Endoscopic Management of Difficult Biliary Stones: An Evergreen Issue.

Choledocholithiasis is one of the most common indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in daily practice. Although the majority of stones are small and can be easily removed in a single endoscopy session, approximately 10-15% of patients have complex biliary stones, requiring additional procedures for an optimum clinical outcome. A plethora of endoscopic methods is available for the removal of difficult biliary stones, including papillary large balloon dilation, mechanical lithotripsy, and electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy. In-depth knowledge of these techniques and the emerging literature on them is required to yield the most optimal therapeutic effects. This narrative review aims to describe the definition of difficult bile duct stones based on certain characteristics and streamline their endoscopic retrieval using various modalities to achieve higher clearance rates.

Endoscopic Treatment of Large Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials (2752 patients) comparing different treatments for management of large bile stones (>10 mm) (endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon sphincteroplasty, sphincterotomy followed by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation [S+EPLBD], mechanical lithotripsy, single-operator cholangioscopy [SOC]) with each other were identified. Study outcomes were the success rate of stone removal and the incidence of adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria to appraise the quality of evidence. RESULTS: All treatments except mechanical lithotripsy significantly outperformed sphincterotomy in terms of stone removal rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.03-1.29). SOC was superior to other adjunctive interventions (vs balloon sphincteroplasty [RR, 1.24; 95% CIs, 1.07-1.45], vs S+EPLBD [RR, 1.23; range, 1.06-1.42] and vs mechanical lithotripsy [RR, 1.34; range, 1.14-1.58]). Cholangioscopy ranked the highest in increasing the success rate of stone removal (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score, 0.99) followed by S+EPLBD (SUCRA score, 0.68). SOC and S+EPLBD outperformed the other modalities when only studies reporting on stones greater than 15 mm were taken into consideration (SUCRA scores, 0.97 and 0.71, respectively). None of the assessed interventions was significantly different in terms of adverse event rate compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy or with other treatments. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding were the most frequent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with large bile stones, cholangioscopy represents the most effective method, in particular in patients with larger (>15 mm) stones, whereas S+EPLBD could represent a less expensive and more widely available alternative.

Performance and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The introduction of motorized spiral enteroscopy (mSE) into clinical practice holds diagnostic and therapeutic potential for small-bowel investigations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the performance of this modality in diagnosing and treating small-bowel lesions. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were performed through September 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as the identification of a lesion relative to the indication. Secondary outcomes were successful therapeutic manipulation, total enteroscopy rate (examination from the duodenojejunal flexion to the cecum), technical success (passage from the ligament of Treitz or ileocecal valve for anterograde and retrograde approach, respectively), and adverse event rates. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and the results are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: From 2016 to 2022, 9 studies (959 patients; 42% women; mean age >45 years; 474 patients [49.4%] investigated for mid-GI bleeding/anemia) were considered eligible and included in analysis. The diagnostic success rate of mSE was 78% (95% CI, 72-84; I2 = 78.3%). Considering secondary outcomes, total enteroscopy was attempted in 460 cases and completed with a rate of 51% (95% CI, 30-72; I2 = 96.2%), whereas therapeutic interventions were successful in 98% of cases (95% CI, 96-100; I2 = 79.8%) where attempted. Technical success rates were 96% (95% CI, 94-97; I2 = 1.5%) for anterograde and 97% (95% CI, 94-100; I2 = 38.6%) for retrograde approaches, respectively. Finally, the incidence of adverse events was 17% (95% CI, 13-21; I2 = 65.1%), albeit most were minor adverse events (16%; 95% CI, 11-20; I2 = 67.2%) versus major adverse events (1%; 95% CI, 0-1; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: mSE provides high rates of diagnostic and therapeutic success with a low prevalence of severe adverse events.

Comparison of adenoma miss rate and adenoma detection rate between conventional colonoscopy and colonoscopy with second generation distal attachment cuff: a multicenter, randomized, back-to-back trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endocuff VisionTM has been designed to enhance mucosal visualization thereby improving detection of (pre-)malignant colorectal lesions. This multicenter, international, back-to-back, randomized colonoscopy trial compared adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adenoma miss rate (AMR) between Endocuff Vision-assisted colonoscopy (EVC) and conventional colonoscopy (CC). METHODS: Patients aged 40-75 years referred for non-immunochemical fecal occult blood test-based screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy were included at ten hospitals and randomized into four groups: Group 1; 2xCC, Group 2; CC followed by EVC, Group 3; EVC followed CC and Group 4; 2xEVC. Primary outcomes included ADR and AMR. RESULTS: A total of 717 patients were randomized of which 661 patients (92.2%) had one and 646 (90.1%) patients had two completed back-to-back colonoscopies. EVC did not significantly improve ADR compared to CC (41.1% [95%-CI;36.1-46.3] versus 35.5% [95%-CI;30.7-40.6], respectively, P=0.125), but EVC did reduced AMR by 11.7% (29.6% [95%-CI;23.6-36.5] versus 17.9% [95%-CI;12.5-23.5], respectively, P=0.049). AMR of 2xCC compared to 2xEVC was also not significantly different (25.9% [95%-CI;19.3-33.9] versus 18.8% [95%-CI;13.9-24.8], respectively, P=0.172). Only 3.7% of the polyps missed during the first procedures had advanced pathologic features. Factors affecting risk of missing adenomas were age (P=0.002), Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (P=0.008) and region where colonoscopy was performed (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our trial shows that EVC reduces the risk of missing adenomas but does not lead to a significant improved ADR. Remarkably, 25% of adenomas are still missed during conventional colonoscopies, which is not different from miss rates reported 25 years ago; reassuringly, advanced features were only found in 3.7% of these missed lesions. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03418948.

Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of newer end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of available FNB needles for sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. METHODS: A systematic literature review (Medline and Cochrane Database) was conducted for studies evaluating the accuracy of newer FNB needles in adults undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sample adequacy, diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and adverse event rate. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses and appraised the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. RESULTS: Overall, 16 RCTs (1934 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, Franseen needles (Acquire; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA) significantly outperformed reverse-bevel needles (risk ratio [RR], 1.21 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.40] for accuracy and 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05-1.22] for adequacy) and FNA needles (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.25] for accuracy and 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.13] for adequacy). Likewise, the Fork-tip needle (SharkCore; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) was significantly superior to the reverse-bevel needle (RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.03-1.33] for accuracy and 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.16] for adequacy) and to the FNA needle (RR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.19] for accuracy and 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.07] for adequacy). Other comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. As a consequence, Franseen (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .89 for accuracy and .94 for adequacy) and Fork-tip needles (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .76 for accuracy and .73 for adequacy) ranked as the 2 highest-performing FNB needles. When considering different needle sizes, 25-gauge Franseen and 25-gauge Fork-tip needles were not superior to 22-gauge reverse-bevel needles (RR, 1.18 [95% CI, .96-1.46] and 1.04 [95% CI, .62-1.52]). None of the tested needles was significantly superior to the other FNB devices or to FNA needles when rapid onsite cytologic evaluation was available. CONCLUSIONS: Franseen and Fork-tip needles, particularly 22-gauge size, showed the highest performance for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates.

Comparative efficacy of different methods for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several methods with variable efficacy have been proposed for difficult biliary cannulation in ERCP. We assessed the comparative efficacy of different strategies for difficult biliary cannulation through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons. METHODS: We identified 17 randomized controlled trials (2015 patients) that compared the efficacy of different adjunctive methods for difficult biliary cannulation (needle-knife techniques, pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, pancreatic-assisted technique, and transpancreatic sphincterotomy) either with each other or with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. The success rate of biliary cannulation and the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were the outcomes of interest. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria to appraise quality of evidence. RESULTS: Low-quality evidence supported the use of transpancreatic sphincterotomy over persistence with standard cannulation techniques (risk ratio [RR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.59) and over any other adjunctive intervention (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.44] vs pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique, RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.01-1.43] vs early needle-knife techniques, RR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.03-2.10] vs pancreatic stent-assisted technique) for increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. No other significant results were observed in any other comparisons. Based on the network model, transpancreatic sphincterotomy (P-score, .97) followed by early needle-knife techniques (P-score, .62) were ranked highest in terms of increasing the success rate of biliary cannulation. Early needle-knife techniques outperformed persistence with standard cannulation techniques in terms of decreasing PEP rate (RR, .61; 95% CI, .37-1.00), whereas both early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy led to lower PEP rates as compared with pancreatic guidewire-assisted technique (RR, .49 [95% CI, .23-.99] and .53 [95% CI, .30-.92], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Transpancreatic sphincterotomy increases the success rate of biliary cannulation as compared with persistence with the standard cannulation techniques. Early needle-knife techniques and transpancreatic sphincterotomy are superior to other interventions in decreasing PEP rates and should be considered in patients with difficult cannulation.

Polygenic and multifactorial scores for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma risk prediction.

BACKGROUND: Most cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are asymptomatic in early stages, and the disease is typically diagnosed in advanced phases, resulting in very high mortality. Tools to identify individuals at high risk of developing PDAC would be useful to improve chances of early detection. OBJECTIVE: We generated a polygenic risk score (PRS) for PDAC risk prediction, combining the effect of known risk SNPs, and carried out an exploratory analysis of a multifactorial score. METHODS: We tested the associations of the individual known risk SNPs on up to 2851 PDAC cases and 4810 controls of European origin from the PANcreatic Disease ReseArch (PANDoRA) consortium. Thirty risk SNPs were included in a PRS, which was computed on the subset of subjects that had 100% call rate, consisting of 839 cases and 2040 controls in PANDoRA and 6420 cases and 4889 controls from the previously published Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium I-III and Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium genome-wide association studies. Additional exploratory multifactorial scores were constructed by complementing the genetic score with smoking and diabetes. RESULTS: The scores were associated with increased PDAC risk and reached high statistical significance (OR=2.70, 95% CI 1.99 to 3.68, p=2.54×10-10 highest vs lowest quintile of the weighted PRS, and OR=14.37, 95% CI 5.57 to 37.09, p=3.64×10-8, highest vs lowest quintile of the weighted multifactorial score). CONCLUSION: We found a highly significant association between a PRS and PDAC risk, which explains more than individual SNPs and is a step forward in the direction of the construction of a tool for risk stratification in the population.

Treatment of a chronic esophageal perforation after vertebral surgery with external vacuum therapy - a case report.

Esophageal perforations of any cause may escape early diagnosis and progress to lethal mediastinitis despite aggressive management. The treatment and outcome depends on the extent and chronicity of the injury. A CASE REPORT: We present a case of a late-diagnosed cervical esophageal rupture treated successfully with external vacuum therapy. A blunt trauma patient with cervical vertebral column fractures underwent fixation with a titanium bracket. A procedure-related esophageal perforation created an open fistulous communication to the skin. This was diagnosed with one month's delay. In diagnostic endoscopy the prosthesis was visible through a large esophageal defect. Evidence of mediastinitis was absent. The external wound was explored and a standard vacuum device was inserted. Nine weeks of continuous vacuum therapy achieved complete fistula closure and prevented infection. Mediastinitis was avoided and complete oral feeding was resumed. CONCLUSIONS: Different clinical presentations indicate surgical, endoscopic or conservative treatment. In this report, we provide the ground for discussion for the alternative application of the vacuum technology in a case where otherwise surgery would be the definite treatment.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021.

1: ESGE recommends in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) for pre-endoscopy risk stratification. Patients with GBS ≤ 1 are at very low risk of rebleeding, mortality within 30 days, or needing hospital-based intervention and can be safely managed as outpatients with outpatient endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in patients with acute UGIH who are taking low-dose aspirin as monotherapy for secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis, aspirin should not be interrupted. If for any reason it is interrupted, aspirin should be re-started as soon as possible, preferably within 3-5 days.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that following hemodynamic resuscitation, early (≤ 24 hours) upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy should be performed. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 4: ESGE does not recommend urgent (≤ 12 hours) upper GI endoscopy since as compared to early endoscopy, patient outcomes are not improved. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends for patients with actively bleeding ulcers (FIa, FIb), combination therapy using epinephrine injection plus a second hemostasis modality (contact thermal or mechanical therapy). Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends for patients with an ulcer with a nonbleeding visible vessel (FIIa), contact or noncontact thermal therapy, mechanical therapy, or injection of a sclerosing agent, each as monotherapy or in combination with epinephrine injection. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE suggests that in patients with persistent bleeding refractory to standard hemostasis modalities, the use of a topical hemostatic spray/powder or cap-mounted clip should be considered. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that for patients with clinical evidence of recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage, use of a cap-mounted clip should be considered. In the case of failure of this second attempt at endoscopic hemostasis, transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) should be considered. Surgery is indicated when TAE is not locally available or after failed TAE. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for patients who receive endoscopic hemostasis and for patients with FIIb ulcer stigmata (adherent clot) not treated endoscopically. (A): PPI therapy should be administered as an intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (e. g., 80 mg then 8 mg/hour) for 72 hours post endoscopy. (B): High dose PPI therapies given as intravenous bolus dosing (twice-daily) or in oral formulation (twice-daily) can be considered as alternative regimens.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10: ESGE recommends that in patients who require ongoing anticoagulation therapy following acute NVUGIH (e. g., peptic ulcer hemorrhage), anticoagulation should be resumed as soon as the bleeding has been controlled, preferably within or soon after 7 days of the bleeding event, based on thromboembolic risk. The rapid onset of action of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS), as compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), must be considered in this context.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Recognizing Post-Endoscopy Complications: A Database Filter Reduces Quality Assurance Workload for Inpatients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Documentation of complications of gastrointestinal endoscopy within the commonly used endoscopy documentation systems are mostly limited to acute complications during endoscopy included in the post-procedural endoscopy report. We tested a documentation system-based filter to reduce the workload by maintaining a high sensitivity to recognize post-endoscopy complications. METHODS: Of all inpatient endoscopic resections during 1 year and all endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures during 4 months in 1 tertiary referral centre, post-procedural complications during hospital stay were individually analyzed retrospectively from the hospital databases (gold standard). In comparison, information technology-based filters were assessed searching for specific tests and data within 2 days after endoscopy and/or until discharge. These were second endoscopy, surgery, or an abdominal computed tomography (CT) or haemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dL for endoscopic resection. For ERCP cases, any case with lipase determination and post-ERCP CT scan was selected. Main outcomes were the sensitivity of these filters to recognize post-endoscopy complications and the percentage of workload reduction. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-two inpatients who underwent endoscopic resections and 302 ERCP cases (all inpatients) were included. Post-endoscopy complications occurred in 7.14% (endoscopic resection) and 3.7% (ERCP). The above-mentioned filters identified 100% of all resection and post-ERCP complications compared to detailed case file analysis, at the same time reducing the quality management workload to 14 and 31%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Post-procedural monitoring of advanced endoscopic procedures performed on inpatient procedures has a high sensitivity (100%) and reduces case-by-case screening workload for complications by 70-85%. Outpatient interventions, however, require a different system for monitoring of post-endoscopy complications after discharge.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Achalasia: Two Distinct Nosologic Entities or a Possible Etiopathogenic Association?

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that researchers have made significant progress in elucidating the pathophysiology of esophageal diseases, the understanding of esophageal motility alterations in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is in its infancy and current published medical literature remains rather scarce on this topic. A growing body of scientific data regarding associations between esophageal motor disorders, such as achalasia and EoE, exists nowadays. SUMMARY: It seems that the association of EoE and achalasia does not constitute a cause and effect relationship, as it is not clear whether esophageal motility abnormalities are the result of EoE or vice versa. As such, there is no universally accepted treatment algorithm for patients presenting with both of these entities. Key Messages: The aim of this article is to review the existing data on achalasia-like motility disorders in patients with EoE, highlighting a possible association between these 2 esophageal disorders. Moreover, we seek to describe the clinical presentation in such cases, diagnostic modalities to be used, and current treatment strategies in patients suspected to suffer from both disorders.

High Prevalence of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth among Functional Dyspepsia Patients.

BACKGROUND: Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), characterized by either increased numbers or presence of colonic type bacteria in the small bowel has been previously described in functional dyspepsia (FD), based on breath testing. In this study, we aim to examine the prevalence of SIBO among FD patients using small bowel aspirate culture. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled outpatients fulfilling Rome IV criteria for FD. Severity of symptoms was graded using the patient assessment of upper gastrointestinal symptom severity index (PAGI-SYM) questionnaire. Patients underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and duodenal fluid was aspirated in sterile traps. SIBO was defined as ≥103 colony forming units/mL of duodenal aspirate and/or presence of colonic type bacteria. Patients undergoing gastroscopy due to gastroesophageal reflux symptoms - control group (CG) - and patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) fulfilling Rome IV criteria were also recruited. RESULTS: We enrolled 227 FD subjects, 30 CG, and 90 IBS patients. Among FD patients, 144 (63.4%), 64 (28.2%), and 19 (8.4%) had postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), epigastric pain syndrome (EPS), and overlapping PDS-EPS syndrome, respectively. SIBO prevalence was 20.8%, 12.5%, and 31.6% among PDS, EPS, and overlapping PDS-EPS FD subtypes, respectively. Overall, SIBO prevalence was significantly higher in FD (44/227 [19.4%]) compared to CG (1/30 [3.3%]) (p = 0.037) and similar to IBS (44/227 [19.4%] vs. 15/90 [16.7%], p = 0.63) subjects. SIBO presence was associated neither with total nor with any subscale score of the PAGI-SYM questionnaire. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of Greek FD patients, SIBO prevalence was similar to that of IBS subjects and higher compared to that of controls.

ERCP-related adverse events: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

PROPHYLAXIS: 1:  ESGE recommends routine rectal administration of 100 mg of diclofenac or indomethacin immediately before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in all patients without contraindications to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic stenting in selected patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis (inadvertent guidewire insertion/opacification of the pancreatic duct, double-guidewire cannulation).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE suggests against routine endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy before the insertion of a single plastic stent or an uncovered/partially covered self-expandable metal stent for relief of biliary obstruction.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends against the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP in the case of anticipated incomplete biliary drainage, for severely immunocompromised patients, and when performing cholangioscopy.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6:  ESGE suggests tests of coagulation are not routinely required prior to ERCP for patients who are not on anticoagulants and not jaundiced.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. TREATMENT: 7:  ESGE suggests against salvage pancreatic stenting in patients with post-ERCP pancreatitis.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE suggests temporary placement of a biliary fully covered self-expandable metal stent for post-sphincterotomy bleeding refractory to standard hemostatic modalities.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 9:  ESGE suggests to evaluate patients with post-ERCP cholangitis by abdominal ultrasonography or computed tomography (CT) scan and, in the absence of improvement with conservative therapy, to consider repeat ERCP. A bile sample should be collected for microbiological examination during repeat ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

Antithrombotic Treatment Is Associated with Small-Bowel Video Capsule Endoscopy Positive Findings in Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of antithrombotic treatment on the findings of small-bowel capsule endoscopy for patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding remains contentious. We aimed to determine the effect of these agents on small-bowel video capsule endoscopy positive findings. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting on patients receiving concurrent antithrombotic treatment, while undergoing capsule endoscopy for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Outcomes were the effect of antithrombotic therapy-overall and per type of antithrombotic agent-on the examination's positive findings and re-bleeding risk. The effect size of study outcomes is presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1023 patients were included. We detected significant heterogeneity with no evidence of publication bias. Compared to antithrombotic drug nonusers, antithrombotic treatment was associated with an increased prevalence of positive findings [OR 1.98 (95% CI 1.34-2.93); P = 0.0006]. This effect did not differ between antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments [OR 2.22 (95% CI 1.28-3.84); P = 0.005 and 2.53 (95% CI 1.66-3.87); P < 0.0001, respectively]. Antithrombotic use over no use was not associated either with overt [OR 1.17 (95% CI 0.51-2.66); P = 0.71] or with occult [OR 0.86 (95% CI 0.38-1.95); P = 0.71] bleeding pattern. However, concurrent antithrombotic treatment was associated with higher odds for re-bleeding compared to no treatment [OR 2.53 (95% CI 1.46-4.37); P = 0.0009]. CONCLUSIONS: Antithrombotic treatment is associated with more positive findings in small-bowel video capsule endoscopy in OGIB as well as higher odds of re-bleeding.

Endoscopic biliary stenting: indications, choice of stents, and results: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline - Updated October 2017.

ESGE recommends against routine preoperative biliary drainage in patients with malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction; preoperative biliary drainage should be reserved for patients with cholangitis, severe symptomatic jaundice (e. g., intense pruritus), or delayed surgery, or for before neoadjuvant chemotherapy in jaundiced patients. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. ESGE recommends the endoscopic placement of a 10-mm diameter self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for preoperative biliary drainage of malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends SEMS insertion for palliative drainage of of extrahepatic malignant biliary obstruction. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE recommends against the insertion of uncovered SEMS for the drainage of extrahepatic biliary obstruction of unconfirmed etiology. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. ESGE suggests against routine preoperative biliary drainage in patients with malignant hilar obstruction. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends uncovered SEMSs for palliative drainage of malignant hilar obstruction. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends temporary insertion of multiple plastic stents or of a fully covered SEMS for treatment of benign biliary strictures. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic placement of plastic stent(s) to treat bile duct leaks that are not due to transection of the common bile duct or common hepatic duct. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Endoscopic management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) evidence-based multidisciplinary guidelines.

1: ESGE suggests using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) as the first-line imaging modality on admission when indicated and up to the 4th week from onset in the absence of contraindications. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used instead of CT in patients with contraindications to contrast-enhanced CT, and after the 4th week from onset when invasive intervention is considered because the contents (liquid vs. solid) of pancreatic collections are better characterized by MRI and evaluation of pancreatic duct integrity is possible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends against routine percutaneous fine needle aspiration (FNA) of (peri)pancreatic collections. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. FNA should be performed only if there is suspicion of infection and clinical/imaging signs are unclear. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends initial goal-directed intravenous fluid therapy with Ringer's lactate (e. g. 5 - 10 mL/kg/h) at onset. Fluid requirements should be patient-tailored and reassessed at frequent intervals. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends against antibiotic or probiotic prophylaxis of infectious complications in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends invasive intervention for patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis and clinically suspected or proven infected necrosis. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests that the first intervention for infected necrosis should be delayed for 4 weeks if tolerated by the patient. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends performing endoscopic or percutaneous drainage of (suspected) infected walled-off necrosis as the first interventional method, taking into account the location of the walled-off necrosis and local expertise. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that, in the absence of improvement following endoscopic transmural drainage of walled-off necrosis, endoscopic necrosectomy or minimally invasive surgery (if percutaneous drainage has already been performed) is to be preferred over open surgery as the next therapeutic step, taking into account the location of the walled-off necrosis and local expertise. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends long-term indwelling of transluminal plastic stents in patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. Lumen-apposing metal stents should be retrieved within 4 weeks to avoid stent-related adverse effects.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Proteomics and irritable bowel syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a gastrointestinal disease that according to Rome IV criteria is subdivided into four subtypes. The pathophysiology of this disease is not well understood due to numerous factors playing multiple roles in disease development, such as diet, stress and hormones. IBS has a variety of symptoms and overlaps with many other gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal diseases. Area covered: This review aims to present an overview of implementation of proteomics in experimental studies in the field of IBS. Expert commentary: Proteomics is commonly used for biomarker discovery in and has also been extensively used in IBS research. The necessity of a sensitive and specific biomarker for IBS is apparent, but despite the intensive research performed in this field, an appropriate biomarker is not yet available.

Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy is associated with a lower adenoma miss rate: a multicenter randomized tandem study.

Background and study aims The Endocuff (ARC Medical Design, Leeds, UK) is a device that, when mounted on the tip of an endoscope, may assist with inspection of a greater surface of the colonic mucosa by pulling backwards, flattening, and stretching the colonic folds as the endoscope is gradually withdrawn. We aimed to compare the adenoma miss rates of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy with those of conventional colonoscopy. Patients and methods The included patients underwent same-day, back-to-back, (Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy as the index procedure followed by conventional colonoscopy or vice versa, randomly assigned 1:1) colonoscopies, performed by six endoscopists with documented adenoma detection rates > 35 %, in four tertiary endoscopy facilities. Results We randomized 200 patients (mean age 61.2 years [standard deviation 9.8]; 86.5 % colorectal cancer screening surveillance cases). Overall, there were seven incomplete examinations using Endocuff and one with conventional colonoscopy (P = 0.03). Times for endoscope insertion (5.0 minutes [0.8 - 21.0] vs. 5.0 minutes [1.0 - 16.0]; P = 0.49) and withdrawal (6.0 minutes [3.2 - 29.0] vs. 6.0 minutes [3.1 - 17.0]; P = 0.06) were similar for Endocuff-assisted and conventional colonoscopy. We detected one cancer and 195 adenomas; 84 in the proximal colon. Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy showed significantly lower overall and proximal colon adenoma miss rates compared with conventional colonoscopy (14.7 % [8.0 % - 21.0 %] vs. 38.4 % [28.1 % - 48.6 %] and 10.4 % [1.8 % - 19.1 %] vs. 38.9 % [23.0 % - 54.8 %], respectively). No difference between the two arms was shown regarding advanced adenoma miss rates, either overall or in the proximal colon. There were no serious adverse events related to the procedures. Conclusions In comparison with conventional colonoscopy, Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy has a significantly lower adenoma miss rate when performed by high-detector endoscopists. However, the incomplete colonoscopy rate with Endocuff is higher.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02340065.

Lower adenoma miss rate with FUSE vs. conventional colonoscopy with proximal retroflexion: a randomized back-to-back trial.

Background and study aims Full-spectrum colonoscopy (FSC) promises to increase adenoma detection by providing a wider field of view. The aim of this study was to compare adenoma miss rates of FSC with those of conventional colonoscopy complemented by right-colon re-examination using scope retroflexion (CC/R). Patients and methods At two tertiary endoscopy facilities, patients who were scheduled for colonoscopy for the assessment of symptoms or for colorectal cancer screening/surveillance were randomized (1:1) to undergo same-day, back-to-back colonoscopies (FSC or CC/R first), performed by one of five endoscopists who had documented adenoma detection rates > 35 %. Per-protocol data were analyzed. Results We randomized 220 patients. There were five FSC technical failures (three air pump and two left screen); therefore, 107 and 108 cases were analyzed in the FSC and CC/R index procedure arms, respectively. Withdrawal times were similar for FSC and CC/R (7.7 minutes vs. 7.6 minutes). Overall, we detected 3 cancers and 153 adenomas (FSC = 92; CC/R = 61); 81 were detected in the proximal colon, 3 of which were detected by retroflexed examination. By per-lesion analysis, FSC showed a significantly lower adenoma miss rate compared with CC/R overall (10.9 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.8 to 18.1] vs. 33.7 % [95 %CI 23.4 to 44.1]) and in the proximal colon (13.9 % [95 %CI 2.6 to 25.2] vs. 42.2 % [95 %CI 27.8 to 56.7]). The advanced adenoma miss rate was lower with FSC overall (4.3 % [95 %CI - 4.0 to 12.7] vs. 25.9 % [95 %CI 9.4 to 42.5]). There were no adverse events. Conclusions FSC outperformed conventional colonoscopy with right-colon scope retroflexion in the detection of missed adenomas, both overall and in the proximal colon, even when performed by experienced endoscopists.Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02117674).