Efficacy and Safety of Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (CS-EMR) for Nonampullary Duodenal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increasing interest in cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR), and studies have shown its safety and efficacy for colonic polyps. This meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of CS-EMR for the removal of duodenal adenomas. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of several databases, from inception through February 2023, for studies that addressed outcomes of CS-EMR for nonampullary duodenal adenomas. We used the random-effects model for the statistical analysis. The weighted pooled rates were used to summarize the technical success, polyp recurrence, bleeding, and perforation events. Cochran Q test and I2 statistics adjudicated heterogeneity. RESULTS: Six studies were included in the analysis. In all, 178 duodenal polyps were resected using CS-EMR. The pooled rates were 95.8% (95% CI 89.1-98.5%, I2=21.5%) for technical success and 21.2% (95% CI 8.5-43.6%, I2=78%) for polyp recurrence. With regards to CS-EMR safety, the pooled rates were 4.2% (95% CI 1.6-10.5%, I2=12%) for immediate bleeding, 3.4% (95% CI 1.5-7.6%, I2=0%) for delayed bleeding, 2.8% (95% CI 1.1-6.7%, I2=0%) for perforation, and 2% (95% CL 0.5-7.5%, I2=0%) for post-polypectomy syndrome. Rates were not significantly different for large adenomas. Three studies reported data on CS-EMR and conventional EMR. Compared with conventional EMR, CS-EMR had lower odds of delayed bleeding, OR 0.11 (CI 0.02-0.62, P value 0.012, I2=0%). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that CS-EMR is a safe and effective strategy for the resection of nonampullary duodenal adenomas, with an acceptable recurrence rate. Data from larger randomized controlled studies are needed to validate our findings.

The spearfishing sign: differentiating mucin from mural nodules in pancreatic cysts.

Video 1EUS evaluation of intracystic mucin and demonstration of spearfishing sign.

Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection for colon polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) can reduce the risks associated with electrocautery during colon polyp resection. Data on efficacy are variable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled efficacy and safety rates of CS-EMR. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of multiple databases, from inception to March 2023, for studies addressing outcomes of CS-EMR for colon polyps. The weighted pooled estimates with 95 %CIs were calculated using the random effects model. I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity. RESULTS: 4137 articles were reviewed, and 16 studies, including 2592 polyps in 1922 patients (51.4 % female), were included. Overall, 54.4 % of polyps were adenomas, 45 % were sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and 0.6 % were invasive carcinomas. Polyp recurrence after CS-EMR was 6.7 % (95 %CI 2.4 %-17.4 %, I2  = 94 %). The recurrence rate was 12.3 % (95 %CI 3.4 %-35.7 %, I2  = 94 %) for polyps ≥ 20 mm, 17.1 % (95 %CI 4.6 %-46.7 %, I2  = 93 %) for adenomas, and 5.7 % (95 %CI 3.2 %-9.9 %, I2  = 50 %) for SSLs. The pooled intraprocedural bleeding rate was 2.6 % (95 %CI 1.5 %-4.5 %, I2  = 51 %), the delayed bleeding rate was 1.5 % (95 %CI 0.8 %-2.7 %, I2  = 18 %), and no perforations or post-polypectomy syndromes were reported, with estimated rates of 0.6 % (95 %CI 0.3 %-1.3 %, I2  = 0 %) and 0.6 % (95 %CI 0.3 %-1.4 %, I2  = 0 %), respectively. CONCLUSION: CS-EMR demonstrated an excellent safety profile for colon polyps, with variable recurrence rates based on polyp size and histology. Large prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection for upper gastrointestinal tract lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is used to resect difficult superficial mucosal lesions and sub-epithelial lesions (SELs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EFTR for upper gastrointestinal tract (GIT) lesions. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus databases for studies published in the English language that addressed outcomes of EFTR for upper GIT lesions through November 2021. The weighted pooled rates with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Cochran Q test and I statistics were used to calculate heterogeneity. RESULTS: We identify 740 articles on the initial search and six studies met the inclusion criteria. 140 patients (45.7% females) with 142 lesions were analyzed. Four studies used the full-thickness resection device (FTRD®). EFTR was performed for 26 adenomas, 97 SELs, six adenocarcinomas, and ten full-thickness biopsies. The overall technical success rate was 86.9% (CI 79.8-94%, I 2 = 38.9%), R0 resection was 80% (CI 67.6-92.3%, I 2 = 75.6%), and the overall adverse events rate was 18.6% (9.8-27.2%, I 2 = 49.4%). Major adverse events included six episodes of major bleeding, three micro-perforations, one large duodenal perforation, and one case of mucosal damage from FTRD®. At 3-6 months follow-up, there were only two cases of recurrence (R0 was not achieved in both). CONCLUSION: EFTR has a high technical and clinical success rate in managing upper GIT lesions with an acceptable safety profile. Large prospective studies comparing EFTR with conventional endoscopic resection techniques are needed.

Splenic injury is an under-recognized adverse event of in-patient colonoscopy: a nationwide analysis.

Background and study aims Splenic injury (SI) during colonoscopy is an underappreciated adverse event. Our aim was to examine the occurrence and outcomes of patients who developed SI after inpatient colonoscopy using a nationwide dataset. Patients and methods Retrospective, observational study using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2012 and 2018. All patients with ICD9/10CM procedural codes for colonoscopy with or without SI were included. The primary outcome was the association between SI and inpatient colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were inpatient morbidity, mortality, resource utilization, splenectomy rates, hospital length of stay and total hospital costs and charges. Comparative analyses were performed between patients with and without SI. Multivariate regression analyses were utilized. Results A total of 2,258,040 of inpatient colonoscopies were included. Of these, 240 had associated SI and 25 patients required splenectomy (10.4 %). The incidence of colonoscopy-associated SI remained relatively stable between 2012 and 2018 (0.033 % versus 0.020 %, respectively). The mean age of patients with and without SI was 63.7 and 64.1 years, respectively. The occurrence of SI was calculated as 10.63 cases per 100,000 inpatient colonoscopies. Patients who had associated SI displayed significantly higher odds of inpatient mortality (aOR: 14.45) and ICU stay (aOR: 10.11) compared to those without SI. Conclusions Splenic injury confers significantly higher odds of inpatient mortality, and resource utilization. The incidence of SI related to colonoscopy remained stable during the study period. Although uncommon, SI should be considered when encountering patients with abdominal pain after colonoscopy.

Preexisting opioid use disorder is associated with poor outcomes in hospitalized acute pancreatitis patients.

INTRODUCTION: Although opioids are widely used for pain management in acute pancreatitis, the impact of opioid use disorder (OUD) on outcomes in patients with acute pancreatitis remains unknown. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the OUD on outcomes in patients hospitalized with acute pancreatitis and delineate the trends associated with OUD and acute pancreatitis using a nationally representative sample. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with acute pancreatitis using the combined releases of the year 2005-2014 of the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Patients over the age of 18 years with a principal diagnosis of acute pancreatitis were divided into cohorts of patients with opioid use disorders and those without. The primary measured outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were healthcare utilization measures, including length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs. RESULTS: A total of 2 593 831 hospitalizations of acute pancreatitis were included; of which, 37 849 (1.46%) had a secondary diagnosis of OUD. Total acute pancreatitis-related hospitalizations increased from 237 882 in 2005 to 274 006 in 2014. At the same time prevalence of OUD in acute pancreatitis patients also increased from 1 to 2.1%. Patients with OUD had significantly increased mortality as compared to patients without OUD (aOR: 1.4; P < 0.001). At the same time, acute pancreatitis patients with OUD were associated with 1.3 days longer LOS as compared to other acute pancreatitis patients (P < 0.001]. The mean adjusted difference in total hospitalization costs was $2353 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: OUD is associated with a significant increase in LOS, healthcare utilization cost and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted for acute pancreatitis. Therefore, clinicians should exercise caution in prescribing opioid medications to this high-risk patient population and other modalities such as nonopioid pain medications should be tried as alternatives to opioid analgesics.

Quality Gaps in Management of Acute Pancreatitis: A Tertiary Care Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a leading cause of inpatient care among gastrointestinal conditions. Our study compares the management of AP and adherence to guidelines among teaching medicine, nonteaching medicine, and surgical services within the same center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of AP patients admitted to our center between January 2016 and January 2017 and analyzed the clinical and epidemiological data. RESULTS: Of 115 patients, 65% were admitted to medicine (IM), and 35% were admitted to surgery. Mean age was 53.9 (standard deviation [SD], 15) years, and 52% were males; 38.6% (n = 29) of IM patients were prescribed lactated Ringer's solution for fluid resuscitation (mean rate of 153 [SD, 44.98] mL/h on teaching and 113 [SD, 43.56] mL/h on the nonteaching service). Antibiotics were prescribed to 22.6% (n = 17) of IM patients. On the surgical service, 77.5% of patients were prescribed lactated Ringer's solution for fluid resuscitation (mean rate of 108.25 [SD, 1.19] mL/h); 52.5% of patients received antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to guidelines for management of AP is inadequate, and nonuniformity exists across different services within the same institution. There is a need for quality improvement initiatives.

Gastroenterology Fellowship Applicants' Perspectives on GI Program Preferences.

Gastroenterology fellowship continues to be highly competitive among internal medicine subspecialties. Recruiting excellent applicants is also important for GI fellowship program directors. We aim to examine factors that influence GI fellowship applicants' perspectives about a fellowship program. The authors conducted an anonymous online survey of applicants focusing on program characteristics including location, faculty, research/clinical opportunities, website, and interview day experience. Anonymous survey responses were recorded regarding program characteristics, and subsequent candidate preferences were evaluated for factors influencing their decision. Candidates were also asked to evaluate their interview experience and share other comments about the program. Though GI fellowship applicants have varying preferences regarding the ideal training program, some opinions converged. The study of these trends can inform program directors regarding areas for improvement that in turn can help attract the best applicants.

What constitutes urgent endoscopy? A social media snapshot of gastroenterologists' views during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background and study aims There is a consensus among gastroenterology organizations that elective endoscopic procedures should be deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the decision to perform urgent procedures and to defer entirely elective procedures is mostly evident, there is a wide "middle ground" of time-sensitive but not technically urgent or emergent endoscopic interventions. We aimed to survey gastroenterologists worldwide using Twitter to help elucidate these definitions using commonly encountered clinical scenarios during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A 16-question survey was designed by the authors to include common clinical scenarios that do not have clear guidelines regarding the timing or urgency of endoscopic evaluation. This survey was posted on Twitter. The survey remained open to polling for 48 hours. During this time, multiple gastroenterologists and fellows with prominent social media presence were tagged to disseminate the survey. Results The initial tweet had 38,795 impressions with a total of 2855 engagements. There was significant variation in responses from gastroenterologists regarding timing of endoscopy in these semi-urgent scenarios. There were only three of 16 scenarios for which more than 70 % of gastroenterologists agreed on procedure-timing . For example, significant variation was noted in regard to timing of upper endoscopy in patients with melena, with 44.5 % of respondents believing that everyone with melena should undergo endoscopic evaluation at this time. Similarly, about 35 % of respondents thought that endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography should only be performed in patients with choledocholithiasis with abdominal pain or jaundice. Conclusion Our analysis shows that there is currently lack of consensus among gastroenterologists in regards to timing of semi-urgent or non-life-threatening procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. These results support the need for the ongoing development of societal guidance for these "semi-urgent" scenarios to help gastroenterologists in making difficult triage decisions.

Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be one of the most prevalent gastrointestinal tract disorders. Management of GERD is individualized for each patient depending on severity of symptoms, complications of GERD and patient/physician preference. The different management options include life style modification, pharmacological therapy, minimally invasive procedures and surgery. The final decision regarding management should be made based on an individualized patient centered approach on a case-by-case basis in consultation with a multidisciplinary team including primary care physician, gastroenterologist and surgeon. We provide a comprehensive review for the management of GERD.

Adherence to post colorectal cancer surveillance colonoscopy guidelines at a tertiary care center / Adesão às diretrizes de colonoscopia para rastreamento após câncer colorretal em um centro de atendimento terciário

Abstract Background: Surveillance colonoscopy 1 year after resection of colorectal cancer is recommended by all major societies, including National Comprehensive Cancer Network and United States Multi Society Task Force. Study objectives: Our study assesses adherence to post colorectal cancer resection surveillance colonoscopy guidelines at a large tertiary care center and aims to identify reasons for non-adherence. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted for patients who underwent curative resection for colorectal cancer between January 2016 and June 2017. Adherence to surveillance colonoscopy for non-obstructed or partially obstructed colon and rectal cancers was defined as performance of colonoscopy 11-14 months and 11-15 months after surgery, respectively. Results: A total of 80 patients were identified. Mean age was 66 ± 13 years and 58% (n = 46) were males. 60% (n = 48) had colon cancer and 40% (n = 32) had rectal cancer. 69% (n = 24) of patients with colon cancer and 42% (n = 8) of patients with rectal cancer adhered to surveillance colonoscopy guidelines and the mean time to colonoscopy was 315 ± 44 days and 369 ± 103 days, respectively. The most commonly identified reasons for non-adherence to surveillance colonoscopy included metastases (10.9%) and patients' refusal to undergo surveillance (6.5%). Conclusion: Overall, post colorectal cancer resection to follow up surveillance is inadequate. There is a need to identify barriers to surveillance post colorectal cancer resection and address them.

Resumo Introdução: A colonoscopia de rastreamento um ano após a ressecção do câncer colorretal é recomendada por todas as principais sociedades, incluindo a National Comprehensive Cancer Network e a Multi Society Task Force dos Estados Unidos. Objetivos do estudo: Avaliar a adesão às diretrizes de colonoscopia de rastreamento após ressecção de câncer colorretal em um grande centro de atendimento terciário e identificar razões para a não adesão. Métodos: Um estudo retrospectivo foi realizado em pacientes submetidos a ressecção curativa de câncer colorretal entre janeiro de 2016 a junho de 2017. Adesão à colonoscopia de rastreamento em cânceres de cólon e reto não obstruídos ou parcialmente obstruídos foi definida como a realização do procedimento entre 11 a 14 meses e 11 a 15 meses após a cirurgia, respectivamente. Resultados: Um total de 80 pacientes foram identificados. A média de idade foi de 66 ± 13 anos; 58% (n = 46) eram do sexo masculino, 60% (n = 48) tinham câncer de cólon e 40% (n = 32) tinham câncer de reto. Aderência às diretrizes de colonoscopia de rastreamento foi observada em 69% (n = 24) dos pacientes com câncer de cólon e 42% (n = 8) dos pacientes com câncer retal; o tempo médio até a realização da colonoscopia foi de 315 ± 44 dias e 369 ± 103 dias, respectivamente. Os motivos mais frequentemente identificados para a não adesão à colonoscopia de rastreamento incluíram metástases (10,9%) e recusa dos pacientes (6,5%). Conclusão: De forma geral, o rastreamento após a resecção de câncer colorretal é inadequado. É necessário identificar barreiras ao rastreamento após a ressecção do câncer colorretal e abordá-las.

A Case of Secondary Sclerosing Cholangitis in the setting of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Sclerosing cholangitis represents a spectrum of cholestatic liver disease characterized by inflammation, fibrosis, and stricture of the bile ducts. A 67-year-old Caucasian female with a history of breast cancer in remission, presented with jaundice and an exophytic mass at the base of the tongue. Laboratory data revealed cholestasis with alkaline phosphatase 953 U/L, total bilirubin 7.7 mg/dL, direct bilirubin 6.4 mg/dL, and gamma-glutamyltransferase 3369 U/L. Computed tomography (CT) scan showed widespread lymphadenopathy in the chest, abdomen, and pelvis concerning for lymphoma, acute pancreatitis and biliary dilation with hyperenhancement of the common bile duct wall. Diffuse intrahepatic biliary ductal dilatation and narrowing with multifocal stenosis of the proximal and distal aspects of the common bile duct was seen on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). Findings were consistent with sclerosing cholangitis. Pathology of the oral lesion revealed activin receptor-like kinase 1 (ALK1) positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Chemotherapy was initiated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, adriamycin, vincristine, etoposide, and prednisone (CHOEP-14) regimen, which resulted in significant clinical improvement along with a remarkable decrease in the liver function tests. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) has only rarely been reported in the literature as a cause of secondary sclerosing cholangitis, i.e., only 0.2% to 2.0% of patients with NHL present with biliary tract obstruction. It is essential for gastroenterologists, oncologists, and radiologists to recognize sclerosing cholangitis occurring secondary to a systemic disease because early initiation of treatment can improve clinical outcome, as manifested by our case.

Endoscopy Is Relatively Safe in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke and Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH) is reported to occur in 1-8% of patients admitted with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). AIS is considered to be a relative contraindication to GIE. AIMS: Evaluate the outcomes of gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) in patients hospitalized with AIS and GIH. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with AIS and GIH were included from the National Inpatient Sample 2005-2014. Primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality in patients with AIS and GIH who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy. Secondary outcomes were (1) resource utilization as measured by length of stay (LOS) and total hospitalization costs and (2) to identify independent predictors of undergoing GIE in patients with AIS and GIH. Confounders were adjusted for by using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 75,756 hospitalizations were included in the analysis. Using a multivariate analysis, the in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients who underwent GIE as compared to those who did not [aOR: 0.4, P < 0.001]. Patients who underwent GIE also had significantly shorter adjusted mean LOS [adjusted mean difference in LOS: 0.587 days, P < 0.001]. Patients with AIS and GIH who did not undergo GIE had significantly higher adjusted total hospitalization costs. [Mean adjusted difference in total hospitalization costs was $5801 (P < 0.001).] Independent predictors of undergoing GIE in this population were male gender, age > 65 years, Asian or Pacific race, hypovolemic shock, need for blood transfusion and admission to urban non-teaching hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal endoscopy can be safely performed in a substantial number of patients with AIS and GIH.

Variations in the medical treatment of inflammatory bowel disease among gastroenterologists.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: With expanding available treatment options and evolving understanding of the risks and benefits of medical therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there is the possibility of significant variations in treatment and outcomes. Little is known about the variation in treatment between IBD specialists and other gastroenterology (GI) physicians. Evaluating possible variations is an important first step to help address standardized care and optimize treatment. We studied the differences in use of biologics and immunomodulators in the management of IBD patients at a tertiary care hospital between IBD-trained physicians and other gastroenterologists. METHODS: A total of 325 IBD patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 216 patients received care with an IBD physician and 109 had other GI/non-IBD physicians as their main caregivers. RESULTS: The unadjusted use of immunomodulators (35.6% vs 16.5%, p = 0.001), biologics (45.8% vs 22.9%, p =0.001) and dual therapy (biologics and immunomodulator) (14.4% vs 3.7%, p =0.001) was significantly higher in the IBD-physician group. These differences in therapy between the two groups remained after adjusting for patient and disease characteristics. CONCLUSION: There are significant variations in the treatment of patients with IBD by GI physicians. The use of biologics and immunomodulators is higher in GI physicians with dedicated IBD interest and training.

One of the Largest Pancreatic Pseudocysts in the Literature: A Case Report.

The pancreatic pseudocyst is a pancreatic fluid collection which classically develops due to acute or chronic pancreatitis. A 68-year-old male with the remote history of alcohol abuse presented with abdominal pain secondary to acute pancreatitis. The first computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen showed acute necrotizing pancreatitis. He was initially treated conservatively. Repeat CT of the abdomen after two weeks revealed a peripancreatic fluid collection of 20x12x10 cm. One month later, he became septic following biliary stent placement. Repeat CT of the abdomen showed an enlarging pseudocyst of 25x20x14 cm (estimated 7000 mL of fluid). Percutaneous CT-guided cyst drainage was performed and only three liters of infected fluid could be drained which eventually grew Enterococcus faecalis. Due to lack of improvement, he underwent laparotomy with pancreatic necrosectomy, pseudocyst debridement, and cholecystectomy. The patient did well postoperatively and until one-year follow-up visit. The largest pancreatic pseudocyst in the literature (about 9500 mL) was reported in 1882. To our knowledge, this case is the second largest pseudocyst in the literature which was successfully managed by surgical resection.

Diagnostic yield from colon biopsies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and suspected cytomegalovirus infection: is it worth it?

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are often immunosuppressed and are at risk for reactivation of latent cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. We examined the diagnostic yield from colon biopsies in IBD patients with suspected CMV infection. METHODS: Patients above 18 years of age who underwent testing for CMV on colon biopsies between January 1st, 2012, and December 31st, 2015, were identified from a pathology data base. A positive CMV result was included only if testing included both hematoxylin/eosin staining and immunohistochemistry from two or more biopsy samples. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 99 had a diagnosis of IBD: 30 with Crohn's disease, 63 with ulcerative colitis, and 6 with indeterminate colitis. As regards treatment, 21.2% of the patients had biologic therapy alone, 13.1% received immunomodulators, and 11.1% were treated with combined biologic and immunomodulator therapy within 3 months of the colon biopsy. In addition, 32.3% of the patients were on steroids. Of the 99 IBD patients, only 1 had biopsy-proven CMV colitis. CONCLUSION: The yield from colon biopsies with hematoxylin/eosin staining and immunohistochemistry to test for CMV in IBD flare is very low. Further multicenter studies with large numbers of patients are needed to compare all testing modalities in the same cohort of patients. This may help identify which subgroup of IBD patients are likely to benefit from specific modalities of CMV testing, with potential cost-saving implications.

Double pylorus: two sides to one story.

It is important to recognize that "congenital" double pylorus is a benign condition, so that extensive work-up can be avoided. Also, endoscopists should be aware of the double pylorus and demonstrate extra caution during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).