Minimizing endoscopist facial exposure to droplets: Optimal patient-endoscopist distance and use of a barrier device.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Minimizing endoscopist exposure to bodily fluids is important for reducing the risk of infection transmission. This study investigated the patient-endoscopist vertical distance necessary to minimize an endoscopist's facial exposure to a patient's visible droplets during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and the ability of a new device to prevent droplets from reaching the endoscopist's face. METHODS: A model was developed to simulate a patient experiencing a forceful cough during an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with a model endoscopist. Fluorescent dye was expelled from the model patient's mouth towards the model endoscopist during simulated coughs; dye adhesion to the model endoscopist's face was evaluated using ultraviolet light. The simulation was repeated with the model patient positioned 70-100 cm above the floor, with and without a barrier to shield the patient's face. The accuracy of the cough simulation model and the relationship between patient-endoscopist vertical distance and endoscopist's facial exposure were evaluated. RESULTS: The flow dynamics of the cough simulation model were similar to that of an actual human cough. There was a significant inverse correlation between the patient-endoscopist vertical distance and the model endoscopist's facial exposure, with positive exposures decreasing from 87% at 70 cm to 0% at 100 cm (P < 0.001). The barrier device prevented facial exposure to droplets at all distances. CONCLUSIONS: We found that positioning the patient at least 100 cm below the top of the endoscopist's head or using a barrier device minimized the endoscopist's facial exposure to visible droplets during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Attending Training Courses on Barrett's Esophagus Improves Adherence to Guidelines: A Survey from the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Little is known on practice patterns of endoscopists for the management of Barrett's esophagus (BE) over the last decade. AIMS: Our aim was to assess practice patterns of endoscopists for the diagnosis, surveillance and treatment of BE. METHODS: All members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited to participate to a questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire included questions on demographic and professional characteristics, and on diagnosis and management strategies for BE. RESULTS: Of the 883 SIED members, 259 (31.1%) completed the questionnaire. Of these, 73% were males, 42.9% had > 50 years of age and 68.7% practiced in community hospitals. The majority (82.9%) of participants stated to use the Prague classification; however 34.5% did not use the top of gastric folds to identify the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ); only 51.4% used advanced endoscopy imaging routinely. Almost all respondents practiced endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic BE, but 43.7% performed eradication in selected cases and 30% practiced surveillance every 1-2 years. The majority of endoscopists managed low-grade dysplasia with surveillance (79.1%) and high-grade dysplasia with ablation (77.1%). Attending a training course on BE in the previous 5 years was significantly associated with the use of the Prague classification (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.9-12.1), the top of gastric folds as landmark for the GEJ (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.27-4.74) and advanced imaging endoscopic techniques (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.53-7.29). CONCLUSIONS: Practice patterns for management of BE among endoscopists are variable. Attending training courses on BE improves adherence to guidelines.

International consensus statements for endoscopic management of distal biliary stricture.

Distal biliary strictures (DBS) are common and may be caused by both malignant and benign pathologies. While endoscopic procedures play a major role in their management, a comprehensive review of the subject is still lacking. Our consensus statements were formulated by a group of expert Asian pancreatico-biliary interventional endoscopists, following a proposal from the Digestive Endoscopy Society of Taiwan, the Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and the Tokyo Conference of Asian Pancreato-biliary Interventional Endoscopy. Based on a literature review utilizing Medline, Cochrane library, and Embase databases, a total of 19 consensus statements on DBS were made on diagnosis, endoscopic drainage, benign biliary stricture, malignant biliary stricture, and management of recurrent biliary obstruction and other complications. Our consensus statements provide comprehensive guidance for the endoscopic management of DBS.

Testing of Helicobacter pylori by Endoscopic Biopsy: The Clinical Dilemma of Suppressive Conditions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Testing for Helicobacter pylori is frequently conducted during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Suppressive conditions such as the intake of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), preceded antibiotic treatment or recent upper gastrointestinal bleeding impair H. pylori test quality. The aim of our study was to evaluate the frequency and pattern of H. pylori suppressive conditions in a large patient collective undergoing elective EGD in a German university hospital. METHODS: The trial was performed as a single-center study. Only elective EGD from inpatients and outpatients were included. Prior to endoscopy, H. pylori suppressive conditions were collected using a standardized questionnaire. If H. pylori testing was indicated according to the guidelines, always both histology and helicobacter urease test were performed in analogy to the Sydney classification. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred and thirty-one patients were included (median 61 years, 36.0% outpatients, 64.0% inpatients). Overall, 76.5% of patients were under H. pylori suppressive conditions. The main suppressive condition was the intake of PPIs (70.7%). In 819 (50.2%) of all included cases, H. pylori testing was performed. The following were the results: 17.3% (142) had a positive H. pylori testing and 82.7% (677) were negative. Of those with negative result, 70.0% were tested under suppressive conditions. CONCLUSION: Guidelines recommend H. pylori testing under non-suppressive conditions. However, this does not always meet the clinical practice. Our data show that de facto, many patients undergoing elective EGD are tested for H. pylori under suppressive conditions coming along with a higher risk of potentially false negative results. Particularly, concerning this issue, further research is needed to improve and clarify everyday clinical practice.

Mucosal Schwann cell hamartoma of the gastroesophageal junction: A series of 6 cases and comparison with colorectal counterpart.

Mucosal Schwann cell hamartoma (MSCH) is an uncommon neural lesion characterized by an ill-defined proliferation of S100-positive Schwann cells in the lamina propria, with reported cases exclusively occurring in the colorectum. Here we describe the first series of MSCHs arising in the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and discuss their clinicopathologic features in comparison with their colorectal counterparts. We searched the UCLA pathology database from 01/2014 to 12/2018 to identify cases carrying the diagnosis of MSCH. A total of 48 cases (45 in-house, 3 consults) of colorectal MSCHs and 6 cases (1 in-house, 5 consults) of GEJ MSCHs were identified. For GEJ MSCHs, there were 4 males and 2 females with an average age of 70.2 years (range: 57-76 years). Clinical indications for endoscopy included history of gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 2), heartburn (n = 2), dysphagia (n = 1), and iron deficiency anemia (n = 1). Endoscopic findings at the GEJ were available for 5 patients including irregular Z-line (n = 3), mild nodular carditis (n = 1), and normal (n = 1). None of them showed a polyp or nodule. The mean size of the lesion was 2.8 mm (range: 2-4 mm) microscopically. None of the colorectal or GEJ MSCH cases had an association with inherited syndromes. In conclusion, MSCH of the gastrointestinal tract is predominantly seen in the colorectum, but also infrequently seen in the GEJ. GEJ MSCH shares histologic and immunohistochemical features with its colorectal counterpart, but is usually an incidental finding with no endoscopically visible lesion. As there is no syndromic association with MSCH, additional treatment, work-up and follow-up are unnecessary.

Principles and practice to facilitate complete photodocumentation of the upper gastrointestinal tract: World Endoscopy Organization position statement.

Although esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the most commonly used procedure in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, the method of esophageal, gastric and duodenal mucosa photodocumentation varies considerably worldwide. One probable explanation is that for generations, EGD has primarily been taught by GI faculty and instructors based on their perceptions and experience, which has resulted in EGD being a non-standardized procedure. Currently, the procedure is facing a challenging scenario as endoscopy societies are implementing procedure-associated quality indicators aiming for best practice among practitioners and evidence-based care for patients. Contrary to colonoscopy where cecum landmarks photodocumentation is considered proof of completeness, there are currently no reliable performance measures to gauge the completeness of an upper endoscopy nor guidance for complete photodocumentation. This World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) position statement aims to provide practical guidance to practitioners to carry out complete EGD photodocumentation. Hence, an international group of experts from the WEO Upper GI Cancer Committee formulated the following document using the body of evidence established through literature reviews, expert opinions, and other scientific sources. The group acknowledged that although the procedure should be feasible in any facility, what is needed to achieve a global shift on the concept of completeness is a common written statement of agreement on its potential impact and added value. This best practice statement offers endoscopists principles and practical guidance in order to carry out complete photodocumentation from the hypopharynx to the second duodenal portion.

Remaining challenges for the noninvasive diagnosis of esophageal varices in liver cirrhosis.

Although endoscopy is the recommended method for detecting esophageal varices, noninvasive methods for diagnosing esophageal varices are needed to avoid unnecessary invasive endoscopic examinations. In recent years, many studies have been performed to predict the presence of high-risk varices in noninvasive ways. The most widely used tools for noninvasive screening for esophageal varices are the Baveno VI and expanded Baveno VI criteria. Even these accepted criteria are not 100% accurate and have some limitations. Here, we summarize the current literature on the noninvasive diagnosis of esophageal varices in liver cirrhosis patients and highlight the remaining issues.

Corrosive ingestion managements in children.

Corrosive (caustic) material ingestion remains a major health issue, particularly in developing countries. The management strategy after corrosive ingestion should be planned according to the signs and symptoms. The management of corrosive ingestion based on endoscopic grading, nothing by mouth, and barium studies should be abandoned. With the new management protocol, esophageal stricture can be predicted with high accuracy using the simple new prognostic DROOL score (≤ 4) rather than endoscopic grading, reduced by immediate oral feeding as soon as the patient can swallow saliva instead of nothing by mouth, diagnosed earlier (10-14 days) by fluoro-endoscopic balloon-assisted esophageal examination for patients with persistent dysphagia instead of relying on a barium study (≥ 21 days), and adequately treated by initiating balloon dilation earlier during the same anesthesia procedure. Fluoroscopically guided balloon dilatation with large balloons (18-20 mm) seems to be safe, with a low frequency of complications and a high success rate. If dilatation fails after a few months, esophagectomy and replacement surgery using the stomach should be considered. The increased risk of developing esophageal carcinoma after ingestion of corrosive substances should be kept in mind.

[Adaptation to the reality of Latin America of the NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN 2016 Guidelines on the Diagnosis, Prevention and Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection in Pediatrics]. / Adaptación a la realidad de Latinoamérica de la Guía Clínica NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN 2016 sobre Diagnóstico, Prevención y Tratamiento de Infección por Helicobacter pylori en Pediatría.

INTRODUCTION: The latest joint H. pylori NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN clinical guidelines published in 2016, contain 20 statements that have been questioned in practice regarding their applicability in Latin America (LA); in particular in relation to gastric cancer prevention. METHODS: We conduc ted a critical analysis of the literature, with special emphasis on LA data and established the level of evidence and level of recommendation of the most controversial claims in the Joint Guidelines. Two rounds of voting were conducted according to the Delphi consensus technique and a Likert scale (from 0 to 4) was used to establish the "degree of agreement" among a panel of SLAGHNP ex perts. RESULTS: There are few studies regarding diagnosis, treatment effectiveness and susceptibility to antibiotics of H. pylori in pediatric patients of LA. Based on these studies, extrapolations from adult studies, and the clinical experience of the participating expert panel, the following recom mendations are made. We recommend taking biopsies for rapid urease and histology testing (and samples for culture or molecular techniques, when available) during upper endoscopy only if in case of confirmed H. pylori infection, eradication treatment will be indicated. We recommend that selected regional centers conduct antimicrobial sensitivity/resistance studies for H. pylori and thus act as reference centers for all LA. In case of failure to eradicate H. pylori with first-line treatment, we recommend empirical treatment with quadruple therapy with proton pump inhibitor, amoxi cillin, metronidazole, and bismuth for 14 days. In case of eradication failure with the second line scheme, it is recommended to indicate an individualized treatment considering the age of the pa tient, the previously indicated scheme and the antibiotic sensitivity of the strain, which implies performing a new endoscopy with sample extraction for culture and antibiogram or molecular resistance study. In symptomatic children referred to endoscopy who have a history of first or se cond degree family members with gastric cancer, it is recommended to consider the search for H. pylori by direct technique during endoscopy (and eradicate it when detected). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports most of the general concepts of the NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN 2016 Guidelines, but it is necessary to adapt them to the reality of LA, with emphasis on the development of regional centers for the study of antibiotic sensitivity and to improve the correct selection of the eradication treatment. In symptomatic children with a family history of first or second degree gastric cancer, the search for and eradication of H. pylori should be considered.

Randomised controlled trial of WISENSE, a real-time quality improving system for monitoring blind spots during esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the pivotal procedure in the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal lesions. However, there are significant variations in EGD performance among endoscopists, impairing the discovery rate of gastric cancers and precursor lesions. The aim of this study was to construct a real-time quality improving system, WISENSE, to monitor blind spots, time the procedure and automatically generate photodocumentation during EGD and thus raise the quality of everyday endoscopy. DESIGN: WISENSE system was developed using the methods of deep convolutional neural networks and deep reinforcement learning. Patients referred because of health examination, symptoms, surveillance were recruited from Renmin hospital of Wuhan University. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent EGD with or without the assistance of WISENSE. The primary end point was to ascertain if there was a difference in the rate of blind spots between WISENSE-assisted group and the control group. RESULTS: WISENSE monitored blind spots with an accuracy of 90.40% in real EGD videos. A total of 324 patients were recruited and randomised. 153 and 150 patients were analysed in the WISENSE and control group, respectively. Blind spot rate was lower in WISENSE group compared with the control (5.86% vs 22.46%, p<0.001), and the mean difference was -15.39% (95% CI -19.23 to -11.54). There was no significant adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: WISENSE significantly reduced blind spot rate of EGD procedure and could be used to improve the quality of everyday endoscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1800014809; Results.

Competency in esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a validated tool for assessment and generalizable benchmarks for gastroenterology fellows.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tools for colonoscopy and EGD were both put forth by the Training Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), with the intent of providing teachers and programs a means to continuously assess fellow skills in these procedures throughout their years of training. Despite the availability of the tools, there are no data that define when competency in EGD has been reached. The goal of this study is to validate the EGD ACE tool (ACE-E) and for the first time describe learning curves and competency benchmarks for EGD by examining a large national cohort of trainees. METHODS: In a prospective, multicenter trial, gastroenterology fellows at all stages of training had their core cognitive and motor skills in EGDs assessed by staff using the ACE-E tool. Evaluations occurred at set intervals of every 50 procedures over an academic year. Like the previously reported and validated ACE tool for colonoscopy, the ACE-E tool uses a 4-point grading scale to define a skills continuum from novice to competent. At each assessment interval, average scores for each skill were computed and overall competency benchmarks for each skill were established using the contrasting groups method. RESULTS: Ninety-six GI fellows at 10 U.S. academic institutions had 1002 EGDs assessed using the ACE-E tool. Average ACE-E scores of 3.5 were found to be inclusive of all minimal competency thresholds identified for each core skill. In addition, independent intubation of the second part of the duodenum (D2) at rates of ≥95% as well as D2 intubation times of ≤4.75 minutes and average total procedure times of ≤12.5 minutes were identified as the points separating competent from non-competent groups. Although the average fellow achieves the D2 intubation rates and time criteria by 100 and 150 procedures, respectively, achieving ACE-E threshold scores on the remaining metrics was typically not achieved until 200 to 250 procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Nationally generalizable learning curves for EGD skills in GI fellows are described. Average ACE-E scores of 3.5, independent D2 intubation rates of 95%, and D2 intubation times of ≤4.75 minutes are recommended as minimum competency criteria. On average, it takes GI fellows only 150 procedures to simply drive the scope adequately but 250 procedures to achieve minimum competence in the remaining cognitive and motor skills. The D2 intubation rate threshold and learning curve found in this multicenter cohort using the ACE-E tool are similar to those recently described by researchers in the United Kingdom; however, development of cognitive and overall competence requires a higher procedure threshold than previously described.

Quality of Care Indicators in Patients with Acute Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common and expensive condition. Improving quality of care in AP is vital to minimizing cost and improving patient outcomes. However, there has been little work accomplished toward developing and validating explicit quality indicators (QIs) in AP. AIMS: To define quality of care in patients with AP by developing explicit QIs using standardized techniques. METHODS: We used the UCLA/RAND Delphi panel approach to combine a comprehensive literature review with the collective judgment of experts to identify a defined set of process measures for AP. RESULTS: We produced 164 candidate QIs after a comprehensive literature review. After Delphi review, 75 had a median rating ≥ 7. We excluded 11 QIs where the disagreement index exceeded 1.0 and combined indicators overlapping in content to produce a final list of 22 QIs. Overall, 8 QIs related to diagnosis, prevention, or determination of etiology, 2 QIs focused on determination of severity, 3 QIs captured fluid resuscitation, 2 QIs measured nutrition, 1 QI use of antibiotics, and 6 QIs captured endoscopic or surgical management. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed 22 QIs spanning the spectrum of AP management including diagnosis, risk stratification, and pharmacological and endoscopic therapy. These QIs will facilitate future quality improvement by practitioners and organizations who treat patients with AP and further identify areas that are amenable to improvement to enhance patient care. We anticipate that this QI set will represent the first step in determining a framework for demonstrating value in the care of patients with AP.

Prevention and Management of Bleeding Risk Related to Invasive Procedures in Cirrhosis.

Cirrhosis represents the end stage of chronic liver disease and its transition from a compensated to a decompensated status is mainly driven by portal hypertension and systemic inflammation. Although relevant modifications in the evaluation of the coagulative balance in cirrhosis across its natural history have occurred and alterations in routine indices of hemostasis have lost their role as indicators of the hemorrhagic risk of patients with liver cirrhosis, these are still perceived as prone to bleed when admitted to invasive procedures. This view, which is still present in guidelines addressing the management of bleeding risk, makes preprocedural transfusion of plasma and platelets still an ongoing clinical practice. In this review, we describe the limitations of both bleeding risk assessment in cirrhotic patients admitted to radiologic and endoscopic invasive procedures and evaluate whether preventive strategies indicated by current guidelines can affect the procedure-related hemorrhagic events.

Longer Observation Time Increases Proportion of Neoplasms Detected by Esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is commonly used to detect upper gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. However, there is little evidence that longer examination time increases rate of detection of upper GI neoplasia. We investigated the association between length of time spent performing a normal screening EGD and rate of neoplasm detection. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 111,962 subjects who underwent EGD as part of a comprehensive health-screening program from January 2009 to December 2015 in Korea. Endoscopy findings were extracted from reports prepared by 14 board-certified endoscopists. Endoscopists were classified as fast or slow based on their mean examination time for a normal EGD without biopsy during their first year of the study. All endoscopists used the same endoscopy unit. We obtained findings from histologic analyses of GI biopsies from patient records; positive findings were defined as the detection of neoplasms (esophageal, gastric, or duodenal lesions). We examined the association between examination time and proportions of neoplasms detected. The primary outcome measure was the rate of neoplasm detection for each endoscopist (total number of neoplastic lesions detected divided by the number of subjects screened) and as the proportion of subjects with at least 1 neoplastic lesion. RESULTS: The mean examination time was 2 minutes 53 seconds. Using 3 minutes as a cutoff, we classified 8 endoscopists as fast (mean duration, 2:38 ± 0:21 minutes) and 6 endoscopists as slow (mean duration, 3:25 ± 0:19 minutes). Each endoscopist's mean examination time correlated with their rate of neoplasm detection (R2 = 0.54; P = .046). Fast endoscopists identified neoplasms in the upper GI tract in 0.20% of patients, whereas slow endoscopists identified these in 0.28% of patients (P = .0054). The frequency of endoscopic biopsy varied among endoscopists (range, 6.9%-27.8%) and correlated with rate of neoplasm detection (R2 = 0.76; P = .0015). On multivariable analysis, slow endoscopists were more likely to detect gastric adenomas or carcinomas than fast endoscopists (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.17-1.97). CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective analysis of data from more than 100,000 subjects who underwent EGD in a screening program, we found slow endoscopists detected a higher proportion of neoplasms than fast endoscopists. Examination time is therefore a useful indicator of quality for EGD.

Early (<4 Weeks) Versus Standard (≥ 4 Weeks) Endoscopically Centered Step-Up Interventions for Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines for necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) recommend delay in drainage ± necrosectomy until 4 or more weeks after initial presentation to allow collections to wall off. However, evidence of infection with clinical deterioration despite maximum support may mandate earlier (<4 weeks) intervention. There are concerns, but scant data regarding risk of complications and outcomes with early endoscopic intervention. Our aim was to compare the results of an endoscopic centered step-up approach to NP when initiated before versus 4 or more weeks. METHODS: All patients undergoing intervention for NP were managed using an endoscopically centered step-up approach, with transluminal drainage whenever feasible, ±necrosectomy, and/or percutaneous catheter drainage as needed, with surgery only for failures. Interventions were categorized as early or standard based on timing of intervention (<4 weeks or ≥ 4 weeks from onset of pancreatitis). Demographic data, indications and timing for interventions, number and type of intervention, mortality and morbidity (length of stay in hospital and ICU) and complications were compared. RESULTS: Of 305 patients with collections associated with NP, 193 (63%) (median age-52 years) required intervention, performed by a step-up approach. Of the 193 patients, 76 patients underwent early and 117 patients standard intervention. 144 (75%) interventions included endoscopic drainage ± necrosectomy. As compared with standard intervention, early intervention was more often performed for infection (91% vs. 39%, p < 0.05), more associated with acute kidney injury (43% vs. 32%, p = 0.09), respiratory failure (41% vs. 22%, p = 0.005), and shock (13% vs. 4%, p < 0.05). Organ failure improved significantly after intervention in both groups. There was a significant difference in mortality (13% vs. 4%, p = 0.02) and need for rescue open necrosectomy (7% vs. 1%, p = 0.03) between groups. Patients undergoing early intervention had increased median hospital (37 days vs. 26 days, p = 0.01) and ICU stay (median 2.5 days vs. 0 days, p = 0.001). There was no difference in complications. CONCLUSIONS: When using an endoscopically centered step-up strategy in necrotizing pancreatitis, early (<4 weeks) interventions were more often performed for infection and organ failure, with no increase in complications, similar improvement in organ failure, slightly increased need for surgery, and relatively low mortality. Early endoscopic drainage ± necrosectomy should be considered when there is a strong indication for intervention.

Proposed standards for reporting outcomes of treating biliary injuries.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard nor widely accepted way of reporting outcomes of treatment of biliary injuries. This hinders comparison of results among approaches and among centers. This paper presents a proposal to standardize terminology and reporting of results of treating biliary injuries. METHODS: The proposal was developed by an international group of surgeons, biliary endoscopists and interventional radiologists. The method is based on the concept of "patency" and is similar to the approach used to create reporting standards for arteriovenous hemodialysis access. RESULTS: The group considered definitions and gradings under the following headings: Definition of Patency, Definition of Index Treatment Periods, Grading of Severity of Biliary Injury, Grading of Patency, Metrics, Comparison of Surgical to Non Surgical Treatments and Presentation of Case Series. CONCLUSIONS: A standard procedure for reporting outcomes of treating biliary injuries has been produced. It is applicable to presenting results of treatment by surgery, endoscopy, and interventional radiology.

Quality standards in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a position statement of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS).

This document represents the first position statement produced by the British Society of Gastroenterology and Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, setting out the minimum expected standards in diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The need for this statement has arisen from the recognition that while technical competence can be rapidly acquired, in practice the performance of a high-quality examination is variable, with an unacceptably high rate of failure to diagnose cancer at endoscopy. The importance of detecting early neoplasia has taken on greater significance in this era of minimally invasive, organ-preserving endoscopic therapy. In this position statement we describe 38 recommendations to improve diagnostic endoscopy quality. Our goal is to emphasise practices that encourage mucosal inspection and lesion recognition, with the aim of optimising the early diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal disease and improving patient outcomes.

Validation of Adapted Dartmouth Operative Conditions Scale for sedation during pediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

AIMS: Pediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy requires deep sedation as it involves stimulation of the airway. Frequency of adverse events is higher with esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Hence, monitoring needs sedation scales like the Dartmouth Operative Condition Scale that identifies safe states of sedation. This study aims at validating the Adapted Dartmouth Operative Condition Scale for sedation rating by pediatricians during pediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy. METHODS: Items in the Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale were adapted for pediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Videos of 35 procedures were recorded. The recording started 10 min before sedation and continued till recovery. The videos were split into preprocedure videos, intraprocedure videos, and recovery videos, and further split into 30-s clips. Twenty representative intraprocedure videos clips were selected. Ten raters scored the videos with the Adapted Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale and modified-COMFORT score. The Adapted Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale scoring was repeated after a month. The preprocedure videos, intraprocedure videos, and recovery videos of ten patients (six clips each) were scored by one rater to assess responsiveness. RESULTS: The Adapted Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale detected nonoptimal sedation states including laryngospasm due to undersedated states. It showed fair interrater reliability at timeline-1 (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.45) and timeline-2 (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.65) but poor intrarater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.32). There was significant positive correlation with modified-COMFORT (Spearman's rank order correlation, r = 0.150). Responsiveness was demonstrated by the difference in the preprocedure videos, intraprocedure videos, and recovery videos scores (F = 126.50). CONCLUSION: The Adapted Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale detects nonoptimal sedation states during pediatric-esophagogastroduodenoscopy. It shows good criterion validity, interrater reliability, and responsiveness. Poor intrarater reliability seen in our study could be due to item ambiguity arising from the mode of training of the raters in the Dartmouth Operating Conditions Scale.

ASA Classification Pre-Endoscopic Procedures: A Retrospective Analysis on the Accuracy of Gastroenterologists.

OBJECTIVES: Before an endoscopic procedure, an evaluation to assess the risk of sedation is performed by the gastroenterologist. To risk stratify based on medical problems, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification scores are used routinely in the preprocedure evaluation. The objective of our study was to evaluate among physicians the ASA score accuracy pre-endoscopic procedures. METHODS: At a single tertiary-care center an institutional review board-approved retrospective study was performed. Upper endoscopies performed from May 2012 through August 2013 were reviewed; data were collected and recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and linear weighted kappa analysis for agreement (≤0.20 is poor agreement, 0.21-0.40 is fair, 0.41-0.60 is moderate, 0.61-0.80 is good, and 0.81-1.00 is very good). RESULTS: The mean ASA scores by the gastroenterologist compared with the anesthesiologist were 2.28 ± 0.56 and 2.78 ± 0.60, respectively, with only fair agreement (weighted kappa index 0.223, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.113-0.333; 48% agreement). The mean ASA scores for gastroenterologists compared with other gastroenterologists were 2.26 ± 0.5 and 2.26 ± 0.44, respectively, with poor agreement (weighted kappa index 0.200, 95% CI 0.108-0.389; 68% agreement). Agreement on ASA scores was only moderate between the gastroenterologist and himself or herself (weighted kappa index 0.464, 95% CI 0.183-0.745; 75% agreement). CONCLUSIONS: Gastroenterologists performing preprocedure assessments of ASA scores have fair agreement with anesthesiologists, poor agreement with other gastroenterologists, and only moderate agreement with themselves. Given this level of inaccuracy, it appears that the ASA score pre-endoscopy is of limited significance.

WEO position statement on hygiene in digestive endoscopy: Focus on endoscopy units in Asia and the Middle East.

The aim of this position statement is to reinforce the key points of hygiene in digestive endoscopy. The present article details the minimum hygiene requirements for reprocessing of endoscopes and endoscopic devices, regardless of the reprocessing method (automated washer-disinfector or manual cleaning) and the endoscopy setting (endoscopy suite, operating room, elective or emergency procedures). These minimum requirements are mandatory for patient safety. Both advanced diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopies should be carried out in an environment that is safe for patients and staff. Particular attention is given to contaminants. Procedural errors in decontamination, defective equipment, and failure to follow disinfection guidelines are major factors contributing to transmission of infection during endoscopy. Other important risk factors include inadequate cleaning, use of older endoscopes with surface and working channel irregularities, and contamination of water bottles or irrigating solutions. Infections by multidrug-resistant organisms have become an increasing problem in health-care systems worldwide. Since 2010, outbreaks of multidrug-resistant bacteria associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography have been reported from the USA, France, Germany, and The Netherlands. In many endoscopy units in Asia and the Middle East, reprocessing procedures have lagged behind those of Western countries for cultural reasons or lack of financial resources. This inconsistency in standards is now being addressed, and the World Endoscopy Organization has prepared this position statement to highlight key points for quality assurance in any endoscopy unit in any country.