Updates to the modern diagnosis of GERD: Lyon consensus 2.0.

The Lyon Consensus provides conclusive criteria for and against the diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and adjunctive metrics that consolidate or refute GERD diagnosis when primary criteria are borderline or inconclusive. An international core and working group was assembled to evaluate research since publication of the original Lyon Consensus, and to vote on statements collaboratively developed to update criteria. The Lyon Consensus 2.0 provides a modern definition of actionable GERD, where evidence from oesophageal testing supports revising, escalating or personalising GERD management for the symptomatic patient. Symptoms that have a high versus low likelihood of relationship to reflux episodes are described. Unproven versus proven GERD define diagnostic strategies and testing options. Patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD) are studied using prolonged wireless pH monitoring or catheter-based pH or pH-monitoring off antisecretory medication, while patients with conclusive GERD evidence (proven GERD) and persisting symptoms are evaluated using pH-impedance monitoring while on optimised antisecretory therapy. The major changes from the original Lyon Consensus criteria include establishment of Los Angeles grade B oesophagitis as conclusive GERD evidence, description of metrics and thresholds to be used with prolonged wireless pH monitoring, and inclusion of parameters useful in diagnosis of refractory GERD when testing is performed on antisecretory therapy in proven GERD. Criteria that have not performed well in the diagnosis of actionable GERD have been retired. Personalisation of investigation and management to each patient's unique presentation will optimise GERD diagnosis and management.

The Role of High-Resolution Manometry Prior to and Following Antireflux Surgery: The Padova Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the last two decades the development of high-resolution manometry (HRM) has changed and revolutionized the diagnostic assessment of patients complain foregut symptoms. The role of HRM before and after antireflux procedure remains unclear, especially in surgical practice, where a clear understanding of esophageal physiology and hiatus anatomy is essential for optimal outcome of antireflux surgery (ARS). Surgeons and gastroenterologists (GIs) agree that assessing patients following antireflux procedures can be challenging. Although endoscopy and barium-swallow can reveal anatomic abnormalities, physiologic information on HRM allowing insight into the cause of eventually recurrent symptoms could be key to clinical decision making. METHOD: A multi-disciplinary international working group (14 surgeons and 15 GIs) collaborated to develop consensus on the role of HRM pre- and post- ARS, and to develop a postoperative classification to interpret HRM findings. The method utilized was detailed literature review to develop statements, and the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) to assess agreement with the statements. Only statements with an approval rate >80% or a final ranking with a median score of 7 were accepted in the consensus. The working groups evaluated the role of HRM prior to ARS and the role of HRM following ARS. CONCLUSION: This international initiative developed by surgeons and GIs together, summarizes the state of our knowledge of the use of HRM pre- and post-ARS. The Padova Classification was developed to facilitate the interpretation of HRM studies of patients underwent ARS.

Factors associated with early failure of peroral endoscopic myotomy in achalasia.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Achalasia can be treated very effectively with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), but factors associated with early failure remain to be determined, especially in European cohorts. METHODS: All consecutive adult patients who underwent a first POEM to treat primary achalasia were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Early failure was defined by an Eckardt score (ES) >3 at 3 months after POEM. When evaluating factors predictive of early failure, 2 cohorts were considered: one consisted of the total population, for whom only basic variables were collected, and the other a cohort built for a case-control study that included matched early-failure and early-success patients (ratio, 1:2). RESULTS: Among 746 patients, the early failure rate was 9.4%. Predictive factors were age ≤45 years (P = .019), achalasia types I and III (P < .001), and the development of a severe adverse event during the procedure (P = .023). In the case-control study, the only additional independent risk factor for early failure was a high pre-POEM ES (P = .001). Only the retrosternal pain subscore was significantly associated with the early failure rate. CONCLUSION: The early failure rate of POEM used to treat primary achalasia is <10%. Younger age, type I/III achalasia, and a high pre-POEM ES were significantly associated with failure.

Value of pH Impedance Monitoring While on Twice-Daily Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy to Identify Need for Escalation of Reflux Management.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acid exposure time (AET) and reflux episode thresholds from the Lyon Consensus may not apply for pH impedance studies performed while on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. We aimed to determine metrics from "on PPI" pH impedance studies predicting need for escalation of therapy. METHODS: De-identified pH impedance studies performed while on twice-daily PPI (Diversatek, Boulder, CO) in healthy volunteers (n = 66, median age 37.5 years, 43.9% female), and patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (European heartburn-predominant cohort: n = 43, median age 57.0 years, 55.8% female; North American regurgitation-predominant cohort: n = 42, median age 41.6 years, 42.9% female) were analyzed. Median values and interquartile ranges for pH impedance metrics in healthy volunteers were compared with proven GERD patients with and without 50% symptom improvement on validated measures. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses identified optimal thresholds predicting symptom response. RESULTS: Both conventional and novel reflux metrics were similar between PPI responders and nonresponders (P ≥ .1 for each) despite differences from healthy volunteers. Combinations of metrics associated with conclusively abnormal reflux burden (AET >4%, >80 reflux episodes) were seen in 32.6% and 40.5% of heartburn and regurgitation-predominant patients, respectively, 57.1% and 82.4% of whom reported nonresponse; and 85% with these metrics improved with invasive GERD management. On ROC analysis, AET threshold of 0.5% modestly predicted nonresponse (sensitivity, 0.62; specificity, 0.51; P = .22), and 40 reflux episodes had better performance characteristics (sensitivity, 0.80; specificity, 0.51; P = .002); 79% with these metrics improved with invasive GERD management. CONCLUSION: Combinations of abnormal "on PPI" pH impedance metrics are associated with PPI nonresponse in proven GERD patients, and can be targeted for treatment escalation, including surgery, particularly in regurgitation-predominant GERD.

Impact of Gastric Electrical Stimulation on Economic Burden of Refractory Vomiting: A French Nationwide Multicentre Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Medico-economic data of patients suffering from chronic nausea and vomiting are lacking. In these patients, gastric electrical stimulation (GES) is an effective, but costly treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety and medico-economic impact of Enterra therapy in patients with chronic medically refractory nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from patients with medically refractory nausea and/or vomiting, implanted with an Enterra device and followed for two years. Gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) score, vomiting frequency, nutritional status and safety were evaluated. Direct and indirect expenditure data were prospectively collected in diaries. RESULTS: Complete clinical data were available for142 patients (60 diabetic, 82 non-diabetic) and medico-economic data were available for 96 patients (36 diabetic, 60 non-diabetic), 24 months after implantation. GIQLI score increased by 12.1 ± 25.0 points (p < .001), with a more significant improvement in non-diabetic than in diabetic patients (+15.8 ± 25.0 points, p < .001 versus 7.3 ± 24.5 points, p = .027, respectively). The proportion of patients vomiting less than once per month increased by 25.5% (p < .001). Hospitalisations, time off work and transport were the main sources of costs. Enterra therapy decreased mean overall healthcare costs from 8873 US$ to 5525 US$ /patient/year (p = .001), representing a saving of 3348 US$ per patient and per year. Savings were greater for diabetic patients (4096 US$ /patient/year) than for non-diabetic patients (2900 US$ /patient/year). CONCLUSIONS: Enterra therapy is an effective, safe and cost-effective option for patients with refractory nausea and vomiting. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT00903799.

Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation or surveillance in patients with Barrett's oesophagus with confirmed low-grade dysplasia: a multicentre randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: Due to an annual progression rate of Barrett's oesophagus (BO) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) between 9% and 13% per year endoscopic ablation therapy is preferred to surveillance. Since this recommendation is based on only one randomised trial, we aimed at checking these results by another multicentre randomised trial with a similar design. DESIGN: A prospective randomised study was performed in 14 centres comparing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (maximum of 4 sessions) to annual endoscopic surveillance, including patients with a confirmed diagnosis of BO with LGD. Primary outcome was the prevalence of LGD at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of LGD at 1 year, the complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) at 3 years, the rate of neoplastic progression at 3 years and the treatment-related morbidity. RESULTS: 125 patients were initially included, of whom 82 with confirmed LGD (76 men, mean age 62.3 years) were finally randomised, 40 patients in the RFA and 42 in the surveillance group. At 3 years, CE-IM rates were 35% vs 0% in the RFA and surveillance groups, respectively (p<0.001). At the same time, the prevalence LGD was 34.3% (95% CI 18.6 to 50.0) in the RFA group vs 58.1% (95% CI 40.7 to 75.4) in the surveillance group (OR=0.38 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.02), p=0.05). Neoplastic progression was found in 12.5% (RFA) vs 26.2% (surveillance; p=0.15). The complication rate was maximal after the first RFA treatment (16.9%). CONCLUSION: RFA modestly reduced the prevalence of LGD as well as progression risk at 3 years. The risk-benefit balance of endoscopic ablation therapy should therefore be carefully weighted against surveillance in patients with BO with confirmed LGD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01360541.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Functional Heartburn: Expert Review.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: A diagnosis of functional heartburn should be considered when retrosternal burning pain or discomfort persists despite maximal (double-dose) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy taken appropriately before meals during a 3-month period. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: A diagnosis of functional heartburn requires upper endoscopy with esophageal biopsies to rule out anatomic and mucosal abnormalities, esophageal high-resolution manometry to rule out major motor disorders, and pH monitoring off PPI therapy (or pH-impedance monitoring on therapy in patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease [GERD]), to document physiologic levels of esophageal acid exposure in the distal esophagus with absence of reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Overlap of functional heartburn with proven GERD is diagnosed according to Rome IV criteria when heartburn persists despite maximal PPI therapy in patients with history of proven GERD (ie, positive pH study, erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, or esophageal ulcer), and pH impedance testing on PPI therapy demonstrates physiologic acid exposure without reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: PPIs have no therapeutic value in functional heartburn, the exception being proven GERD that overlaps with functional heartburn. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Neuromodulators, including tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tegaserod, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists have benefit as either primary therapy in functional heartburn or as add-on therapy in functional heartburn that overlaps with proven GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Based on available evidence, acupuncture and hypnotherapy may have benefit as monotherapy in functional heartburn, or as adjunctive therapy combined with other therapeutic modalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Based on available evidence, anti-reflux surgery and endoscopic GERD treatment modalities have no therapeutic benefit in functional heartburn and should not be recommended.

Evolution of Endoscopic Lesions in Steroid-Refractory Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis Responding to Infliximab or Cyclosporine.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Few data on the evolution of endoscopic findings are available in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC). The aim of this study was to describe this evolution in a prospective cohort. METHODS: Patients admitted for a steroid-refractory ASUC and included in a randomized trial comparing infliximab and cyclosporine were eligible if they achieved steroid-free clinical remission at day 98. Flexible sigmoidoscopies were performed at baseline, days 7, 42 and 98. Ulcerative colitis endoscopic index of severity (UCEIS) and its sub-scores - vascular pattern, bleeding and ulceration/erosion - were post-hoc calculated. Global endoscopic remission was defined by a UCEIS of 0, and partial endoscopic remission by any UCEIS sub-score of 0. RESULTS: Among the 55 patients analyzed (29 infliximab and 26 cyclosporine), 49 (83%) had UCEIS ≥6 at baseline at baseline. Partial endoscopic remission rates were higher for bleeding than for vascular pattern and for ulcerations/erosions at day 7 (20% vs. 4% and 5% (n = 55); p = .004 and p=.04), for bleeding and ulceration/erosion than for vascular pattern at day 42 [63% and 65% vs. 33% (n=54); p<.001 for both] and at day 98 [78% and 92% vs. 56% (n = 50); p = .007 and p < .001]. Global endoscopic remission rates at day 98 were higher in patients treated with infliximab than with cyclosporine [73% vs. 25% (n = 26 and 24); p < .001]. CONCLUSION: In steroid-refractory ASUC patients responding to a second-line medical therapy, endoscopic remission process started with bleeding remission and was not achieved in half the patients at day 98 for vascular pattern. Infliximab provided a higher endoscopic remission rate than cyclosporine at day 98.

Gastric Electrical Stimulation Reduces Refractory Vomiting in a Randomized Crossover Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There have been conflicting results from trials of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for treatment of refractory vomiting, associated or not with gastroparesis. We performed a large, multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial with crossover to study the efficacy of GES in patients with refractory vomiting, with or without gastroparesis. METHODS: For 4 months, we assessed symptoms in 172 patients (66% women; mean age ± standard deviation, 45 ± 12 years; 133 with gastroparesis) with chronic (>12 months) of refractory vomiting (idiopathic, associated with a type 1 or 2 diabetes, or postsurgical). A GES device was implanted and left unactivated until patients were randomly assigned, in a double-blind manner, to groups that received 4 months of stimulation parameters (14 Hz, 5 mA, pulses of 330 µs) or no stimulation (control); 149 patients then crossed over to the other group for 4 months. Patients were examined at the end of each 4-month period (at 5 and 9 months after implantation). Primary endpoints were vomiting score, ranging from 0 (daily vomiting) to 4 (no vomiting), and the quality of life, assessed by the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index scoring system. Secondary endpoints were changes in other digestive symptoms, nutritional status, gastric emptying, and control of diabetes. RESULTS: During both phases of the crossover study, vomiting scores were higher in the group with the device on (median score, 2) than the control group (median score, 1; P < .001), in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Vomiting scores increased significantly when the device was ON in patients with delayed (P < .01) or normal gastric emptying (P = .05). Gastric emptying was not accelerated during the ON period compared with the OFF period. Having the GES turned on was not associated with increased quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized crossover study, we found that GES reduced the frequency of refractory vomiting in patients with and without diabetes, although it did not accelerate gastric emptying or increase of quality of life. Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT00903799.

A novel bowel rehabilitation programme after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the BOREAL pilot study.

AIM: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) following sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer has a high prevalence, with an impact on long-term bowel dysfunction and quality of life. We designed the bowel rehabilitation programme (BOREAL) as a proactive strategy to assess and treat patients with LARS. The BOREAL programme consists of a stepwise approach of escalating treatments: medical management (steps 0-1), pelvic floor physiotherapy, biofeedback and transanal irrigation (step 2), sacral nerve neuromodulation (step 3), percutaneous endoscopic caecostomy and anterograde enema (step 4) and definitive colostomy (step 5). METHODS: A pilot study was undertaken to assess the feasibility of collecting LARS data routinely with the parallel implementation of the BOREAL programme. All patients who underwent total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between February 2017 and March 2019 were included. LARS was assessed using the LARS score and the Wexner Faecal Incontinence score at 30 days and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postoperatively. A good functional result was considered to be a combined LARS score <20 and/or a Wexner score <4. RESULTS: In all, 137 patients were included. Overall compliance with the BOREAL programme was 72.9%. Major LARS decreased from 48% at 30 days postoperatively to 12% at 12 months, with a concomitant improvement in overall good function from 33% to 77%, P < 0.001. The majority of patients (n = 106, 77%) required medical management of their LARS. CONCLUSION: The BOREAL programme demonstrates the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of implementing a responsive, stepwise programme for detecting and treating LARS.

Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome - the MANUEL project.

AIM: Little is known about the pathophysiology of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), and evidence concerning the management of patients diagnosed with this condition is scarce. The aim of the LARS Expert Advisory Panel was to develop practical guidance for healthcare professionals dealing with LARS. METHOD: The 'Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome' (MANUEL) project was promoted by a team of eight experts in the assessment and management of patients with LARS. After a face-to-face meeting, a strategy was agreed to create a comprehensive, practical guide covering all aspects that were felt to be clinically relevant. Eight themes were decided upon and working groups established. Each working group generated a draft; these were collated by another collaborator into a manuscript, after a conference call. This was circulated among the collaborators, and it was revised following the comments received. A lay patient revised the manuscript, and contributed to a section containing a patient's perspective. The manuscript was again circulated and finalized. A final teleconference was held at the end of the project. RESULTS: The guidance covers all aspects of LARS management, from pathophysiology, to assessment and management. Given the lack of sound evidence and the often poor quality of the studies, most of the recommendations and conclusions are based on the opinions of the experts. CONCLUSIONS: The MANUEL project provides an up-to-date practical summary of the available evidence concerning LARS, with useful directions for healthcare professional and patients suffering from this debilitating condition.

Normal values and regional differences in oesophageal impedance-pH metrics: a consensus analysis of impedance-pH studies from around the world.

OBJECTIVE: Limitations of existing impedance-pH thresholds include small sample size of normative studies, inclusion of artefactual pH drops and incorrect identification of impedance reflux events. We aimed to obtain new impedance-pH thresholds from expert consensus analysis of tracings from a large number of healthy subjects. DESIGN: Of 541 studies performed worldwide using two different systems (Diversatek, USA, and Laborie, Netherlands), 150 tracings with oesophageal diagnoses, behavioural disorders and study-related artefacts were excluded. The remainder studies were subject to two reviewer consensus analysis, in-person or through video conference, consisting of editing meals and pH drops, identification of impedance reflux and postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) using strict pre-established criteria and measurement of distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI). RESULTS: Consensus analysis was performed in 391 tracings (age 32.7 years, range 18-71, 54.2% female). Normative thresholds were significantly different between Diversatek and Laborie (total acid exposure time: 2.8% and 5%; reflux episodes: 55 and 78; MNBI at 3 cm: 1400 and 1500 ohms, at 5 cm: 1400 and 1800 ohms). Males had higher acid exposure, more reflux episodes and lower MNBI. Significant regional differences were identified, including higher PSPW scores in Western countries, and higher MNBI in Asia using Diversatek, and higher acid exposure in the Netherlands, higher MNBI in Asia and South Africa, and lower MNBI in Turkey using Laborie. CONCLUSION: Normal impedance-pH monitoring thresholds have regional and system-related differences. Clinical interpretation needs to use normal thresholds valid for the system used and world region, following careful editing of the tracings.

Efficacy of per-oral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of non-achalasia esophageal motor disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is effective in achalasia. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy of POEM in non-achalasia esophageal motility disorders (NAEMD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with NAEMD diagnosed by high-resolution manometry were included in a retrospective multicentric study. For each individual case, two controls paired on gender and age were matched: one with type I/II achalasia and one with type III achalasia. The clinical response, defined by an Eckardt score ≤ 3, was assessed at 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Ninety patients (mean age 66 years, 57 men) were included, 30 patients with NAEMD (13 jackhammer esophagus, 6 spastic esophageal disorders, 4 nutcracker esophagus, and 7 esophagogastric junction obstruction), 30 patients with type I-II achalasia, and 30 patients with type III achalasia. The 3-month response rates were 80% (24/30), 90% (27/30), and 100% (30/30) in NAEMD, type I-II achalasia and type III achalasia, respectively (p < 0.01). Eckardt scores improved from preoperative baseline in all groups (median scores 2.0 after POEM vs. 6.5 before POEM, 1.3 vs. 7.2, and 0.5 vs. 6.1 in NAEMD, type I//I and Type III, respectively). No predictive factor of response was identified. In NAEMD patients, there was a significant improvement of dysphagia, regurgitation, and chest pain scores. The 6-month response rates were 63.2% (12/19), 95.5% (21/22), and 87.0% (20/23) in NAEMD, type I-II achalasia and type III achalasia, respectively (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Although less effective than in achalasia, POEM is an effective treatment for NAEMD. Long-term follow-up data are needed to further confirm that POEM may be a valid treatment of NAEMD.

Altered sleep quality is associated with Crohn's disease activity: an actimetry study.

BACKGROUND: Sleep is involved in the regulation of inflammation, healing, and digestion. The pathophysiology of Crohn's disease (CD) is unclear, and the role of sleep disturbances has recently been suggested. OBJECTIVE: The present study investigated a putative association between sleep disturbances and CD activity. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational monocenter translational study, recruiting major CD patients from 2013 to 2015. Disease activity was assessed by the Harvey-Bradshaw index and the CD activity index. Objective sleep quantity and quality were measured by wrist actigraphy over a period of 7 days. The primary objective was to look for an association between wrist actigraphy parameters and CD activity. RESULTS: Thirty-four CD patients, including 14 with active disease and 20 in remission, were included. Sleep efficiency measured by wrist actigraphy was lower in patients with active CD compared to patients in remission. Wake after sleep onset time best predicted CD activity with an AUROC of 0.83. Patients with active CD were more frequently characterized as "poor sleepers" and frequently suffered from excessive daytime sleepiness. CONCLUSION: Sleep efficiency is lower in patients with active CD than in those in remission. Further studies aimed at better characterizing CD patients' sleep are warranted.

How to select patients for antireflux surgery? The ICARUS guidelines (international consensus regarding preoperative examinations and clinical characteristics assessment to select adult patients for antireflux surgery).

OBJECTIVE: Antireflux surgery can be proposed in patients with GORD, especially when proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use leads to incomplete symptom improvement. However, to date, international consensus guidelines on the clinical criteria and additional technical examinations used in patient selection for antireflux surgery are lacking. We aimed at generating key recommendations in the selection of patients for antireflux surgery. DESIGN: We included 35 international experts (gastroenterologists, surgeons and physiologists) in a Delphi process and developed 37 statements that were revised by the Consensus Group, to start the Delphi process. Three voting rounds followed where each statement was presented with the evidence summary. The panel indicated the degree of agreement for the statement. When 80% of the Consensus Group agreed (A+/A) with a statement, this was defined as consensus. All votes were mutually anonymous. RESULTS: Patients with heartburn with a satisfactory response to PPIs, patients with a hiatal hernia (HH), patients with oesophagitis Los Angeles (LA) grade B or higher and patients with Barrett's oesophagus are good candidates for antireflux surgery. An endoscopy prior to antireflux surgery is mandatory and a barium swallow should be performed in patients with suspicion of a HH or short oesophagus. Oesophageal manometry is mandatory to rule out major motility disorders. Finally, oesophageal pH (±impedance) monitoring of PPI is mandatory to select patients for antireflux surgery, if endoscopy is negative for unequivocal reflux oesophagitis. CONCLUSION: With the ICARUS guidelines, we generated key recommendations for selection of patients for antireflux surgery.

Endoscopic Phenotype of Monoallelic Carriers of MUTYH Gene Mutations in the Family of Polyposis Patients: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Almost no prospective data on endoscopy in MUTYH monoallelic carriers are available. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to define the prevalence of colorectal and duodenal adenomas in a population of people presenting with a single mutation of the MUTYH gene and being first-degree relatives of biallelic MUTYH mutation carriers. DESIGN: This study is a prospective cohort evaluation. PATIENTS: Patients were first-degree relatives of a patient who had polyposis with biallelic MUTYH mutation and carrying a single gene mutation of the gene from 12 French centers. SETTINGS: This is a multicenter study. INTERVENTION: Detailed data on life habits (tobacco, alcohol, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), extraintestinal manifestations, and germline analysis were recorded. Complete endoscopic evaluation (colonoscopy and upper endoscopy) with chromoendoscopy was performed. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were prospectively included (34 women (55%), mean age of 54, range 30-70 years). Thirty-two patients (52%) presented with colorectal polyps at colonoscopy. Of these patients with polyps, 15 (25%) had only adenomas, 8 (13%) had only hyperplastic polyps, 1 (1%) had sessile serrated adenomas, and 8 (13%) had adenomas and/or sessile serrated adenomas. We detected, in total, 29 adenomas with low-grade dysplasia, 5 adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, and 6 sessile serrated adenomas. Fourteen patients (23%) presented with a single adenoma, and 10 (16%) had 1 to 5 adenomas. No patient had more than 5 adenomas. At upper endoscopy, 3 had a limited number of fundic gland polyps; none had duodenal adenomas. The 2 main missense mutations c.1145G>A, p.Gly382Asp and c.494A>G, p.Tyr165Cys were associated with the development of colorectal adenomas/serrated polyps in these monoallelic carriers. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study provides unique prospective data suggesting that monoallelic mutation carriers related to patients with polyposis show no colorectal polyposis and have very limited upper GI manifestations justifying an endoscopic follow-up. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A862.

Anterograde colonic irrigations by percutaneous endoscopic caecostomy in refractory colorectal functional disorders.

PURPOSE: In case reports or small studies, percutaneous endoscopic caecostomy (PEC) has been proposed as an alternative to the Malone intervention to perform antegrade colonic enemas. Our goal was to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and tolerance of PEC in a large group of patients with refractory colorectal functional disorders. METHODS: From September 2006 to April 2014, all patients undergoing PEC for constipation, fecal incontinence, and incontinence after rectal resection in two expert centers were studied. The PEC procedure consisted in anchoring the caecum to the abdominal wall (caecopexy) and placing a specifically designed tube in the colonic lumen to perform antegrade enemas. The quality of life (GIQLI), constipation (Kess), and incontinence (Cleveland) scores were assessed before PEC and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients were included. GIQLI scores were significantly improved in constipation group (n = 43), incontinence group (n = 19), and rectal resection group (n = 10). In the constipation group, Kess score decreased from 25.9 before PEC to 20.6 at 2 years (p = 0.01). In the incontinence and post-rectal resection groups, Cleveland scores decreased from 14.3 before PEC to 2.7 at 6 months (p = 0.01) and to 10.4 at 2 years (p = 0.04). Overall, PEC was considered successful by patients in 58%, 74%, and 90% of cases, in constipation, incontinence, and rectal resection groups, respectively. Chronic pain (52%) at the catheter site was the most frequent complication. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous endoscopic caecostomy for antegrade colonic enemas improves significantly the quality of life of patients with colorectal disorder refractory to medical treatment.

Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus.

Clinical history, questionnaire data and response to antisecretory therapy are insufficient to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD in isolation, but are of value in determining need for further investigation. Conclusive evidence for reflux on oesophageal testing include advanced grade erosive oesophagitis (LA grades C and D), long-segment Barrett's mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) >6% on ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring. A normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, but provides supportive evidence refuting GERD in conjunction with distal AET <4% and <40 reflux episodes on pH-impedance monitoring off proton pump inhibitors. Reflux-symptom association on ambulatory reflux monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux triggered symptoms, and may predict a better treatment outcome when present. When endoscopy and pH or pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (histopathology scores, dilated intercellular spaces), motor evaluation (hypotensive lower oesophageal sphincter, hiatus hernia and oesophageal body hypomotility on high-resolution manometry) and novel impedance metrics (baseline impedance, postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index) can add confidence for a GERD diagnosis; however, diagnosis cannot be based on these findings alone. An assessment of anatomy, motor function, reflux burden and symptomatic phenotype will therefore help direct management. Future GERD management strategies should focus on defining individual patient phenotypes based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the oesophagogastric junction and psychometrics defining symptomatic presentations.

Extraesophageal Symptoms and Diseases Attributed to GERD: Where is the Pendulum Swinging Now?

The purpose of this review is to outline the recent developments in the field of extraesophageal reflux disease and provide clinically relevant recommendations. The recommendations outlined in this review are based on expert opinion and on relevant publications from PubMed and EMbase. The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association proposes the following recommendations: Best Practice Advice 1: The role of a gastroenterologist in patients referred for evaluation of suspected extra esophageal symptom is to assess for gastroesophageal etiologies that could contribute to the presenting symptoms. Best Practice Advice 2: Non-GI evaluations by ENT, pulmonary and/or allergy are essential and often should be performed initially in most patients as the cause of the extraesophageal symptom is commonly multifactorial or not esophageal in origin. Best Practice Advice 3: Empiric therapy with aggressive acid suppression for 6-8 weeks with special focus on response of the extraesophageal symptoms can help in assessing association between reflux and extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 4: No single testing methodology exists to definitively identify reflux as the etiology for the suspected extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 5: Constellation of patient presentation, diagnostic test results and response to therapy should be employed in the determination of reflux as a possible etiology in extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 6: Testing may need to be off or on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy depending on patients' presenting demographics and symptoms in assessing the likelihood of abnormal gastroesophageal reflux. A. On therapy testing may be considered in those with high probability of baseline reflux (those with previous esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus or abnormal pH). B. Off therapy testing may be considered in those with low probability of baseline reflux with the goal of identifying moderate to severe reflux at baseline. Best Practice Advice 7: Lack of response to aggressive acid suppressive therapy combined with normal pH testing off therapy or impedance-pH testing on therapy significantly reduces the likelihood that reflux is a contributing etiology in presenting extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 8: Surgical fundoplication is discouraged in those with extra esophageal reflux symptoms unresponsive to aggressive PPI therapy. Best Practice Advice 9: Fundoplication should only be considered in those with a mechanical defect (e.g., hiatal hernia), moderate to severe reflux at baseline off PPI therapy who have continued reflux despite PPI therapy and have failed more conservative non-GI treatments.

Antegrade Enema After Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: The Last Chance to Avoid Definitive Colostomy for Refractory Low Anterior Resection Syndrome and Fecal Incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision and preoperative radiotherapy in mid and low rectal cancer allow us to achieve very good oncological results. However, major and refractory low anterior resection syndrome and fecal incontinence alter the quality of life of patients with a long expected life span. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the functional results of patients treated by antegrade enema for refractory low anterior resection syndrome and fecal incontinence after total mesorectal excision. DESIGN: This is a prospective monocentric study from 2012 to 2016. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic cecostomy for refractory low anterior resection syndrome and fecal incontinence after total mesorectal excision were prospectively analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed the morbidity of the procedure and compared low anterior resection syndrome score, Wexner score, and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index before and after the use of antegrade enema. RESULTS: Of 25 patients treated by antegrade enema over the study period, 6 (24%) had a low anterior resection, 18 (72%) had a coloanal anastomosis, and 1 (4%) had a perineal colostomy. Postoperatively, the rate of local abscess was 8%, all treated by antibiotics. Low anterior resection syndrome score (33 vs 4, p < 0.001), Wexner score (16 vs 4, p <0.001), and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (73 vs 104, p < 0.001) were all significantly improved after antegrade enema. The 2 main symptoms reported by patients were sweating (28%) and local pain (36%). At the end of the follow-up, 16% (n = 4) catheters were removed, and the rate of definitive colostomy was 12% (n = 3). LIMITATIONS: The main limitations of this study are the monocentric features and the sample size. CONCLUSION: Antegrade enema for major and refractory low anterior resection syndrome and fecal incontinence after total mesorectal excision appears to be a promising treatment to avoid definitive colostomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A608.