ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT AND MATERIAL COMPOSITION COMPARISON OF SINGLE-USE AND REUSABLE DUODENOSCOPES.

BACKGROUND: Infection outbreaks associated with contaminated reusable duodenoscopes (RDs) have induced the development of novel single-use duodenoscopes (SDs). This study aims to analyse the material composition and life cycle assessment (LCA) of RDs and SDs to assess the sustainability of global and partial SD implementation. METHODS: A single-centre study evaluated material composition analysis and LCA of one RD and two SDs from different manufacturers (A, B). Material composition analysis was performed to evaluate the thermochemical properties of the duodenoscope components. Carbon footprint was calculated using environmental software. We compared the sustainability strategies of universal use of RDs, frequent use of RDs with occasional SDs, and universal use of SDs over the lifetime of one RD. RESULTS: RDs were substantially heavier (3489 g) than SD-A (943 g) and SD-B (715.5 g). RDs were mainly metallic alloys (95%), whereas SDs were mainly plastic polymers and resins (70-81%). The LCA demonstrated the sustainability of RDs, with a lifecycle carbon footprint 62-82 times lower compared to the universal use of SDs (151.7 vs. 10512-12640 kg CO2-eq) and 10 times lower compared to the occasional use of SDs (151.7 vs. 1417.3-1676.6 kg CO2-eq). Differences were observed between SD-A and SD-B (7.9 vs. 6.6 kg CO2-eq per endoscope). End-of-life incineration emissions for SDs were the most environmental contributors. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread adoption of SD has greater environmental challenges; it requires a balance between infection control and environmental responsibility. Carbon footprint labelling can help healthcare institutions make sustainable choices and promote environmentally responsible healthcare practices.

Materials Science Toolkit for Carbon Footprint Assessment: A Case Study for Endoscopic Accessories of Common Use.

Ironically, healthcare systems are key agents in respiratory-related diseases and estimated deaths because of the high impact of their greenhouse gas emissions, along with industry, transportation, and housing. Based on safety requirements, hospitals and related services use an extensive number of consumables, most of which end up incinerated at the end of their life cycle. A thorough assessment of the carbon footprint of such devices typically requires knowing precise information about the manufacturing process, which is rarely available in detail because of the many materials, pieces, and steps involved during the fabrication. Yet, the tools most often used for determining the environmental impact of consumer goods require a bunch of parameters, mainly based on the material composition of the device. Here, we report a basic set of analytical methods that provide the information required by the software OpenLCA to calculate the main outcome related to environmental impact, greenhouse gas emissions. Through thermogravimetry, calorimetry, infrared spectroscopy, and elemental analysis, we proved that obtaining relevant data for the calculator in the exemplifying case of endoscopy tooling or accessories is possible. This routine procedure opens the door to a broader, more accurate analysis of the environmental impact of everyday work at hospital services, offering potential alternatives to minimize it.

Perspectives and awareness of endoscopy healthcare professionals on sustainable practices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of the LEAFGREEN survey.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare's main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy. METHODS: The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023. RESULTS: 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.

Life cycle assessment of routinely used endoscopic instruments and simple intervention to reduce our environmental impact.

OBJECTIVES: GI endoscopy units represent the third largest producers of medical waste. We aimed to determine endoscopic instrument composition and life cycle assessment (LCA) and to assess a sustainability proposal based on a mark on the instruments that identifies parts can be safely recycled or 'green mark'. DESIGN: Material composition analysis and LCA of forceps, snares and clips from four different manufacturers (A-D) were performed with four different methods. Carbon footprint from production, transportation and end of life of these instruments was calculated. In 30 consecutive procedures, we marked the contact point with the working channel. 5 cm away from that point was considered as green mark. One-week prospective study was conducted with 184 procedures evaluating 143 instruments (75 forceps, 49 snares and 19 haemoclips) to assess the efficacy of this recyclable mark. RESULTS: Composition from different manufacturers varied widely. Most common materials were high global warming potential (GWP) waste (polyethylene, polypropylene and acrylonitrile) and low GWP waste (stainless steel). Significant differences were found for the forceps (0.31-0.47 kg of CO2 equivalent (CO2-eq)) and haemoclips (0.41-0.57 kg CO2-eq) between the manufacturers. Green mark was established 131.26 cm for gastroscope and 195.32 cm for colonoscope. One-week activity produced 67.74 kg CO2-eq. Applying our sustainability intervention, we could reduce up to 27.44% (18.26 kg CO2-eq). This allows the recycling of 61.7% of the instrument total weight (4.69 kg). CONCLUSION: Knowledge of carbon footprint is crucial to select the most sustainable alternatives because there are large variations between brands. A mark to identify recyclable parts could reduce our environmental impact significantly.

Impact of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2020 guidelines on the number of scheduled post-polypectomy surveillance colonoscopies: Meeting presentations: Partial results of this research were published in abstract form at ESGE Days 2020.

Background and study aims In contrast with the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) 2013 and the US Multi-society Task Force (USMSTF) 2020 guidelines, the ESGE 2020 guideline considers patients with three to four adenomas < 10 mm or an adenoma with villous histology as low risk. The aim of this study was to quantify the influence of the application of the new ESGE 2020 guidelines, as opposed to the ESGE 2013 and USMSTF 2020 guidelines, on the number of scheduled colonoscopies, and to describe the main causes for changes in the surveillance intervals. Patients and methods A retrospective evaluation was conducted of a prospectively maintained fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based regional colorectal cancer screening program database. Surveillance regimens following ESGE 2020, ESGE 2013, and USMSTF 2020 guidelines were compared. Results Overall, 1284 individuals with a positive FIT and undergoing colonoscopy were consecutively included. When applying the ESGE 2020 guidelines, 10.8 % of patients changed to a "no-surveillance" group (relative reduction in colonoscopies of 82.5 %). The main reason for these changes was considering three to four adenomas as low risk. The proportion of patients from the "3-year surveillance" group who moved to the "no-surveillance" group was lower when a sessile serrated lesion (SSL) was present (ESGE 2013, 32.0% vs 16.3 %; USMSTF 2020 17.2 % vs 6.8 %). Analyzing the 41 patients with SSLs who remained unchanged in the "no-surveillance" group, only in 15 (36.6 %) the cause was the presence of an SSL. Conclusions applying the new ESGE 2020 guidelines could reduce by 11 % the proportion of individuals being offered surveillance. SLLs have not a major influence on the change of surveillance intervals.

Reducing the environmental footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement.

Climate change and the destruction of ecosystems by human activities are among the greatest challenges of the 21st century and require urgent action. Health care activities significantly contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases and waste production, with gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy being one of the largest contributors. This Position Statement aims to raise awareness of the ecological footprint of GI endoscopy and provides guidance to reduce its environmental impact. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) outline suggestions and recommendations for health care providers, patients, governments, and industry. MAIN STATEMENTS 1: GI endoscopy is a resource-intensive activity with a significant yet poorly assessed environmental impact. 2: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adopting immediate actions to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 3: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adherence to guidelines and implementation of audit strategies on the appropriateness of GI endoscopy to avoid the environmental impact of unnecessary procedures. 4: ESGE-ESGENA recommend the embedding of reduce, reuse, and recycle programs in the GI endoscopy unit. 5: ESGE-ESGENA suggest that there is an urgent need to reassess and reduce the environmental and economic impact of single-use GI endoscopic devices. 6: ESGE-ESGENA suggest against routine use of single-use GI endoscopes. However, their use could be considered in highly selected patients on a case-by-case basis. 7: ESGE-ESGENA recommend inclusion of sustainability in the training curricula of GI endoscopy and as a quality domain. 8: ESGE-ESGENA recommend conducting high quality research to quantify and minimize the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 9: ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy companies assess, disclose, and audit the environmental impact of their value chain. 10:  ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy should become a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions practice by 2050.

Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions.

The most common major adverse event of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB), with an incidence of 6%-7% in large lesions. Repeat colonoscopy, blood transfusions, or other interventions are often needed. The associated direct costs are much higher than those of an uncomplicated EMR. In this review, we discuss the aspects related to CSPEB of large nonpedunculated polyps, such as risk factors, predictive models, and prophylactic measures, and we highlight evidence for preventive treatment options and explore new methods for bleeding prophylaxis. We also provide recommendations for steps that can be taken before, during, and after EMR to minimize bleeding risk. Finally, this review proposes future directions to reduce CSPEB incidence.

Development of knowledge-based clinical decision support system for patients included in colorectal screening program.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal (CRC) screening programs represent a large volume of procedures that need a follow-up endoscopy. A knowledge-based clinical decision support system (K-CDSS) is a technology which contains clinical rules and associations of compiled data that assist with clinical decision-making tasks. We develop a K-CDSS for management of patients included in CRC screening and surveillance of colorectal polyps. METHODS: We collected information on 48 variables from hospital colonoscopy records. Using DILEMMA Solutions Platform © (https://www.dilemasolution.com) we designed a prototype K-CDSS (PoliCare CDSS), to provide tailored recommendations by combining patients data and current guidelines recommendations. The accuracy of rules was verified using four scenarios (normal colonoscopy, lesions different than polyps, non-advanced adenomas and advanced adenomas). We studied the degree of agreement between the clinical assessments made by expert doctors and nurses equipped with PoliCare CDSS. Two experts confirmed a correlation between guidelines and PoliCare recommendations. RESULTS: 56 consecutive endoscopy cases from colorectal screening program were included (62.8 years; range 53-71). Colonoscopy results were: absence of colon lesions (n=7, 12.5%), lesions in the colon that are not polyps (n=3, 5.4%) and resected colonic polyps (n=46, 82.1%; 100% R0 resection). Patients with resected polyps presented non-advanced adenoma (n=21, 45.6%) or advanced lesions (n=25, 54.4%). There were no differences in erroneous orders with PoliCare CDSS (Kappa value 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: PoliCare CDSS can easily be integrated into the workflow for improving the overall efficiency and better adherence to evidence-based guidelines.

Endoscopic anti-reflux therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease has an increasing incidence and prevalence worldwide. A significant proportion of patients have a suboptimal response to proton pump inhibitors or are unwilling to take lifelong medication due to concerns about long-term adverse effects. Endoscopic anti-reflux therapies offer a minimally invasive option for patients unwilling to undergo surgical treatment or take lifelong medication. The best candidates are those with a good response to proton pump inhibitors and without a significant sliding hiatal hernia. Transoral incisionless fundoplication and nonablative radiofrequency are the techniques with the largest body of evidence and that have been tested in several randomized clinical trials. Band-assisted ligation techniques, anti-reflux mucosectomy, anti-reflux mucosal ablation, and new plication devices have yielded promising results in recent noncontrolled studies. Nonetheless, the role of endoscopic procedures remains controversial due to limited long-term and comparative data, and no consensus exists in current clinical guidelines. This review provides an updated summary focused on the patient selection, technical details, clinical success, and safety of current and future endoscopic anti-reflux techniques.

Corrigendum: Development and Characterization of a New Endoscopic Drug-Eluting Platform With Proven Efficacy in Acute and Chronic Experimental Colitis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2020.00415.].

Prevention of late complications with coverage agents in endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions: Current landscape in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Endoscopic removal of large (≥ 20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs) may result in major adverse events, such as delayed bleeding (DB) and delayed perforation (DP), despite closure of the mucosal defects with clips. Topical application of a coverage agent refers to the creation of a shield with a biocompatible medical device (tissue or hydrogel) with proven bioactive properties. Coverage of the eschar after endoscopic resection provides shielding protection to prevent delayed complications. The aim of the present review was to systematically collect and review the currently available literature regarding the prevention of DB and DP with coverage agents after endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection of LNPCLs.

Endoscopic Shielding With Platelet-rich Plasma After Resection Of Large Colorectal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has demonstrated efficacy as submucosal injection before endoscopic mucosal resection or local injection after endoscopic submucosal dissection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions. METHODS: The EndoPRP study was a prospective single-center study to analyze the efficacy of PRP shield after endoscopic mucosal resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesio with impossible clip closure, assessed by the incidence of delayed bleeding (DB) and delayed perforation, and percentage of mucosal restoration after 4 weeks (mucosal healing rate). RESULTS: Shielding technique with PRP was performed in 4 patients, aged 52 to 80, with 4 lesions at rectum (mean size 53.7±20.6 mm, range 35 to 80 mm). DB occurred in 1 lesion (25% of all lesions), no required blood transfusion or endoscopic treatment. No postoperative delayed perforation occurred. Mucosal healing rate was of 78.6% after 4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: PRP shield failed in prevent DB, probably due to migration and failure in the adherence in large wounds. Future comparative studies are needed to confirm these data.

Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations.

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.

Development and Characterization of a New Endoscopic Drug-Eluting Platform With Proven Efficacy in Acute and Chronic Experimental Colitis.

Background and Aims: Mucosal lesions refractory to biological treatments represent unmet needs in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) that require new treatment modalities. We developed and characterized a new endoscopic drug-eluting hydrogel (CoverGel) with proven efficacy in acute and chronic experimental colitis (EC) in rats. Methods: CoverGel was developed based on appropriate rheological, drug release, gelation, structural, and degradation property capacities to allow endoscopic application. Experimental colitis (EC) was induced by TNBS application in rats. In acute EC 40, rats were randomized in five groups (eight each): Sham, Control, CoverGel, CoverGel + Infliximab (IFX) and CoverGel + Vedolizumab (VDZ). In chronic EC, 12 rats were randomized in two groups (six each): IFX s.c. and CoverGel + IFX. Endoscopic, histological, and blood test were performed during follow-up to evaluate clinical success. Antibodies to IFX (ATIs) were evaluated in chronic EC animal study. Results: CoverGel is a biocompatible and bioadhesive reverse thermosensitive gelation hydrogel with a macroporous structure and drug release capacity. In acute EC animals treated with CoverGel + IFX or CoverGel + VDZ showed significantly clinical success (weight recovery, mucosal restoration, and bacterial translocation) as compared with controls and animals without a bioactive drug. In a chronic EC animal study, clinical efficacy was comparable in both groups. Levels of ATIs were significantly lower in animals treated with CoverGel + IFX vs. IFX s.c. (0.90 ± 0.06 µg/mL-c vs. 1.97 ± 0.66 µg/mL-c, p = 0.0025). Conclusions: CoverGel is an endoscopic vehicle to locally deliver biological drugs with proven efficacy in acute and chronic EC in rats and induce less immunogenicity reaction.