Pre-medication with simethicone and N-acetyl cysteine for improving mucosal visibility during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Diagnostic performance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be compromized due to adherent mucus and foam. In this study, we aimed at assessing the impact of premedication on mucosal visibility during endoscopy. METHODS: This is a double-blinded (patient and investigator), randomized trial conducted at a tertiary care centre. Patients were randomized into four groups: A (water), B (simethicone [S]), C (N-acetyl cysteine [NAC]), D (S + NAC). Premedication solutions were administered 10-30 minutes before endoscopy and mucosal visibility graded from 1 (best) to 4 (worst) (1 best, 4 worst). Total mucosal visibility scores (TMVS) from six sites ranged from 6 (best) to 24 (worst) points. The primary outcome of study was comparison of TMVS between simethicone and combination (S + NAC) premedication groups. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and impact of endoscopy timing on TMVS. RESULTS: Total 800 patients (39 years, 68.8% males) were randomized into four groups. Median TMVS were significantly lower in groups B (7 [6-8]) and D (8 [6-9]) as compared to A (11 [9-13]) and C (10 [8-12]). Proportion of cases with adequate gastric mucosal visibility (score < 7) was 26% in group A, 71% in group B, 36% in group C and 79% in group D. There was no difference in TMVS in groups A and C (p = 0.137). TMVS were significantly lower in late (> 20-30 minutes) vs. early (10-20 minutes) endoscopy sub-group (8 [7-11] vs, 9 ([7-11], p = 0.001). However, TMVS were similar between group B and group D in early endoscopy group (p = 0.451). There was no significant difference in the lesion detection rate among the different premedication drugs (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Premedication with simethicone or combination (simethicone and NAC) significantly improves mucosal visibility during EGD. If early endoscopy is indicated, simethicone provides similar mucosal visibility and may be an effective alternative to combined premedication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05951712.

Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy: Experience from a single large tertiary care centre.

Background and study aims Capsule endoscopy (CE) has transformed examination of the small bowel (SB), once considered a dark continent. The present study aimed to describe the indications, diagnostic yield, practical issues and complications of CE in one of the largest tertiary center in India. Patients and methods This retrospective analysis from a prospectively maintained database, conducted from January 2013 to June 2021 included 1155 CEs performed during this period. Patient medical records were reviewed for indications, results, and complications of CE. Results A total of 1154 patients (809 males and 345 females), mean age 53 years (range 6-87 years), one capsule got stuck in the esophagus, were included in the study. Active SB bleeding had no effect on SB transit time (324.7±161 minutes, n = 137 patients with active bleed vs 310.6±166.9 minutes, n = 1017 patients without active bleed; P = 0.35). The indication and diagnostic yield (DY) of CE were potential overt SB bleed (68.6% & 43.9%), potential occult SB bleed (8.2% and 40%), chronic diarrhea (7.9% and 28.4%), abdominal pain (6.5% and 21.3%), anemia (5.9% and 57.9%), and suspected/known case of Crohn's disease (2.3% & 56.5%) respectively. The DY for patients with age ≥60 years was similar to those with age < 60 years (61.9% vs. 51.8% respectively; P = 0.4). 21 patients (1.8%) had capsule retention of which six (0.5%) had to be referred for surgery. Conclusions CE is a safe and effective investigation with ever increasing range of indications. Potential SB bleed remains the most common indication for CE with high detection rate.

Diagnostic yield and technical performance of the novel motorized spiral enteroscopy compared with single-balloon enteroscopy in suspected Crohn's disease: a prospective study (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Both single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) and the novel motorized spiral enteroscopy (NMSE) are effective techniques for device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE). To date, no study has prospectively compared both modalities in suspected Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: Patients with suspected CD undergoing either SBE or NMSE between March 2021 and December 2021 in a high-volume tertiary center were prospectively compared for technical success (ability to reach the lesion), diagnostic yield, depth of maximal insertion (DMI), procedure time, and total enteroscopy rates. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-seven patients (37.2% female; aged 7-75 years) with suspected CD underwent 201 DAEs. Technical success was 83% (SBE 81.5% vs NMSE 87.3%, P = .61) and impacted subsequent management in 92% (SBE 88.5% vs NMSE 97.8%, P = .2). Technical success with antegrade NMSE was significantly higher (81.4%) than antegrade SBE (33.3%, P = .007) for lesions in the proximal ileum and beyond. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic yield (SBE 80.8% vs NMSE 83.6%, P = .65). Median procedure time was significantly lower in both antegrade (NMSE, 40 minutes [range, 10-75]; SBE, 60 minutes [range, 20-180]; P < .0001) and retrograde (NMSE, 25 minutes [range, 20-60]; SBE, 60 minutes [range, 20-180]; P < .0001) NMSE. Median DMI was higher with antegrade NMSE (NMSE, 400 cm [range, 70-600]; SBE, 180 cm [range, 60-430]; P < .0001). The total enteroscopy rate was higher with NMSE (37% vs .7% with SBE, P < .0001). All adverse events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: Both NMSE and SBE are safe and effective for small-bowel evaluation in suspected CD. NMSE is superior to SBE with regard to deeper small-bowel evaluation with complete small-bowel coverage and shorter procedure time.

Is intraoperative enteroscopy still relevant in small bowel disorders in the era of capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy? Real-world experience from a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: With the advent of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE), the indication of intraoperative enteroscopy (IOE) has become limited due to reported high morbidity/mortality. Most of the earlier studies on IOE were small/from pre-VCE/DAE era. We aimed to evaluate the impact of IOE in management of small bowel disorders (SBD) in post-VCE/DAE era. METHODS: Patients with SBD undergoing IOE over last 15 years were evaluated retrospectively. Overall diagnostic/therapeutic yield, incremental diagnostic yield over preoperative investigations, and adverse events were noted. We also evaluated the number of cases in which IOE changed the management or guided surgical or endoscopic therapy. Rebleeding and recurrence were evaluated in patients with available follow-up data. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients (59 male, 9-82 years) were included in the study. Overall diagnostic and therapeutic yield were 92.1% and 85.4%, respectively. Common findings of IOE were benign ulcers/strictures (30.1%), vascular lesions (26%), diverticula (15.1%), and tumors (13.7%). A total of 49.4% (44/89), 36% (32/89), and 20.2% (18/89) underwent VCE, DAE, or both, respectively, before IOE. Incremental diagnostic yield over preoperative work-up was 31.5% (28/89), and IOE changed the management in 37.1% (33/89) patients. IOE was used to guide surgery/endotherapy in 39.3% (35/89) patients. Recurrent gastrointestinal bleed occurred in 21.2% (14/66) patients. Morbidity and mortality rates were 20.2% (18/89) and 3.4% (3/89), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative enteroscopy remains an essential technique to evaluate SBD and can detect new and additional lesions even after extensive preoperative evaluation. IOE is useful in guiding therapy in preoperatively identified lesions and can change management in a substantial proportion of patients. Hence, IOE has a definitive role in post-VCE/DAE era in carefully selected patients with SBD.

Diagnostic utility of EUS-guided tissue acquisition in children: A tertiary care center experience.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: EUS is frequently utilized for tissue acquisition in adult patients. However, the literature is limited regarding the utility of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration or biopsy (FNA or FNB) in children. In this study, we aim to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA/FNB in children with various gastrointestinal diseases. METHODS: The data of children (≤18 years) who underwent EUS-FNA/FNB from March 2014 to June 2020 were analyzed, retrospectively. The following parameters were analyzed: technical success, adverse events, and impact on the final diagnosis. RESULTS: Sixty-seven children (32 - boys, 14.8 ± 2.9 years, range 8-18 years), underwent EUS-guided tissue acquisition procedures using standard therapeutic echoendoscope during the study period. The indications included solid pancreatic lesions in 29 (43.3%), mediastinal or abdominal lymphadenopathy in 30 (44.7%), cystic pancreatic lesions in 5 (7.5%), subepithelial lesions in 2 (3%), and retroperitoneal mass in 1 (1.5%). EUS-FNA and-FNB were performed in 42 and 25 children, respectively. All the procedures could be successfully performed and there was no major procedure-related adverse event. Minor adverse events included self-limiting throat pain (10) and abdominal pain (3), self-limited bleeding at puncture site (3), and transient fever (1). EUS-FNA/FNB provided a histopathological diagnosis in 59 (88.1%) children. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided tissue acquisition using standard echoendoscope is feasible and safe in the pediatric age group. EUS-FNA/FNB establishes diagnosis in majority of the children when performed for appropriate clinical indication.

Single balloon enteroscopy in children for evaluation of small bowel diseases in children: A large, tertiary center study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Device assisted enteroscopy is the cornerstone for small bowel evaluation. However, the data are limited in pediatric patients. In this study, we aim to evaluate the safety and utility of single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) in children. METHODS: The data of children (≤18-years) who underwent SBE from November 2010 to July 2020 was analyzed, retrospectively. The safety and diagnostic yield of SBE were assessed. RESULTS: 189-SBE procedures (males 117, mean age 15.1 ± 2.76, range 3-18 years) were performed in 174-children. The indications for SBE were chronic abdominal pain in 119 (68.4%), gastrointestinal bleed 17 (9.8%), chronic diarrhea 17 (9.8%) and vomiting 13 (7.5%). Antegrade, retrograde and combined SBE were performed in 98 (51.8%), 77 (40.7%), 7 (3.7%) children, respectively. The mean length of small bowel intubation in antegrade and retrograde SBE groups were 168.9 ± 58.6 cm and 120.7 ± 52.1 cm, respectively. Overall, a positive finding was seen in 117 (67.2%) cases. The most common findings were ileal and jejunal ulcers with or without strictures in 76 (64.9%) children. A total of 18 therapeutic enteroscopic procedures were performed. There were no major adverse events. CONCLUSION: SBE is a safe and effective procedure for the evaluation and management of small bowel diseases in children.