The endoscopic management of oesophageal strictures.

An oesophageal stricture refers to a narrowing of the oesophageal lumen, which may be benign or malignant. The cardinal feature is dysphagia, and this may result from intrinsic oesophageal disease or extrinsic compression. Oesophageal strictures can be further classified as simple or complex depending on stricture length, location, diameter, and underlying aetiology. Many endoscopic options are now available for treating oesophageal strictures including dilatation, injectional therapy, stenting, stricturotomy, and ablation. Self-expanding metal stents have revolutionised the palliation of malignant dysphagia, but oesophageal dilatation with balloon or bougienage remains first-line therapy for most benign strictures. The increase in endoscopic and surgical interventions on the oesophagus has seen more benign refractory oesophageal strictures that are difficult to treat, and often require advanced endoscopic techniques. In this review, we provide a practical overview on the evidence-based management of both benign and malignant oesophageal strictures, including a practical algorithm for managing benign refractory strictures.

Risk of metastasis among patients diagnosed with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent endoscopic follow-up.

Esophagectomy and lymphadenectomy have been the standard of care for patients at high risk (HR) of lymph node metastasis following a diagnosis of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) after endoscopic resection (ER). However, recent cohorts suggest lymph node metastasis risk is lower than initially estimated, suggesting organ preservation with close endoscopic follow-up is a viable option. We report on the 3- and 5-year risk of lymph node/distant metastasis among patients diagnosed with early HR-T1 OAC undergoing endoscopic follow-up. Patients diagnosed with HR-T1a or T1b OAC following ER at a tertiary referral center were identified and retrospectively analyzed from clinical records between 2010 and 2021. Patients were included if they underwent endoscopic follow-up after resection and were divided into HR-T1a, low risk (LR)-T1b and HR-T1b cohorts. After ER, 47 patients underwent endoscopic follow-up for early HR OAC. In total, 39 patients had an R0 resection with a combined 3- and 5-year risk of LN/distant metastasis of 6.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-25] and 10.9% (95% CI, 3.6-30.2%), respectively. There was no significant difference when stratifying by histopathological subtype (P = 0.64). Among those without persistent luminal disease on follow-up, the 5-year risk was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.6-26.1). Two patients died secondary to OAC with an all-cause 5-year survival of 57.5% (95% CI, 39.5-71.9). The overall risk of LN/distant metastasis for early HR T1 OAC was lower than historically reported. Endoscopic surveillance can be a reasonable approach in highly selected patients with an R0 resection and complete luminal eradication, but clear, evidence-based surveillance guidelines are needed.

Metabolic and Bariatric Endoscopy: A Mini-Review.

We are currently in a worldwide obesity pandemic, which is one of the most significant health problems of the 21st century. As the prevalence of obesity continues to rise, new and innovate treatments are becoming available. Metabolic and bariatric endoscopic procedures are exciting new areas of gastroenterology that have been developed as a direct response to the obesity crisis. These novel interventions offer a potentially reversible, less invasive, safer, and more cost-effective method of tackling obesity compared to traditional bariatric surgery. Minimally invasive endoscopic treatments are not entirely novel, but as technology has rapidly improved, many of the procedures have been proven to be extremely effective for weight loss and metabolic health, based on high-quality clinical trial data. This mini-review examines the existing evidence for the most prominent metabolic and bariatric procedures, followed by a discussion on the future trajectory of this emerging subspecialty.

Risk-adjusted survival in liver transplant patients assessed and managed by a non-transplanting centre: South West Liver Unit experience.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplant services remain a scarce resource not reflective of geography or burden of liver disease within the UK. To address geographical concerns in the South West (SW), a devolved network model of care for liver transplantation was established in 2004 between the SW Liver Unit (SWLU) at Derriford Hospital, Plymouth and King's College Hospital, London. The SWLU has evolved to deliver both pre-transplant and post-transplant care for patients across the SW Peninsula. We determined whether risk-adjusted survival in patients assessed and managed at the SWLU compared with existing UK transplant centres. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of records at National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) for patients ≥18 years listed or undergoing first liver only deceased donor transplantation from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2017. Data collected and used were in accordance with standard NHSBT outcome measures. RESULTS: We identified 8492 patients registered for first liver only transplant and 6140 patients who subsequently underwent transplantation. Of these, 215 patients listed and 172 patients transplanted were registered at the SWLU. The 1-year, 5-year and 10-year risk-adjusted post-listing survival for patients registered at the SWLU were 86%, 75% and 67%, respectively, with 1-year and 5-year risk-adjusted post-transplant survival 94.9% and 84.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted post-listing 1-year, 5-year and 10-year survival outcomes and risk-adjusted 1-year and 5-year post-transplant survival outcomes at the SWLU are good and comparable with the seven UK transplant centres. These outcomes provide assurance that care delivered by our regional programme is equivalent to well-established liver transplant programmes.