Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing a novel and dedicated device with conventional endoscopic techniques for the treatment of buried bumper syndrome (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Buried bumper syndrome (BBS) is a rare adverse event of PEG tubes. This study compared the newly developed Flamingo device (Fujifilm Medwork GmbH, Höchstadt, Germany) with conventional endoscopic techniques for BBS treatment. METHODS: This prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the Flamingo set (study group) with other endoscopic techniques (control group) for BBS treatment in 6 German hospitals. The primary endpoint was procedure time. Further outcome parameters were technical success, adverse event rate, and number and cost of devices used in each group. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients (18 in each group; mean age, 73 years; 12 women) were included in this study between March 2018 and December 2022. Median time since placement of the feeding tube was 30 months. The bumper was located in the gastric corpus in 27 patients, and the internal bumper was completely overgrown in 31 patients. The duration of the removal procedure was 17 minutes (range, 3-72) in the study group compared with 38 minutes (range, 12-111) in the control group (P = .046). The primary technical success rate was 77.8% in the study group and 55.6% in the control group (P = .157), whereas the overall technical success rate was 100% compared with 83.3% (P = .070). Adverse events occurred in 4 patients (11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic removal of the buried bumper using the Flamingo device was significantly faster than that with other endoscopic techniques and showed a higher technical success rate. This device may become the endoscopic treatment of choice for BBS. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03186066.).

Percutaneous transhepatic or endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in malignant distal bile duct obstruction using a self-expanding metal stent: Study protocol for a prospective European multicenter trial (PUMa trial).

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was associated with better clinical success and a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) than fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in recent single center studies with mainly retrospective design and small case numbers (< 50). The aim of this prospective European multicenter study is to compare both drainage procedures using ultrasound-guidance and primary metal stent implantation in patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction (PUMa Trial). METHODS: The study is designed as a non-randomized, controlled, parallel group, non-inferiority trial. Each of the 16 study centers performs the procedure with the best local expertise (PTBD or EUS-BD). In PTBD, bile duct access is performed by ultrasound guidance. EUS-BD is performed as an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AGS). Insertion of a metal stent is intended in both procedures in the first session. Primary end point is technical success. Secondary end points are clinical success, duration pf procedure, AEs graded by severity, length of hospital stay, re-intervention rate and survival within 6 months. The target case number is 212 patients (12 calculated dropouts included). DISCUSSION: This study might help to clarify whether PTBD is non-inferior to EUS-BD concerning technical success, and whether one of both interventions is superior in terms of efficacy and safety in one or more secondary endpoints. Randomization is not provided as both procedures are rarely used after failed endoscopic biliary drainage and study centers usually prefer one of both procedures that they can perform best. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03546049 (22.05.2018).

Over-the-scope-clips versus standard treatment in high-risk patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a randomised controlled trial (STING-2).

OBJECTIVE: Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is managed by standard endoscopic combination therapy, but a few cases remain difficult and carry a high risk of persistent or recurrent bleeding. The aim of our study was to compare first-line over-the-scope-clips (OTSC) therapy with standard endoscopic treatment in these selected patients. DESIGN: We conducted a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre study (NCT03331224). Patients with endoscopic evidence of acute NVUGIB and high risk of rebleeding (defined as complete Rockall Score ≥7) were included. Primary endpoint was clinical success defined as successful endoscopic haemostasis without evidence of recurrent bleeding. RESULTS: 246 patients were screened and 100 patients were finally randomised (mean of 5 cases/centre and year; 70% male, 30% female, mean age 78 years; OTSC group n=48, standard group n=52). All but one case in the standard group were treated with conventional clips. Clinical success was 91.7% (n=44) in the OTSC group compared with 73.1% (n=38) in the ST group (p=0.019), with persistent bleeding occurring in 0 vs 6 in the OTSC versus standard group (p=0.027), all of the latter being successfully managed by rescue therapy with OTSC. Recurrent bleeding was observed in four patients (8.3%) in the OTSC group and in eight patients (15.4%) in the standard group (p=0.362). CONCLUSION: OTSC therapy appears to be superior to standard treatment with clips when used by trained physicians for selected cases of primary therapy of NVUGIB with high risk of rebleeding. Further studies are necessary with regards to patient selection to identify subgroups benefiting most from OTSC haemostasis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03331224.

Esophageal lichen planus: towards diagnosis of an underdiagnosed disease.

Background: Although lichen planus (LP) is a common skin disorder, the prevalence of esophageal involvement (ELP) and its clinical manifestations are poorly defined. We aimed to establish diagnostic criteria and characterize disease outcomes of ELP.Methods: Clinical, endoscopic, histological, and immunofluorescence data from consecutive patients with known LP between 2013 and 2018 were analyzed. We established endoscopic (denudation and tearing of the mucosa, hyperkeratosis and trachealization) and histological criteria (mucosal detachment, T-lymphocytic infiltrate, intraepithelial apoptosis, dyskeratosis, and fibrinogen deposits along the basement membrane) to grade disease severity. Endoscopic findings were correlated with clinical symptoms. Response to medical therapy was monitored.Results: Fifty-two consecutive patients (median age 59.5 years) were analyzed. According to our grading system, 16 patients were considered as severe and 18 as mild ELP. Dysphagia was the only symptom which differentiated patients with severe (14/16) or mild ELP (8/18) from patients without ELP (1/18). Concomitant oral and genital involvement of LP was associated with the presence of ELP, while oral involvement alone was not. Follow-up of 14/16 patients with severe EPL for at least one year revealed that most of these patients responded to topical corticosteroids (budesonide: n = 9/10 or fluticasone n = 2/2). Three budesonide patients experienced a resolution of symptomatic esophageal stenosis.Conclusions: Esophageal involvement of LP is frequent, but may be asymptomatic. ELP can be diagnosed using the diagnostic criteria proposed here. Dysphagia and combined oral and genital manifestation are associated with ELP. Therapy with topical corticosteroids appears to be a prudent therapeutic approach for ELP.

The Endoscopic Treatment of Iatrogenic Gastrointestinal Perforation.

BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic gastrointestinal perforation is a life-threatening complication that arises very rarely in routine endoscopic procedures, with an incidence of 0.03-0.8%. It is more likely in highly complex and invasive therapeutic interventions. In certain situations, endoscopic closure of the perforation and treatment with antibiotics can obviate the need for emergency surgical repair. METHODS: This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective literature search in PubMed and on a relevant position paper. RESULTS: Existing clinical studies of treatment for iatrogenic gastrointestinal perforation are mainly retrospective and uncontrolled. No randomized and controlled trials have been performed to date. If the perforation is discovered soon after it arises, endoscopic treatment can be considered. Gastrointestinal perforations that are less than 30 mm in size can be closed with a clip. In the esophagus, expanding metal stents can be used as well. Clip application is successful in 80-100% of cases of gastrointestinal perforation, and the perforation remains permanently closed in 60-100% of cases. Reports on the endoscopic treatment of esophageal perforation show mixed results, with closure rates of roughly 90% and clinical success rates of roughly 80%. If endoscopic treatment is not possible, timely laparoscopic or open surgical repair is needed. CONCLUSION: The endoscopic treatment of iatrogenic perforations is safe and reliable. Success depends on early detection, adequate endoscopic closure with properly mastered technique, and the early initiation of concomitant antibiotic treatment, which must be continued for a full course. Most patients who are treated in this way do not need emergency surgery.

Percutaneous endoscopic cecostomy (introducer method) in chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction: Report of two cases and literature review.

We report on two patients with recurrent episodes of chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction (CIPO). A 50-year-old woman with severe multiple sclerosis and an 84-year-old man with Parkinson's disease and dementia had multiple hospital admissions because of pain and distended abdomen. Radiographic and endoscopic findings showed massive dilation of the colon without any evidence of obstruction. Conservative management resolved symptoms only for a short period of time. As these patients were poor candidates for any surgical treatment we carried out percutaneous endoscopic colostomy by placing a 20-Fr tube in the cecum with the introducer method. The procedure led to durable symptom relief without complications. We present these two cases and give a review through the existing literature of the procedure in CIPO.