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 Objectives: The implementation and monitoring of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) performance measures for colonoscopy are suboptimal in clinical practice. Electronic reporting systems may play an important role in data retrieval. We aimed to define the possibility of systematically assessing and monitoring ESGE performance measures for colonoscopy through reporting systems. Materials and Methods: We conducted a survey during a nationwide event on the quality of colonoscopy held in Rome, Italy, in March 2023 by a self-administered questionnaire. Analyses were conducted overall and by workplace setting. Results: The attendance was 93% (M/F 67/26), with equal distribution of age groups, regions and public or private practices. Only about one-third (34%) and 21.5% of participants stated that their reporting system allows them to retrieve all the ESGE performance measures, overall and as automatic retrieval, respectively. Only 66.7% and 10.7% of respondents can systematically report the cecal intubation and the adenoma detection rate, respectively. The analysis according to hospital setting revealed no significant difference for all the items. Conclusions: We found a generalized lack of systematic tracking of performance measures for colonoscopy due to underperforming reporting systems. Our results underline the need to update reporting systems to monitor the quality of endoscopy practice in Italy.
Subject(s)
Colonoscopy , Humans , Colonoscopy/standards , Colonoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Italy , Adult , Aged , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/standards , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/statistics & numerical data , Societies, Medical , EuropeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials (2752 patients) comparing different treatments for management of large bile stones (>10 mm) (endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon sphincteroplasty, sphincterotomy followed by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation [S+EPLBD], mechanical lithotripsy, single-operator cholangioscopy [SOC]) with each other were identified. Study outcomes were the success rate of stone removal and the incidence of adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria to appraise the quality of evidence. RESULTS: All treatments except mechanical lithotripsy significantly outperformed sphincterotomy in terms of stone removal rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.03-1.29). SOC was superior to other adjunctive interventions (vs balloon sphincteroplasty [RR, 1.24; 95% CIs, 1.07-1.45], vs S+EPLBD [RR, 1.23; range, 1.06-1.42] and vs mechanical lithotripsy [RR, 1.34; range, 1.14-1.58]). Cholangioscopy ranked the highest in increasing the success rate of stone removal (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score, 0.99) followed by S+EPLBD (SUCRA score, 0.68). SOC and S+EPLBD outperformed the other modalities when only studies reporting on stones greater than 15 mm were taken into consideration (SUCRA scores, 0.97 and 0.71, respectively). None of the assessed interventions was significantly different in terms of adverse event rate compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy or with other treatments. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding were the most frequent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with large bile stones, cholangioscopy represents the most effective method, in particular in patients with larger (>15 mm) stones, whereas S+EPLBD could represent a less expensive and more widely available alternative.
Subject(s)
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Gallstones , Humans , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/methods , Gallstones/surgery , Network Meta-Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic/adverse effects , Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic/methods , Dilatation/methodsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the pathological complete response (pCR) rate of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) after adaptive high-dose neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) based on 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18 F-FDG-PET/CT). METHODS: The primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were the predictive value of 18 F-FDG-PET/CT on pathological response and acute and late toxicity. All patients performed 18 F-FDG-PET/CT at baseline (PET0) and after 2 weeks during CRT (PET1). The metabolic PET parameters were calculated both at the PET0 and PET1. The total CRT dose was 45 Gy to the pelvic lymph nodes and 50 Gy to the primary tumor, corresponding mesorectum, and to metastatic lymph nodes. Furthermore, a sequential boost was delivered to a biological target volume defined by PET1 with an additional dose of 5 Gy in 2 fractions. Capecitabine (825 mg/m2 twice daily orally) was prescribed for the entire treatment duration. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (13 males, 5 females; median age 55 years [range, 41-77 years]) were enrolled in the trial. Patients underwent surgical resection at 8-9 weeks after the end of neoadjuvant CRT. No patient showed grade > 1 acute radiation-induced toxicity. Seven patients (38.8%) had TRG = 0 (complete regression), 5 (27.0%) showed TRG = 2, and 6 (33.0%) had TRG = 3. Based on the TRG results, patients were classified in two groups: TRG = 0 (pCR) and TRG = 1, 2, 3 (non pCR). Accepting p < 0.05 as the level of significance, at the Kruskal-Wallis test, the medians of baseline-MTV, interim-SUVmax, interim-SUVmean, interim-MTV, interim-TLG, and the MTV reduction were significantly different between the two groups. 18 F-FDG-PET/CT was able to predict the pCR in 77.8% of cases through compared evaluation of both baseline PET/CT and interim PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that a dose escalation on a reduced target in the final phase of CRT is well tolerated and able to provide a high pCR rate.
Subject(s)
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Rectal Neoplasms , Male , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Radiopharmaceuticals , Rectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Chemoradiotherapy/adverse effects , Positron-Emission Tomography , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
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
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.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Humans , Colonoscopy , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methodsABSTRACT
MR1: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy as the first-line examination, before consideration of other endoscopic and radiological diagnostic tests for suspected small-bowel bleeding, given the excellent safety profile of capsule endoscopy, its patient tolerability, and its potential to visualize the entire small-bowel mucosa.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR2: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with overt suspected small-bowel bleeding as soon as possible after the bleeding episode, ideally within 48 hours, to maximize the diagnostic and subsequent therapeutic yield.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR3: ESGE does not recommend routine second-look endoscopy prior to small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding or iron-deficiency anemia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR4: ESGE recommends conservative management in those patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding and high quality negative small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR5: ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy to confirm and possibly treat lesions identified by small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR6: ESGE recommends the performance of small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line examination in patients with iron-deficiency anemia when small bowel evaluation is indicated.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR7: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected Crohn's disease and negative ileocolonoscopy findings as the initial diagnostic modality for investigating the small bowel, in the absence of obstructive symptoms or known bowel stenosis.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR8: ESGE recommends, in patients with unremarkable or nondiagnostic findings from dedicated small-bowel cross-sectional imaging, small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a subsequent investigation if deemed likely to influence patient management.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR9: ESGE recommends, in patients with established Crohn's disease, the use of a patency capsule before small-bowel capsule endoscopy to decrease the capsule retention rate.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR10: ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) as an alternative to surgery for foreign bodies retained in the small bowel requiring retrieval in patients without acute intestinal obstruction.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR11: ESGE recommends DAE-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (DAE-ERCP) as a first-line endoscopic approach to treat pancreaticobiliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (except for Billroth II patients).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.
Subject(s)
Anemia, Iron-Deficiency , Capsule Endoscopy , Crohn Disease , Intestinal Diseases , Humans , Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/diagnosis , Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/etiology , Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/therapy , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Intestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Intestinal Diseases/therapyABSTRACT
Pelvic radiation disease (PRD), a frequent side effect in patients with abdominal/pelvic cancers treated with radiotherapy, remains an unmet medical need. Currently available preclinical models have limited applications for the investigation of PRD pathogenesis and possible therapeutic strategies. In order to select the most effective irradiation protocol for PRD induction in mice, we evaluated the efficacy of three different locally and fractionated X-ray exposures. Using the selected protocol (10 Gy/day × 4 days), we assessed PRD through tissue (number and length of colon crypts) and molecular (expression of genes involved in oxidative stress, cell damage, inflammation, and stem cell markers) analyses at short (3 h or 3 days after X-ray) and long (38 days after X-rays) post-irradiation times. The results show that a primary damage response in term of apoptosis, inflammation, and surrogate markers of oxidative stress was found, thus determining a consequent impairment of cell crypts differentiation and proliferation as well as a local inflammation and a bacterial translocation to mesenteric lymph nodes after several weeks post-irradiation. Changes were also found in microbiota composition, particularly in the relative abundance of dominant phyla, related families, and in alpha diversity indices, as an indication of dysbiotic conditions induced by irradiation. Fecal markers of intestinal inflammation, measured during the experimental timeline, identified lactoferrin, along with elastase, as useful non-invasive tools to monitor disease progression. Thus, our preclinical model may be useful to develop new therapeutic strategies for PRD treatment.
Subject(s)
Radiation Injuries , Mice , Animals , X-Rays , Disease Models, Animal , Apoptosis/radiation effects , InflammationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To validate Lyon Consensus criteria for diagnosing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) by reflux monitoring. DESIGN: Manual review of impedance-pH tracings from patients with proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent heartburn, evaluated off PPI. Acid exposure time (AET) thresholds defined by the Lyon Consensus and impedance parameters were investigated, namely, total refluxes (TRs), postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index and mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI). RESULTS: The study included 488 patients, 178 (36%) with normal (<4%) AET, 89 (18%) with inconclusive (4%-6%) AET and 221 (45%) with abnormal (>6%) AET, alongside with 70 healthy controls. At receiver operating characteristic analysis, area under curve was 0.89, 0.95 and 0.89 for TRs, PSPW index and MNBI, respectively, and threshold values were 40, 50% and 2000 Ω; the 4% physiological AET threshold defined by the Lyon Consensus showed 100% specificity but 63% sensitivity. The thresholds defined for impedance parameters were validated against AET by means of ordered logistic regression, being in concordance with the 4% AET threshold (OR 2.5 for TRs, 18.9 for PSPW index and 5.7 for MNBI). TRs positivity and concordant PSPW index/MNBI positivity were found in 80%-90% of patients in the abnormal AET group, in 73%-74% of cases in the inconclusive AET group and in 28%-40% of cases in the group with normal AET. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show the overall validity of the Lyon Consensus approach to GORD diagnosis. Adding evaluation of impedance parameters, namely, TRs, PSPW index and MNBI to AET appraisal, substantially improves the diagnostic yield of reflux monitoring.
Subject(s)
Esophageal pH Monitoring , Gastroesophageal Reflux , Humans , Consensus , Electric Impedance , Esophageal pH Monitoring/methods , Gastroesophageal Reflux/diagnosis , Hydrogen-Ion Concentration , Proton Pump Inhibitors/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy are often in the workforce. Therefore, colonoscopy may affect patients' work productivity in terms of missed working days and/or reduced working efficiency. We aimed to investigate the impact of colonoscopy on work productivity and factors influencing this impact. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational, multicenter study in 10 Italian hospitals between 2016 and 2017. We collected information on individual characteristics, work productivity, symptoms, and conditions before, during, and after the procedure from patients undergoing colonoscopy for several indications using validated tools. Outcomes were interference of preparation with work, absenteeism, and impaired work performance after the procedure. We fitted multivariate logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for potential predictors of the outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1137 subjects in the study, 30.5% reported at least 1 outcome. Impaired work performance was associated with bowel preparation regimen (full dose on the day of colonoscopy vs split dose: OR, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.43-11.5), symptoms during bowel preparation (high symptom score: OR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.15-8.95), and pain during the procedure (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.40-4.35). Increasing number of working hours and less comfortable jobs were associated with absenteeism (P for trend = .06) and impairment of working performance (P for trend = .01) and GI symptoms both before and after colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational and individual characteristics of patients should be considered when scheduling colonoscopy because this procedure may impair work productivity in up to one-third of patients. Split-dose bowel preparation, performing a painless colonoscopy, and preventing the occurrence of GI symptoms may minimize the impact of colonoscopy on work productivity.
Subject(s)
Cathartics , Polyethylene Glycols , Colonoscopy/methods , Humans , Odds Ratio , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION : Metachronous gastric lesions (MGL) are a significant concern after both endoscopic and surgical resection for early gastric cancer. Identification of risk factors for MGL could help to individualize surveillance schedules and potentially reduce the burden of care, but data are inconclusive. We aimed to identify risk factors for MGL and compare the incidence after endoscopic resection (ER) and subtotal gastrectomy. METHODS : We conducted a systematic review by searching PubMed, ISI, and Scopus, and performed meta-analysis. RESULTS : 52 studies were included. Pooled cumulative MGL incidence after ER was 9.3â% (95â% confidence interval [CI] 7.7â% to 11.0â%), significantly higher than after subtotal gastrectomy (1.2â%, 95â%CI 0.5â% to 2.2â%). After adjusting for mean follow-up, predicted MGL at 5 years was 9.5â% after ER and 0.7â% after subtotal gastrectomy. Older age (mean difference 1.08 years, 95â%CI 0.21 to 1.96), male sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95â%CI 1.22 to 1.66), family history of gastric cancer (OR 1.88, 95â%CI 1.03 to 3.41), synchronous lesions (OR 1.72, 95â%CI 1.30 to 2.28), severe gastric mucosal atrophy (OR 2.77, 95â%CI 1.22 to 6.29), intestinal metaplasia in corpus (OR 3.15, 95â%CI 1.67 to 5.96), persistent Helicobacter pylori infection (OR 2.08, 95â%CI 1.60 to 2.72), and lower pepsinogen I/II ratio (mean difference -0.54, 95â%CI -0.86 to -0.22) were significantly associated with MGL after ER. Index lesion characteristics were not significantly associated with MGL. ER treatment was possible in 83.2â% of 914 MGLs (95â%CI 72.2 to 91.9â%). CONCLUSION : Follow-up schedules should be different after ER and subtotal gastrectomy, and individualized further based on diverse risk factors.
Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Neoplasms, Second Primary , Stomach Neoplasms , Helicobacter Infections/complications , Humans , Incidence , Male , Neoplasms, Second Primary/epidemiology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiology , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI <â30âkg/m2] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] >â10âmmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography >â25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70âg/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90âg/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1âg/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250âmg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C â≤â13 or Child-Pugh B >â7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG >â20âmmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.
Subject(s)
Esophageal and Gastric Varices , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic , Humans , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Carvedilol , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , CyanoacrylatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Estimates on miss rates for upper gastrointestinal neoplasia (UGIN) rely on registry data or old studies. Quality assurance programs for upper GI endoscopy are not fully established owing to the lack of infrastructure to measure endoscopists' competence. We aimed to assess endoscopists' accuracy for the recognition of UGIN exploiting the framework of artificial intelligence (AI) validation studies. METHODS: Literature searches of databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus) up to August 2020 were performed to identify articles evaluating the accuracy of individual endoscopists for the recognition of UGIN within studies validating AI against a histologically verified expert-annotated ground-truth. The main outcomes were endoscopists' pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV/NPV), and area under the curve (AUC) for all UGIN, for esophageal squamous cell neoplasia (ESCN), Barrett esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). RESULTS: Seven studies (2 ESCN, 3 BERN, 1 GAC, 1 UGIN overall) with 122 endoscopists were included. The pooled endoscopists' sensitivity and specificity for UGIN were 82â% (95â% confidence interval [CI] 80â%-84â%) and 79â% (95â%CI 76â%-81â%), respectively. Endoscopists' accuracy was higher for GAC detection (AUC 0.95 [95â%CI 0.93-0.98]) than for ESCN (AUC 0.90 [95â%CI 0.88-0.92]) and BERN detection (AUC 0.86 [95â%CI 0.84-0.88]). Sensitivity was higher for Eastern vs. Western endoscopists (87â% [95â%CI 84â%-89â%] vs. 75â% [95â%CI 72â%-78â%]), and for expert vs. non-expert endoscopists (85â% [95â%CI 83â%-87â%] vs. 71â% [95â%CI 67â%-75â%]). CONCLUSION: We show suboptimal accuracy of endoscopists for the recognition of UGIN even within a framework that included a higher prevalence and disease awareness. Future AI validation studies represent a framework to assess endoscopist competence.
Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms , Artificial Intelligence , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Humans , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hospitalization is associated with inadequate colon cleansing before colonoscopy. We aimed to identify factors associated to inadequate colon cleansing among inpatients, and to derive and validate a model to identify inpatients with inadequate cleansing. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study at 12 hospitals in Italy. Consecutive adult inpatients scheduled for colonoscopy for any indication were enrolled from February through May 2019 (derivation cohort, n = 1016) and from June through August 2019 (validation cohort, n = 508). Inadequate cleansing was defined as Boston bowel preparation scale scores below 2 in any colon segment. We performed multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with inadequate cleansing. RESULTS: In the combined cohorts, 1032 patients (68%) had adequate colon cleansing. Physicians' meetings to optimize bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.65), written and oral instructions to patients (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36-0.65), admission to gastroenterology unit (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.98), split-dose regimens (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.20-0.35), a 1-liter polyethylene glycol-based bowel purge (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.65), and 75% or more intake of bowel preparation (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05-0.15) significantly reduced odds of inadequate colon cleansing. Alternatively, bedridden status (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.55-2.98), constipation (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.55-3.0), diabetes mellitus (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.18-2.20), use of anti-psychotic drugs (OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.62-6.56), and 7 or more days of hospitalization (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) increased risk of inadequate colon cleansing. We developed a model to identify patients with inadequate cleaning using data from patients in the derivation cohort and tested it in the validation cohort. Calibration values were P = .218 for the discrimination cohort and P = .232 for the validation cohort. Discrimination values were c-statistic, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74-0.81) for the discrimination cohort and c-statistic, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.78) for the validation cohort. We developed app for use by clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective observational study, we identified setting-, patient- and preparation-related factors that affect colon cleansing among inpatients. We derived and validated a model to identify patients with inadequate preparation and developed an app for clinicians. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT03925506.
Subject(s)
Cathartics , Colonoscopy , Adult , Colon , Constipation/drug therapy , Humans , Polyethylene Glycols/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Global eradication of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) is hindered by infection persistence among high-prevalence ethnic groups with insufficient access to care. Educational interventions to raise awareness on HCV have led to identification of submerged HCV cases. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a web-based platform to assess and raise the awareness of HCV among Pakistani people living in northern Italy. We created a website in Italian and Urdu language (https://survey-hcv6.webnode.it), and shared it to Pakistani people in Emilia-Romagna through Facebook groups. Participants had to fill a 15-item questionnaire on HCV infection, then watch a video on HCV, and respond to the questionnaire again. McNemar's chi-square and negative binomial multivariable regression analysis yielding incidence rate ratio (IRR) were applied. 339 subjects from 600 (57%) participated and filled the baseline questionnaire. The knowledge on HCV infection was scanty. For instance, 32% were not aware of HCV, 42% only knew that HCV infection may be long term, and only 14% knew the access to DAA treatment is provided by the Health Service. Independent predictors of worse knowledge on HCV were male gender (IRR 1.19), low instruction level (IRR 1.26), Urdu language preference (IRR 1.22), past use of intravenous drugs (1.2) and no previous HCV testing (IRR 1.36). The educational video significantly improved the knowledge on HCV among 67 subjects who refilled the questionnaire, as 97% were later aware of HCV, 99% of the long-term duration of HCV infection and 93% of the access to DAAs provided by Italian Health Service. We found a modest level of knowledge on HCV infection among Pakistani people in northern Italy, identifying predictors of worse awareness. We provided a multimedia platform which significantly improved the knowledge on HCV infection. Consequently, this approach might translate into an improved linkage to care.
Subject(s)
Hepacivirus , Hepatitis C , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Ethnicity , Hepatitis C/diagnosis , Hepatitis C/epidemiology , Hepatitis C/prevention & control , Humans , Internet , Italy , Male , Multimedia , Pakistan/epidemiology , PrevalenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adequate bowel cleansing is critical to ensure quality and safety of a colonoscopy. A novel 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L-PEG+ASC) regimen was previously validated against low-volume regimens but was never compared with high-volume regimens. METHODS: In a phase IV study, patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to receive split-dose 1L PEG+ASC or a split-dose 4-L PEG-based regimen (4L-PEG) in 5 Italian centers. Preparation was assessed with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) by local endoscopists and centralized reading, both blinded to the randomization arm. The primary endpoint was noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC in colon cleansing. Secondary endpoints were superiority of 1L-PEG+ASC, patient compliance, segmental colon cleansing, adenoma detection rate, tolerability, and safety. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-eight patients (median age, 59.8 years) were randomized between January 2019 and October 2019: 195 to 1L-PEG+ASC and 193 to 4L-PEG. Noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC was demonstrated for cleansing in both the entire colon (BBPS ≥ 6: 97.9% vs 93%; relative risk [RR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.04; P superiority = .027) and in the right-sided colon segment (98.4% vs 96.0%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .99-1.02; P noninferiority = .013). Compliance was higher with 1L-PEG+ASC than with 4L-PEG (178/192 [92.7%] vs 154/190 patients [81.1%]; RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12), whereas no difference was found regarding safety (moderate/severe side effects: 20.8% vs 25.8%; P = .253). No difference in adenoma detection rate (38.8% vs 43.0%) was found. CONCLUSIONS: One-liter PEG+ASC showed noninferiority compared with 4L-PEG in achieving adequate colon cleansing and provided a higher patient compliance. No differences in tolerability and safety were detected. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03742232.).
Subject(s)
Cathartics , Polyethylene Glycols , Ascorbic Acid , Cathartics/adverse effects , Colonoscopy , Humans , Laxatives , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 2008, a plethora of research studies has compared the efficacy of water-assisted (aided) colonoscopy (WAC) and underwater resection (UWR) of colorectal lesions with standard colonoscopy. We reviewed and graded the research evidence with potential clinical application. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus among experienced colonoscopists on definitions and practice of water immersion (WI), water exchange (WE), and UWR. METHODS: Major databases were searched to obtain research reports that could potentially shape clinical practice related to WAC and UWR. Pertinent references were graded (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Extracted data supporting evidence-based statements were tabulated and provided to respondents. We received responses from 55 (85% surveyed) experienced colonoscopists (37 experts and 18 nonexperts in WAC) from 16 countries in 3 rounds. Voting was conducted anonymously in the second and third round, with ≥80% agreement defined as consensus. We aimed to obtain consensus in all statements. RESULTS: In the first and the second modified Delphi rounds, 20 proposed statements were decreased to 14 and then 11 statements. After the third round, the combined responses from all respondents depicted the consensus in 11 statements (S): definitions of WI (S1) and WE (S2), procedural features (S3-S5), impact on bowel cleanliness (S6), adenoma detection (S7), pain score (S8), and UWR (S9-S11). CONCLUSIONS: The most important consensus statements are that WI and WE are not the same in implementation and outcomes. Because studies that could potentially shape clinical practice of WAC and UWR were chosen for review, this modified Delphi consensus supports recommendations for the use of WAC in clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Water , Adenoma/diagnosis , Adenoma/surgery , Colonoscopy , Consensus , Delphi Technique , HumansABSTRACT
MALIGNANT DISEASE: 1: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. BENIGN DISEASE: 5: ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.
Subject(s)
Esophageal and Gastric Varices , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Humans , StentsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: One of the aims of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to encourage high quality endoscopic research at a European level. In 2016, the ESGE research committee published a set of research priorities. As endoscopic research is flourishing, we aimed to review the literature and determine whether endoscopic research over the last 4 years had managed to address any of our previously published priorities. METHODS: As the previously published priorities were grouped under seven different domains, a working party with at least two European experts was created for each domain to review all the priorities under that domain. A structured review form was developed to standardize the review process. The group conducted an extensive literature search relevant to each of the priorities and then graded the priorities into three categories: (1) no longer a priority (well-designed trial, incorporated in national/international guidelines or adopted in routine clinical practice); (2) remains a priority (i.âe. the above criterion was not met); (3) redefine the existing priority (i.âe. the priority was too vague with the research question not clearly defined). RESULTS: The previous ESGE research priorities document published in 2016 had 26 research priorities under seven domains. Our review of these priorities has resulted in seven priorities being removed from the list, one priority being partially removed, another seven being redefined to make them more precise, with eleven priorities remaining unchanged. This is a reflection of a rapid surge in endoscopic research, resulting in 27â% of research questions having already been answered and another 27â% requiring redefinition. CONCLUSIONS: Our extensive review process has led to the removal of seven research priorities from the previous (2016) list, leaving 19 research priorities that have been redefined to make them more precise and relevant for researchers and funding bodies to target.
Subject(s)
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Societies, Medical , Humans , ResearchABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Artificial intelligence (AI) may reduce underdiagnosed or overlooked upper GI (UGI) neoplastic and preneoplastic conditions, due to subtle appearance and low disease prevalence. Only disease-specific AI performances have been reported, generating uncertainty on its clinical value. DESIGN: We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus until July 2020, for studies on the diagnostic performance of AI in detection and characterisation of UGI lesions. Primary outcomes were pooled diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of AI. Secondary outcomes were pooled positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values. We calculated pooled proportion rates (%), designed summary receiving operating characteristic curves with respective area under the curves (AUCs) and performed metaregression and sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 19 studies on detection of oesophageal squamous cell neoplasia (ESCN) or Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) or gastric adenocarcinoma (GCA) were included with 218, 445, 453 patients and 7976, 2340, 13 562 images, respectively. AI-sensitivity/specificity/PPV/NPV/positive likelihood ratio/negative likelihood ratio for UGI neoplasia detection were 90% (CI 85% to 94%)/89% (CI 85% to 92%)/87% (CI 83% to 91%)/91% (CI 87% to 94%)/8.2 (CI 5.7 to 11.7)/0.111 (CI 0.071 to 0.175), respectively, with an overall AUC of 0.95 (CI 0.93 to 0.97). No difference in AI performance across ESCN, BERN and GCA was found, AUC being 0.94 (CI 0.52 to 0.99), 0.96 (CI 0.95 to 0.98), 0.93 (CI 0.83 to 0.99), respectively. Overall, study quality was low, with high risk of selection bias. No significant publication bias was found. CONCLUSION: We found a high overall AI accuracy for the diagnosis of any neoplastic lesion of the UGI tract that was independent of the underlying condition. This may be expected to substantially reduce the miss rate of precancerous lesions and early cancer when implemented in clinical practice.