Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal endoscopy activity in France.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has majorly affected medical activity around the world. We sought to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy activity in France. METHODS: We performed a web-based survey, including 35 questions on the responders and their endoscopic practice, from 23 March to 27 March 2020, sent to the 3300 French gastroenterologists practicing endoscopy. RESULTS: 694 GI endoscopists (21 %) provided analyzable data; of these, 29.4 % (204/694) were involved in the management of COVID-19 patients outside the endoscopy department. During the study period, 98.7 % (685/694) of endoscopists had had to cancel procedures. There were 89 gastroenterologists (12.8 %) who reported symptoms compatible with COVID-19 infection, and a positive PCR test was recorded in 12/197 (6.1 %) vs. 3/497 (0.6 %) endoscopists in the high vs. low prevalence areas, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a major reduction in the volume of GI endoscopies performed in France in March 2020. The prolonged limited access to GI endoscopy could lead to a delay in the management of patients with GI cancers.

The expansion of endoscopic submucosal dissection in France: A prospective nationwide survey.

INTRODUCTION: Early reports of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in Europe suggested high complication rates and disappointing outcomes compared to publications from Japan. Since 2008, we have been conducting a nationwide survey to monitor the outcomes and complications of ESD over time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All consecutive ESD cases from 14 centers in France were prospectively included in the database. Demographic, procedural, outcome and follow-up data were recorded. The results obtained over three years were compared to previously published data covering the 2008-2010 period. RESULTS: Between November 2010 and June 2013, 319 ESD cases performed in 314 patients (62% male, mean (±SD) age 65.4 ± 12) were analyzed and compared to 188 ESD cases in 188 patients (61% male, mean (±SD) age 64.6 ± 13) performed between January 2008 and October 2010. The mean (±SD) lesion size was 39 ± 12 mm in 2010-2013 vs 32.1 ± 21 for 2008-2010 (p = 0.004). En bloc resection improved from 77.1% to 91.7% (p < 0.0001) while R0 en bloc resection remained stable from 72.9% to 71.9% (p = 0.8) over time. Complication rate dropped from 29.2% between 2008 and 2010 to 14.1% between 2010 and 2013 (p < 0.0001), with bleeding decreasing from 11.2% to 4.7% (p = 0.01) and perforations from 18.1% to 8.1% (p = 0.002) over time. No procedure-related mortality was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study, ESD achieved high rates of en bloc resection with a significant trend toward better outcomes over time. Improvements in lesion delineation and characterization are still needed to increase R0 resection rates.

Five-Strand versus Four-Strand Hamstring Tendon Graft Technique for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Biomechanical Comparison.

The aim of this article is to compare diameter and stiffness, displacement, and strain in a five-strand versus four-strand hamstring graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Eight matched pairs of lower extremities underwent four-strand or five-strand hamstring graft reconstruction. Diameter was significantly higher in the five-strand versus the four-strand construct (p = 0.002). No significant difference was found between the groups in construct displacement or stiffness. Significantly higher strain was observed in the inner limb versus the outer limb in the four-strand construct (p = 0.001) and in the inner limb versus the fifth limb in the 5-strand construct (p = 0.004). A fifth limb added to a four-strand hamstring graft significantly increased graft diameter but did not significantly change stiffness or displacement, suggesting that attachment of additional graft material via suture did not provide for full incorporation of the added limb into the graft at time zero. The inner limb in both constructs absorbed significantly greater load than did other limbs. The use of suture to attach additional material to a four-strand hamstring graft may not contribute to improved biomechanical qualities of the graft at time zero.