22âG fork-tip or Franseen-type needles were performed, alternating the wet-suction and slow-pull techniques in a randomized order. The primary outcome was the histological yield (samples containing an intact piece of tissue of at least 550âµm). Secondary end points were sample quality (tissue integrity and blood contamination), diagnostic accuracy, and adequate tumor fraction. RESULTS: Overall, 210 patients with 146 pancreatic and 64 nonpancreatic lesions were analyzed. A tissue core was retrieved in 150 (71.4â%) and 129 (61.4â%) cases using the wet-suction and the slow-pull techniques, respectively (Pâ=â0.03). The mean tissue integrity score was higher using wet suction (Pâ=â0.02), as was the blood contamination of samples (Pâ<â0.001). In the two subgroups of pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesions, tissue core rate and tissue integrity score were not statistically different using the two techniques, but blood contamination was higher with wet suction. Diagnostic accuracy and tumor fraction did not differ between the two techniques. CONCLUSION: Overall, the wet-suction technique in EUS-FNB resulted in a higher tissue core procurement rate compared with the slow-pull method. Diagnostic accuracy and the rate of samples with adequate tumor fraction were similar between the two techniques.
Subject(s)
Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/methods , Suction/methods , Cross-Over Studies , Single-Blind Method , Pancreas/diagnostic imaging , Pancreas/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current surveillance for Barrett's esophagus (BE), consisting of four-quadrant random forceps biopsies (FBs), has an inherent risk of sampling error. Wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS) may increase detection of high grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). In this multicenter randomized trial, we aimed to evaluate WATS as a substitute for FB. METHODS: Patients with known BE and a recent history of dysplasia, without visible lesions, at 17 hospitals were randomized to receive either WATS followed by FB or vice versa. All WATS samples were examined, with computer assistance, by at least two experienced pathologists at the CDx Diagnostics laboratory. Similarly, all FBs were examined by two expert pathologists. The primary end point was concordance/discordance for detection of HGD/EAC between the two techniques. RESULTS: 172 patients were included, of whom 21 had HGD/EAC detected by both modalities, 18 had HGD/EAC detected by WATS but missed by FB, and 12 were detected by FB but missed by WATS.âThe detection rate of HGD/EAC did not differ between WATS and FB (Pâ=â0.36). Using WATS as an adjunct to FB significantly increased the detection of HGD/EAC vs. FB alone (absolute increase 10â% [95â%CI 6â% to 16â%]). Mean procedural times in minutes for FB alone, WATS alone, and the combination were 6.6 (95â%CI 5.9 to 7.1), 4.9 (95â%CI 4.1 to 5.4), and 11.2 (95â%CI 10.5 to 14.0), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the combination of WATS and FB increases dysplasia detection in a population of BE patients enriched for dysplasia, we did not find a statistically significant difference between WATS and FB for the detection of HGD/EAC as single modality.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Barrett Esophagus , Esophageal Neoplasms , Precancerous Conditions , Humans , Barrett Esophagus/complications , Barrett Esophagus/diagnosis , Barrett Esophagus/epidemiology , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Esophageal Neoplasms/etiology , Esophageal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/etiology , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology , Hyperplasia , Precancerous Conditions/pathology , Disease ProgressionABSTRACT
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 ≥â1âcm and <â3âcm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥â3âcm and <â10âcm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥â10âcm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of <â1âcm, 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.âe. submucosal invasion depth ≤â500âµm 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 >â500âµm 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.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Barrett Esophagus , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Humans , Barrett Esophagus/diagnosis , Barrett Esophagus/surgery , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , HyperplasiaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is the first-choice exploration in case of overt small bowel bleeding (SBB). An early CE is known to increase diagnostic yield, but long reading times may delay therapeutics. The study evaluates the diagnostic performance of the artificial intelligence tool TOP100 in patients with overt SBB undergoing early CE with Pillcam SB3. METHODS: Patients who underwent early CE (up to 14 days from the bleeding episode) for suspected overt SBB were included. One experienced endoscopist prospectively performed standard reading (SR) and a second blind experienced endoscopist performed a TOP100-based reading (TR). The primary endpoint was TR diagnostic accuracy for lesions with high bleeding potential (P2). RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were analyzed. The most common clinical presentation was melena (64%). CE showed angiodysplasias in 40.5% of patients (45/111). In per-patient analysis, TR showed a sensitivity of 90.48% (95% CI 82.09-95.80), specificity of 100% (95% CI 87.23-100) with a PPV of 100% (95% CI 94.01-100), NPV of 77.14% (95% CI 63.58-86.71) and diagnostic accuracy of 92.79 (86.29-96.84). At multivariate analysis, adequate intestinal cleansing was the only independent predictor of concordance between TR and SR (OR 2.909, p = 0.019). The median reading time for SR and TR was 23 min (18.0-26.8) and 1.9 min (range 1.7-2.1), respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TOP100 provides a fast-reading mode for early CE in case of overt small bowel bleeding. It identifies most patients with active bleeding and angiodysplasias, aiding in the prioritization of therapeutic procedures. However, its accuracy in detecting ulcers, varices and P1 lesions seems insufficient.
Subject(s)
Angiodysplasia , Capsule Endoscopy , Humans , Artificial Intelligence , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnostic imaging , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Intestine, Small/diagnostic imaging , Intestine, Small/pathology , Angiodysplasia/diagnosis , Angiodysplasia/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Motorized Spiral Enteroscopy (MSE) reduces procedure time and increases insertion depth into the small bowel; however, there is scarce evidence on factors affecting MSE efficacy. AIMS: To evaluate diagnostic yield and adverse events of MSE including patients with prior major abdominal surgery. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted on patients undergoing MSE from June 2019 to December 2021. Demographic characteristics, procedure time, depth of maximum insertion (DMI), technical success, diagnostic yield, and adverse events were collected. RESULTS: Seventy-four anterograde (54.4%) and 62 retrograde (45.6%) enteroscopies were performed in 117 patients (64 males, median age 67 years). Fifty patients (42.7%) had prior major abdominal surgery. Technical success was 91.9% for anterograde and 90.3% for retrograde route. Diagnostic yield was 71.6% and 61.3%, respectively. The median DMI was 415 cm (264-585) for anterograde and 120 cm (37-225) for retrograde enteroscopy. In patients with prior major abdominal surgery, MSE showed significantly longer small bowel insertion time (38 vs 29 min, p = 0.004), with similar diagnostic yield (61 vs 71.4%, p = 0.201) and DMI (315 vs 204 cm, p = 0.226). The overall adverse event rate was 10.3% (SAE 1.5%), with no differences related to prior abdominal surgery (p = 0.598). Patients with prior surgeries directly involving the gastrointestinal tract showed lower DMI (189 vs 374 cm, p = 0.019) with equal exploration time (37.5 vs 38 min, p = 0.642) compared to those with other abdominal surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: MSE is effective and safe in patients with major abdominal surgery, although longer procedure times were observed. A lower depth of insertion was detected in patients with gastrointestinal surgery.
Subject(s)
Intestinal Diseases , Laparoscopy , Male , Humans , Aged , Intestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Prospective Studies , Intestine, Small/surgery , Double-Balloon Enteroscopy/methodsABSTRACT
Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is highly prevalent in our environment and is associated with highly relevant gastric disease, both benign and malignant. The gold standard for diagnosis is histological confirmation by biopsy. However, there is increasing evidence that optical endoscopic diagnosis could have a fundamental role in avoiding unnecessary biopsies in certain cases. Specifically, the regular distribution of the collecting venules (RAC pattern) seems to have a high negative predictive value (NPV) to rule out infection. This review describes the most outstanding endoscopic findings with the best diagnostic potential for H. pylori infection after an exhaustive search comparing the most relevant studies that have been carried out in Europe and the East.
Subject(s)
Gastritis , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Humans , Gastroscopy , Gastric Mucosa , Gastritis/diagnosis , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , BiopsyABSTRACT
Diagnosis of early gastric cancer and its precancerous lesions remains a challenge for great part of western endoscopists. Changes seen in the mucosal pattern are generally subtle and hence difficult to identify. In this article, we will review the usefulness of conventional and virtual chromoendoscopy and magnification endoscopy in the recognition and classification of these lesions.
Subject(s)
Precancerous Conditions , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Stomach Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Precancerous Conditions/diagnostic imaging , Precancerous Conditions/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an entity with a known histological progression to malignancy. The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system is involved in the carcinogenesis through obesity-related mechanisms that include IGF and it has been associated with several types of cancer. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the serological levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 in patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective study of patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent upper endoscopy between September 2012 and December 2015. A baseline determination of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 was performed. We included a control group of patients without BE. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were included: 36 controls, 62 with BE (42 without dysplasia and 20 with dysplasia) and 18 with adenocarcinoma. IGF-1 and IGF-1/IGFBP-3 molar ratio showed a progression to high levels in BE and adenocarcinoma than in controls (IGF-1: 135.55±66.07ng/ml, 148.33±81.5ng/ml, 108.19±46.69ng/ml, respectively; P=.049) (molar ratio: 0.23±0.91, 0.29±0.11, 0.19±0.06, respectively; P=.001), without differences between the histological types of BE. Fifty-four out of the 65 patients with BE were followed up (median of 58.50 months, range 12-113) and 11 of them (20.4%) presented progression to low-grade dysplasia (n=8) or high-grade dysplasia/adenocarcinoma (n=3), without differences in the IGF system compared with patients without progression. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma have changes in the IGF system although the serological levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 do not correlate with histological progression of BE.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Barrett Esophagus , Esophageal Neoplasms , Humans , Barrett Esophagus/metabolism , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Longitudinal Studies , Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein 3 , Insulin-Like Growth Factor I/metabolism , Prospective Studies , Disease Progression , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/pathologyABSTRACT
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.).
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Rapid On-site Evaluation , Aged , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/instrumentation , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prospective Studies , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few prospective studies have assessed the safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in elective endoscopy. Our primary aim was to compare the risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients on DOACs or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in this setting. Secondarily, we examined the impact of the timing of anticoagulant resumption on the risk of delayed bleeding in high-risk therapeutic procedures. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study from January 2018 to March 2020 of 1602 patients on oral anticoagulants (1004 on VKAs and 598 on DOACs) undergoing 1874 elective endoscopic procedures. Our primary outcomes were 90-day thromboembolic events and 30-day endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding. The inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score method was used for baseline covariate adjustment. RESULTS: The 2 groups had similar risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding (VKAs vs DOACs, 6.2% vs 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.67-1.65) and thromboembolic events (VKAs vs DOACs, 1.3% vs 1.5%; adjusted OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.34-2.38). In high bleeding risk procedures (n = 747), delayed anticoagulant resumption (> 48 hours or 24-48 hours vs < 24 hours) did not reduce the risk of postprocedural bleeding (10.3%, 9%, and 5.8%, respectively; adjusted P = .43). Hot and cold snare polypectomy were the most frequent high-risk interventions (41.8% and 39.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In a prospective study of patients on DOACs or VKAs undergoing elective endoscopy, endoscopy-related bleeding and thromboembolic events showed similar risk. Our study suggests that early anticoagulant resumption is safe in most patients, but more data are needed for advanced high-risk therapeutic procedures.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Administration, Oral , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Humans , Prospective Studies , Vitamin KABSTRACT
1: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape), but EUS alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SEL.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests providing tissue diagnosis for all SELs with features suggestive of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) if they are of size >â20âmm, or have high risk stigmata, or require surgical resection or oncological treatment.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue diagnosis of SELs ≥â20âmm in size.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends against surveillance of asymptomatic gastrointestinal (GI) tract leiomyomas, lipomas, heterotopic pancreas, granular cell tumors, schwannomas, and glomus tumors, if the diagnosis is clear.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests surveillance of asymptomatic esophageal and gastric SELs without definite diagnosis, with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 3-6 months, and then at 2-3-year intervals for lesions <â10âmm in size, and at 1-2-year intervals for lesions 10-20âmm in size. For asymptomatic SELs >â20âmm in size that are not resected, ESGE suggests surveillance with EGD plus EUS at 6 months and then at 6-12-month intervals.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) if they grow larger than 10âmm. The choice of resection technique should depend on size, depth of invasion, and location in the stomach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests considering removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs smaller than 20âmm as an alternative to surveillance. The decision to resect should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. The choice of technique should depend on size, location, and local expertise.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that, to avoid unnecessary follow-up, endoscopic resection is an option for gastric SELs smaller than 20âmm and of unknown histology after failure of attempts to obtain diagnosis.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends basing the surveillance strategy on the type and completeness of resection. After curative resection of benign SELs no follow-up is advised, except for type 1 gastric NEN for which surveillance at 1-2 years is advised.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 10: For lower or upper GI NEN with a positive or indeterminate margin at resection, ESGE recommends repeating endoscopy at 3-6 months and another attempt at endoscopic resection in the case of residual disease.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.
Subject(s)
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Endosonography/standards , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/diagnostic imaging , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/standards , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/pathology , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/surgery , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/pathology , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/surgery , Humans , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Regular arrangement of collecting venules (RAC) in gastric mucosa accurately identifies patients without Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection. The aim of our study was to evaluate the reproducibility of RAC using white light endoscopy without magnification, in a European country, and to assess the impact of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). METHODS: A multicenter prospective study with image capture of the distal lesser gastric curvature and gastric biopsies was performed. The presence of starfish-like minute points regularly distributed throughout lesser curvature was considered as RAC positive (RAC+). A set of 20 images was used for the training phase and inter and intra-observer agreements were calculated. RESULTS: 174 patients were included and 85 (48.9%) were taking PPIs. Kappa values for interobserver and intra-observer agreements were substantial (0.786) and excellent (0.906), respectively. H. pylori infection was diagnosed in 29 patients (16.7%): 10/85 with PPIs and 19/89 without PPIs (11.8% vs. 21.3%; p = 0.09). All RAC + patients were free of H. pylori infection, with a sensitivity and negative predictive value of 100%, regardless of PPI intake. CONCLUSION: The endoscopic diagnosis of H. pylori by RAC is an easy-to-learn and highly reproducible technique, even with PPI intake. Our results warrant RAC as a real-time diagnostic method for H. pylori-negative infection in Western practice.
Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Gastric Mucosa/pathology , Gastroscopy/methods , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , Humans , Observer Variation , Prospective Studies , Reproducibility of Results , Venules/pathologyABSTRACT
This study assesses the efficacy of detecting colorectal cancer precursors or polyps in an ex vivo human colon model with a microwave colonoscopy algorithm. Nowadays, 22% of polyps go undetected with conventional colonoscopy, and the risk of cancer after a negative colonoscopy can be up to 7.9%. We developed a microwave colonoscopy device that consists of a cylindrical ring-shaped switchable microwave antenna array that can be attached to the tip of a conventional colonoscope as an accessory. The accessory is connected to an external unit that allows successive measurements of the colon and processes the measurements with a microwave imaging algorithm. An acoustic signal is generated when a polyp is detected. Fifteen ex vivo freshly excised human colons with cancer (n = 12) or polyps (n = 3) were examined with the microwave-assisted colonoscopy system simulating a real colonoscopy exploration. After the experiment, the dielectric properties of the specimens were measured with a coaxial probe and the samples underwent a pathology analysis. The results show that all the neoplasms were detected with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 87.4%.
Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Algorithms , Colonic Polyps/diagnostic imaging , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Humans , MicrowavesABSTRACT
Chronic pancreatitis is a chronic fibroinflammatory disease of the pancreas with prevalence around 50 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. It appears to originate from diverse and yet mixed etiological factors. It shows highly variable presenting features, complication types and disease progression rates. Treatment options are as wide as the multiple personalized scenarios the disease might exhibit at a given time point. Some medical societies have developed guidelines for diagnosis and treatment based on scientific evidence. Although these efforts are to be acknowledged, the gathered level of evidence for any topic is usually low and, therefore, recommendations tend to be vague or weak. In the present series of position papers on chronic pancreatitis from the Societat Catalana de Digestologia and the Societat Catalana de Pàncrees we aimed at providing defined position statements for the clinician based on updated review of published literature and on interdisciplinary expert agreement. The final goal is to propose the use of common terminology and rational diagnostic/therapeutic circuits based on current knowledge. To this end 51 sections related to chronic pancreatitis were reviewed by 21 specialists from 6 different fields to generate 88 statements altogether. Statements were designed to harmonize concepts or delineate recommendations. Part 1 of this paper series discusses topics on aetiology and diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Main clinical features are abdominal pain, exocrine and endocrine insufficiency and symptoms derived from complications. Some patients remain symptom-free. Diagnosis (definitive, probable or uncertain) should be based on objective data obtained from imaging, histology, or functional tests.
Subject(s)
Pancreatitis, Chronic/diagnosis , Pancreatitis, Chronic/etiology , Diagnosis, Differential , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/diagnosis , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Pain Measurement/methods , Pancreatic Function Tests/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pancreatic Pseudocyst/diagnosis , Pancreatitis, Chronic/pathology , Risk Factors , Societies, Medical , Spain , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
Chronic pancreatitis is associated with impaired quality of life, high incidence of comorbidities, serious complications and mortality. Healthcare costs are exorbitant. Some medical societies have developed guidelines for treatment based on scientific evidence, but the gathered level of evidence for any individual topic is usually low and, therefore, recommendations tend to be vague or weak. In the present position papers on chronic pancreatitis from the Societat Catalana de Digestologia and the Societat Catalana de Pàncrees we aimed at providing defined position statements for the clinician based on updated review of published literature and on multidisciplinary expert agreement. The final goal is to propose the use of common terminology and rational diagnostic/therapeutic circuits based on current knowledge. To this end 51 sections related to chronic pancreatitis were reviewed by 21 specialists from 6 different fields to generate 88 statements altogether. Statements were designed to harmonize concepts or delineate recommendations. Part 2 of these paper series discuss topics on treatment and follow-up. The therapeutic approach should include assessment of etiological factors, clinical manifestations and complications. The complexity of these patients advocates for detailed evaluation in multidisciplinary committees where conservative, endoscopic, interventional radiology or surgical options are weighed. Specialized multidisciplinary units of Pancreatology should be constituted. Indications for surgery are refractory pain, local complications, and suspicion of malignancy. Enzyme replacement therapy is indicated if evidence of exocrine insufficiency or after pancreatic surgery. Response should be evaluated by nutritional parameters and assessment of symptoms. A follow-up program should be planned for every patient with chronic pancreatitis.
Subject(s)
Pancreatitis, Chronic , Quality of Life , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Pancreatitis, Chronic/complications , Pancreatitis, Chronic/diagnosis , Pancreatitis, Chronic/therapy , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines recommend routine antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic cysts, but there is conflicting evidence for its necessity. We investigated whether performing the procedure without antimicrobial prophylaxis increases the incidence of infection. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial to compare prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin vs placebo in patients with a pancreatic cyst requiring EUS-FNA at multiple centers in Spain. From September 2014 to June 2018, patients were randomly assigned to groups that received the prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin (n = 112) or saline solution (n = 114, placebo). We recorded patients' demographic data, lesion characteristics, and procedure data and followed patients for 21 days. A total of 205 patients completed the trial (90.7%), receiving ciprofloxacin or the control, with no statistically significant differences in demographics, baseline data, or procedure characteristics between groups. The primary outcome was FNA-related infection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of fever, procedure complications, and medication-related adverse events. RESULTS: The only case of FNA-related infection (0.44%) occurred in a patient in the placebo group (0.87%); this patient developed acute pancreatitis and bacteremia after the procedure. Prevention of infection was not inferior in the control group; the difference between proportions was 0.87% (95% confidence interval, -0.84% to 2.59%). There were no differences between groups in fever (2 patients in each group: 1.78% vs 1.76%; P = 1.00) or other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of patients undergoing EUS-FNA for pancreatic cyst evaluation, we found the risk of infection to be low. The incidence of infections did not differ significantly with vs without ciprofloxacin prophylaxis. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02261896).