Peroral endoscopic myotomy for spastic esophageal dysmotility among opioid users: a multicenter propensity score matching study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Opioid-induced esophageal dysfunction (OIED) often presents as spastic esophageal disorders (SEDs) and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO). The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for SEDs and EGJOO among opioid users and nonusers. METHODS: This propensity score (PS) matching study included consecutive opioid users and nonusers who underwent POEM for SEDs and EGJOO between January 2018 and September 2022. The following covariates were used for the PS calculation: age, sex, duration of symptoms, Eckardt score, type of motility disorder, and length of myotomy during POEM. Clinical response was defined as a post-POEM Eckardt score ≤3. RESULTS: A total of 277 consecutive patients underwent POEM during the study period. PS matching resulted in the selection of 64 pairs of patients strictly matched 1:1 (n = 128) with no statistically significant differences in demographic, baseline, or procedural characteristics or in the parameters considered for the PS between the 2 groups. Clinical response to POEM was significantly lower among opioid users (51 of 64 [79.7%]) versus nonusers (60 of 64 [93.8%]) (P = .03) at a median follow-up of 18 months. Among opioid users, higher opioid dose (>60 morphine milligram equivalents per day) was associated with a higher likelihood of failure to respond to POEM (odds ratio, 4.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.98; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical response to POEM for SEDs and EGJOO is significantly lower among opioid users versus nonusers. There was a dose-relationship between opioids and response to POEM, with higher daily opioid usage associated with a higher likelihood of treatment failure.

Novel single-operator through-the-scope traction device for endoscopic submucosal dissection: Outcomes of a multicenter randomized pilot ex-vivo study in trainees with limited endoscopic submucosal dissection experience (with video).

Objectives: Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a technically demanding procedure. The pilot study aimed to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel single-operator through-the-scope dynamic traction device among trainees with limited endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) experience. Methods: Randomized, controlled, pilot study comparing traction-assisted ESD (T-ESD) versus conventional ESD (C-ESD) in an ex-vivo porcine stomach model. Trainees were randomized to group 1 (T-ESD followed by C-ESD) and group 2 (C-ESD followed by T-ESD). Lesions were created on the gravity-dependent area of the stomachs. The primary outcome was submucosal dissection speed. Secondary outcomes included differences in en-bloc resection, adverse events, and workload, assessed by the National Aeronautical and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Results: Five trainees performed two T-ESD and two C-ESD each, for a total of 20 procedures. Submucosal dissection speed was significantly faster in the T-ESD group compared to the C-ESD group (43.32 ± 22.61 vs. 24.19 ± 15.86 mm2/min; p = 0.042). En-bloc resection was achieved in 60% with T-ESD and 70% with C-ESD (p = 1.00). The muscle injury rate was higher in the C-ESD group (50% vs. 10%; p = 0.21) with 1 perforation reported with C-ESD and none with T-ESD. NASA-TLX physical demand was lower with T-ESD compared to C-ESD (4.5 ± 2.17 vs. 6.9 ± 2.50; p = 0.03). Conclusion: T-ESD resulted in faster submucosal dissection and less physical demand when compared to C-ESD, as performed by trainees in an ex-vivo gravity-dependent model. Future studies are needed to assess its role in human ESD cases.

Margin marking before colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection and its impact on neoplasia recurrence (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ablation of resection margins after EMR of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps decreases recurrence. Margin marking before EMR (EMR-MM) may represent an alternative method to achieve a healthy resection margin. We aimed to determine the efficacy of EMR-MM in reducing neoplasia recurrence. METHODS: We conducted a single-center historical control study of EMR cases (EMR-MM vs conventional EMR) for nonpedunculated polyps ≥20 mm between 2016 and 2021. For EMR-MM, cautery marks were placed along the lateral margins of the polyp with the snare tip. EMR was then performed to include resection of the healthy mucosa containing the marks. We compared recurrence at surveillance colonoscopy after EMR-MM versus historical control subjects. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with recurrence. RESULTS: Two hundred ten patients with 210 polyps (median size, 30 mm; interquartile range: 25-40) underwent EMR-MM (n = 74) or conventional EMR (n = 136). Patient and lesion characteristics were similar between the groups. At a median follow-up of 6 months, the recurrence rate was lower with EMR-MM (6/74; 8%) compared with historical control subjects (39/136; 29%) (P < .001). EMR-MM was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events. On multivariable analysis, EMR-MM remained the strongest predictor of recurrence (odds ratio, .20; 95% confidence interval, .13-.64; P = .003) aside from polyp size (odds ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-6.01; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center historical control study, EMR-MM of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps reduced the recurrence risk by 80% when compared with conventional EMR. This simple technique may provide an alternative to margin ablation.

Initial endoscopic intervention is not associated with reduced risk of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding in left ventricular assist device patients.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly used for mechanical support of end-stage heart failure. Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) confers a significant morbidity in LVAD patients, with rates of up to 30% at 5 years. We assessed predictors of index and recurrent GIB (rGIB) in LVAD patients to risk stratify patients and evaluate if endoscopic approach and intervention at index GIB impacted rGIB. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all LVAD patients at our institution from 01/01/2006 to 31/10/2016 was completed. Predictors for index and recurrent GIB were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was created using only statistically significant dependent variables and adjusted for demographic variables. RESULTS: A total of 77/214 (36%) patients developed GIB, and 38/214 (17.8%) developed rGIB. Destination therapy (P=0.01), longer duration of LVAD (P=0.03), and low albumin (<3.5 g/dL) (P<0.001) were associated with increased risk of index GIB. Charlson Comorbidity Index, heart failure etiology, and Medicare were predictors of index GIB on univariate analysis, but this was not seen on multivariate analysis. Performing an endoscopy with/without intervention, non- angioectasia lesions, and location of bleeding were not statistically significant predictors of rGIB. Longer duration of hospitalization appeared to be protective for rGIB on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Index endoscopy and intervention is not associated with reduced risk of rGIB in LVAD patients. Several independent factors are associated with the risk of index GIB. Albumin is a potentially modifiable risk factor, and likely contributes to bleeding through poor nutrition. It is a surrogate marker for systemic illness, and may have pharmacologic implications.