The Role of High-Resolution Manometry Prior to and Following Antireflux Surgery: The Padova Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the last two decades the development of high-resolution manometry (HRM) has changed and revolutionized the diagnostic assessment of patients complain foregut symptoms. The role of HRM before and after antireflux procedure remains unclear, especially in surgical practice, where a clear understanding of esophageal physiology and hiatus anatomy is essential for optimal outcome of antireflux surgery (ARS). Surgeons and gastroenterologists (GIs) agree that assessing patients following antireflux procedures can be challenging. Although endoscopy and barium-swallow can reveal anatomic abnormalities, physiologic information on HRM allowing insight into the cause of eventually recurrent symptoms could be key to clinical decision making. METHOD: A multi-disciplinary international working group (14 surgeons and 15 GIs) collaborated to develop consensus on the role of HRM pre- and post- ARS, and to develop a postoperative classification to interpret HRM findings. The method utilized was detailed literature review to develop statements, and the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) to assess agreement with the statements. Only statements with an approval rate >80% or a final ranking with a median score of 7 were accepted in the consensus. The working groups evaluated the role of HRM prior to ARS and the role of HRM following ARS. CONCLUSION: This international initiative developed by surgeons and GIs together, summarizes the state of our knowledge of the use of HRM pre- and post-ARS. The Padova Classification was developed to facilitate the interpretation of HRM studies of patients underwent ARS.

Implementation and Analysis of a 5-Year Online Esophageal Motility Curriculum for Gastroenterology Fellows.

BACKGROUND: Motility disorders are frequently encountered in gastroenterology (GI) practice, yet a national structured training curriculum for GI fellows in motility disorders is lacking. Since GI fellowships vary considerably in opportunities for specialized esophageal motility (EM) training, novel educational technology may be leveraged to provide standardized EM curriculum to train GI fellows in esophageal manometry. METHODS: GI fellows participated in an online EM learning program at a single academic center from 2017 to 2022. Fellows answered case-based questions and were provided with evidence-based, corrective feedback related to core EM learning objectives. The primary outcome was change in knowledge and comfort in interpretation and clinical application of EM studies. RESULTS: Sixty-nine fellows actively participated in the online EM curriculum. 65 fellows completed a pre-curriculum test, and 54 fellows completed a post-curriculum test. There was a cumulative improvement between pre-curriculum test and post-curriculum test scores from 70 to 87%, respectively (p < 0.001). Fellows had a mean improvement of 19% in questions as they progressed through the curriculum. Prior to enrolling in the EM course, 26% of fellows felt comfortable in interpreting EM studies compared to 54% of fellows after completion of the program (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: An online, technology-based curriculum was effective in educating GI fellows on core competencies of EM. Fellows demonstrated improvement in proficiency of clinically important EM studies and increased comfort in interpreting EM studies. Further studies are needed to evaluate the use of technology-based learning to widely disseminate a structured training curriculum in EM, particularly in training programs without a motility presence.

Quality Indicator Development for the Approach to Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Modified Delphi Study.

GOALS: Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). BACKGROUND: IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging. STUDY: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process. RESULTS: All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning. CONCLUSION: Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

Quality Indicators for the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite best practice recommendations for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), variation in care exists. METHODS: We used established methodology for quality indicator development to identify metrics to define quality for the treatment of EoE. RESULTS: Among 29 proposed quality indicator statements, 9 (31%) were adopted as highly valid across all categories. Two (22%) of these statements were identified as having existing or suspected quality gaps. DISCUSSION: We identified highly valid EoE quality indicators for adult gastroenterologists, which can be used for quality improvement with resulting benefits for patient outcomes.

Achalasia Quality Indicator Adherence.

BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QIs) are formal ways to track health care performance and outcomes, guide quality improvement, and identify gaps in care delivery. We developed twelve quality indicators for achalasia management which cover the domains of patient education, diagnosis, and treatment of achalasia. AIM: To determine adherence to established quality indicators for achalasia management. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, multicenter evaluation of care patterns for adult patients greater than 18 years old with newly diagnosed achalasia from January 2018 to May 2020. A balanced random patient sample was obtained at four large academic medical centers. Independent electronic health record chart abstraction was performed using a standardized form to determine adherence to applicable QIs. Pooled and de-identified data were analyzed to identify gaps in care. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were included and the overall adherence to applicable quality indicators across all centers was 86%. The median follow-up for all patients from time of diagnosis to end of study was 511 days. Clinicians adhered to all applicable quality indicators in 49 patients (39%). The quality indicator domain with the poorest adherence was patient education (67%), with 50% of patients having had a documented discussion of the risks of gastroesophageal reflux disease following surgical or endoscopic myotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Gaps in the quality of achalasia care delivery were identified, the largest of which relates to patient education about treatment risks. These findings highlight a potential area for future quality improvement studies and form the basis for developing fully specified quality measures.

Racial Disparities in Endoscopy Cancellations During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted healthcare delivery including elective endoscopy. We aimed to determine the prevalence of endoscopy cancellations in the COVID-19 era and identify patient characteristics associated with cancellation due to the pandemic. METHODS: Medical charts were reviewed for adults who cancelled an outpatient endoscopic procedure from 5/2020 to 8/2020. The association of patient characteristics with cancellation of endoscopy due to COVID-19 was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 652 endoscopy cancelations with 211 (32%) due to COVID-19, 384 (59%) due to non-COVID reasons, and 57 (9%) undetermined. Among COVID-19 related cancellations, 75 (36%) were COVID-19 testing logistics related, 121 (57%) were COVID-19 fear related, and 15 (7%) were other. On adjusted analysis, the odds of cancellation due to COVID-19 was significantly higher for black patients (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.07-3.88, p = 0.03), while patients undergoing EGD (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-0.99, p = 0.05) or advanced endoscopy (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.49, p = 0.001) had lower odds of cancellation. The odds of cancelling due to COVID-19 testing logistics was significantly higher among black patients (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.03-9.46, p = 0.05) and patients with Medi-Cal insurance (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.21-6.89, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Black race is associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 related cancellation. Specifically, black patients and those with Medi-Cal are at increased risk of cancellation related to logistics of obtaining pre-endoscopy COVID-19 testing. Racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to endoscopy may be further amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic and warrant further study.

Development of quality indicators for the diagnosis and management of achalasia.

BACKGROUND: The management of achalasia has improved due to diagnostic and therapeutic innovations. However, variability in care delivery remains and no established measures defining quality of care for this population exist. We aimed to use formal methodology to establish quality indicators for achalasia patients. METHODS: Quality indicator concepts were identified from the literature, consensus guidelines and clinical experts. Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Method, experts in achalasia independently ranked proposed concepts in a two-round modified Delphi process based on 1) importance, 2) scientific acceptability, 3) usability, and 4) feasibility. Highly valid measures required strict agreement (≧ 80% of panelists) in the range of 7-9 for across all four categories. KEY RESULTS: There were 17 experts who rated 26 proposed quality indicator topics. In round one, 2 (8%) quality measures were rated valid. In round two, 19 measures were modified based on panel suggestions, and experts rated 10 (53%) of these measures as valid, resulting in a total of 12 quality indicators. Two measures pertained to patient education and five to diagnosis, including discussing treatment options with risk and benefits and using the most recent version of the Chicago Classification to define achalasia phenotypes, respectively. Other indicators pertained to treatment options, such as the use of botulinum toxin for those not considered surgical candidates and management of reflux following achalasia treatment. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Using a robust methodology, achalasia quality indicators were identified, which can form the basis for establishing quality gaps and generating fully specified quality measures.

Virtual Interviews at Graduate Medical Education Training Programs: Determining Evidence-Based Best Practices.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the nation's health care system, including on graduate medical education (GME) training programs. Traditionally, residency and fellowship training program applications involve in-person interviews conducted on-site, with only a minority of programs offering interviews remotely via a virtual platform. However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is anticipated that most interviews will be conducted virtually for the 2021 application cycle and possibly beyond. Therefore, GME training programs need to prepare for the transition to virtual interviews using evidence-based practices. At the University of California, San Francisco, a multidisciplinary task force was convened to review existing literature about virtual interviews and determine best practices. This article summarizes these findings, first discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the virtual interview format and then providing evidence-based best practices for GME training programs. Specifically, the authors make the following recommendations: develop a detailed plan for the interview process, consider using standardized interview questions, recognize and respond to potential biases that may be amplified with the virtual interview format, prepare your own trainees for virtual interviews, develop electronic materials and virtual social events to approximate the interview day, and collect data about virtual interviews at your own institution. With adequate preparation, the virtual interview experience can be high yield, positive, and equitable for both applicants and GME training programs.

GERD for the nongastroenterologist: successful evaluation, management, and lifestyle-based symptom control.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex disorder. Symptoms of heartburn can help find the disorder of GERD. pH testing is the mainstay of evaluation of symptoms, including 24-h and longer pH studies to detect pathologic acid exposure. The use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for approved indications is helpful for both symptomatic relief and esophagitis healing in the majority of patients with abnormal acid exposure. PPI medications are safe in short- or long-term use. It is recommended not to maintain cirrhotic patients on PPI therapy without a meaningful indication. Dietary adjustment can provide benefit to some patients, but the data are mixed on how much benefit has been demonstrated from specific food avoidance. Reduction in weight improves reflux. Obesity has measurable effects on the esophageal acid exposure but fewer effects on the motility of the esophagus itself. Controlling weight and changing lifestyle can be helpful for improving GERD symptoms. For some patients in whom either the control of reflux with medications and lifestyle change is not sufficient or a hernia is contributing to symptom generation, surgical and endosurgical interventions can be considered to help manage reflux after a thorough workup with pH testing and manometry.

Epiphrenic diverticula: An added source of complexity in achalasia management.

Epiphrenic (pulsion) esophageal diverticula can occur in the setting of underlying esophageal motility disorders such as achalasia and present a unique management challenge to the gastroenterologist. Asymptomatic diverticula do not require treatment, but symptomatic diverticula require therapy targeted to the underlying esophageal motility disorder, or else the diverticula will recur. Generally, laparoscopic or combined laparoscopic/thoracoscopic myotomy, diverticulectomy, and anterior fundoplication are required. However, therapeutic options for epiphrenic diverticula are evolving as peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) becomes more commonplace. We review two cases of achalasia complicated by epiphrenic diverticula at our institution. In the first case, type II achalasia was identified and the patient underwent laparoscopic myotomy. In the second case, type III achalasia was present and the patient underwent successful POEM. We discuss the presentation, pathophysiology, and management of epiphrenic diverticula as well as the expanding role for POEM in diverticula.

Effect of individualized feedback on learning curves in EGD and colonoscopy: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastroenterology fellowships need to ensure that trainees achieve competence in upper endoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. Because the impact of structured feedback remains unknown in endoscopy training, this study compared the effect of structured feedback with standard feedback on trainee learning curves for EGD and colonoscopy. METHODS: In this multicenter, cluster, randomized controlled trial, trainees received either individualized quarterly learning curves or feedback standard to their fellowship. Assessment was performed in all trainees using the Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy tool on 5 consecutive procedures after every 25 EGDs and colonoscopies. Individual learning curves were created using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. The primary outcome was the mean CUSUM score in overall technical and overall cognitive skills. RESULTS: In all, 13 programs including 132 trainees participated. The intervention arm (6 programs, 51 trainees) contributed 558 EGD and 600 colonoscopy assessments. The control arm (7 programs, 81 trainees) provided 305 EGD and 468 colonoscopy assessments. For EGD, the intervention arm (-.7 [standard deviation {SD}, 1.3]) had a superior mean CUSUM score in overall cognitive skills compared with the control arm (1.6 [SD, .8], P = .03) but not in overall technical skills (intervention, -.26 [SD, 1.4]; control, 1.76 [SD, .7]; P = .06). For colonoscopy, no differences were found between the 2 arms in overall cognitive skills (intervention, -.7 [SD, 1.3]; control, .7 [SD, 1.3]; P = .95) or overall technical skills (intervention, .1 [SD, 1.5]; control, -.1 [SD, 1.5]; P = .77). CONCLUSIONS: Quarterly feedback in the form of individualized learning curves did not affect learning curves for EGD and colonoscopy in a clinically meaningful manner. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02891304.).

Changing Paradigms in Detection of Dysplasia and Management of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Is Colectomy Still Necessary?

This review chronicles the evolution of dysplasia detection and management in inflammatory bowel disease since 1925, the year the first case report of colitis-related colorectal cancer was published. We conclude that colorectal cancer prevention and dysplasia management for patients with inflammatory bowel disease has changed since this first case report, from somewhat hopeless to hopeful.

Provider, Patient, and Practice Factors Shape Hepatitis B Prevention and Management by Primary Care Providers.

GOALS: To evaluate provider knowledge, attitudes and barriers to hepatitis B virus (HBV) care and management practices across diverse primary care settings. BACKGROUND: Factors influencing adherence to recommended HBV screening and management guidelines are poorly defined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Providers across various health care settings in San Francisco were surveyed. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with recommended HBV screening, vaccination, and disease monitoring. RESULTS: Of 277 (41.3%) responding providers, 42% reported performing HBV screening in >50% of at-risk patients, and 49%, HBV vaccination in >50% of eligible patients. Most reported appropriate monitoring of a majority of HBV-infected patients with alanine aminotransferase (79%) and HBV viral load (67%) every 6 to 12 months, but performed any hepatocellular carcinoma screening in 49%. Provider factors significantly associated with HBV screening were speaking an Asian language [odds ratio (OR), 3.27], offering HBV treatment (OR, 3.00), having >25% of Asian patients in practice (OR, 2.10), practicing in safety net settings (OR, 7.51) and having higher barrier score (OR, 0.74). Appropriate HBV monitoring was associated with provider speaking an Asian language (OR, 3.43) and provider age (OR, 0.68/decade). Hepatocellular carcinoma screening was associated with having >25% of patients speaking English as a second language (OR, 4.26) and practicing in safety net settings (OR, 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of adherence to HBV guidelines were suboptimal irrespective of practice setting and were influenced by certain provider, patient and practice factors. This study reinforces the importance of engaging primary care providers in development, dissemination, and implementation of evidence-based HBV practice guidelines.

Underutilization of palliative care services in the liver transplant population.

AIM: To evaluate use of palliative care services in patients with end-stage liver disease who do not have access to liver transplant. METHODS: Evaluated were end-stage liver disease patients who were removed from the liver transplant wait-list or died prior to transplant at a single transplant center over a 2-year period. Those who were removed due to noncompliance or ultimately transplanted elsewhere were excluded from this study. Patient characteristics associated with palliative care consultation were assessed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty-three patients were listed for liver transplant in 2013-2014 with 107 (16%) dying (n = 62) or removed for clinical decompensation prior to liver transplant (n = 45): Median age was 58 years, and the majority were male (66%), Caucasian (53%), had Child C cirrhosis (61%) or hepatocellular carcinoma (52%). The palliative care team was consulted in only 18 of the 107 patients (17%) who died or were removed, 89% of which occurred as inpatients. Half of these consultations occurred within 72 h of death. In univariable analysis, patients of younger age, white race, and higher end-stage liver disease scores at time of listing and delisting were more likely to receive palliative care services. Only younger age [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.92; P = 0.02] and Caucasian race (OR = 4.90; P = 0.02) were still associated with integration of palliative care services through multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Palliative care services are grossly underutilized in older, non-white patients with cirrhosis on the liver transplant wait-list. We encourage early integration of these services into clinical decision-making in the transplant population, with further studies aimed at understanding barriers to consultation.

Assessment of jaundice in the hospitalized patient.

Jaundice in the hospitalized patient is not an uncommon consultation for the general gastroenterologist. It is essential to explore the underlying cause of jaundice because management is largely aimed at addressing these causes rather than the jaundice itself. Although the diagnostic evaluation for jaundice can be broad, clinical judgment must be used to prioritize between various laboratory tests and imaging studies. Most importantly, clinicians must understand which conditions are emergent and/or require evaluation for liver transplantation. Further studies need to be performed to better understand the outcomes of hospitalized patients who develop jaundice.