When less is more: lower esophageal sphincter-preserving peroral endoscopic myotomy is effective for non-achalasia esophageal motility disorders.

BACKGROUND: Non-achalasia esophageal motility disorders (NAEMDs), encompassing distal esophageal spasm (DES) and hypercontractile esophagus (HCE), are rare conditions. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a promising treatment option. In NAEMDs, unlike with achalasia, the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) functions normally, suggesting the potential of LES preservation during POEM. METHODS: This retrospective two-center observational study focused on patients undergoing LES-preserving POEM (LES-POEM) for NAEMD. Eckardt scores were assessed pre-POEM and at 6, 12, and 24 months post-POEM, with follow-up endoscopy at 6 months to evaluate for reflux esophagitis. Clinical success, defined as an Eckardt score ≤3, served as the primary outcome. RESULTS: 227 patients were recruited over 84 months until May 2021. Of these, 16 underwent LES-POEM for an NAEMD (9 with HCE and 7 with DES). The median pre-POEM Eckardt score was 6.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 5.0-7.0), which decreased to 1.0 (IQR 0.0-1.8; P<0.001) 6 months post-POEM. This was sustained at 24 months, with an Eckardt score of 1.0 (IQR 0.0-1.8; P<0.001). Two patients (12.5%) developed Los Angeles grade A or B esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: LES-POEM for NAEMD demonstrates favorable clinical outcomes, with infrequent esophagitis and reintervention for LES dysfunction rarely required.

Oncological outcomes after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps with covert submucosal invasive cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Management of covert submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC) discovered after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (pEMR) of large (>20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps is challenging. The residual cancer risk is largely unknown. We sought to evaluate this in a large tertiary referral cohort. DESIGN: Cases of covert SMIC following pEMR were identified and followed. Oncological outcomes after surgery were divided based on residual intramural cancer, lymph node metastases (LNM) or both. Risk factors for residual intramural cancer and LNM were analysed based on the original pEMR histological variables. Risk parameters were analysed with respect to low and high-risk variables for residual intramural cancer and LNM. RESULTS: Among 3372 cases of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps, 143 cases of covert SMIC (4.2%) were identified. 109 underwent surgical resection. Histological analysis of pEMR histology was available in 98 of 109 (90%) cases. 62 cases (63%) had no residual malignancy. 36 cases had residual malignancy (residual intramural cancer n=24; LNM n=5; both n=7). All cases of residual intramural cancer could be identified by a R1 histological deep margin. Cases with poor differentiation (PD) and/or lymphovascular invasion (LVI) had a high risk of LNM (12/33), with a very low risk without these criteria (<1%; 0/65). Cases at low risk for LNM with R0 deep margin have a low risk of residual intramural cancer (<1%; 0/35). CONCLUSION: The majority of cases of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps with covert SMIC following pEMR will have no residual malignancy. The risk of residual malignancy can be ascertained from three key variables: PD, LVI and R1 deep margin.

Comparison of the morphology and histopathology of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps in the rectum and colon: implications for endoscopic treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The risk of cancer in large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm (LNPCPs) in the rectum relative to the remainder of the colon is unknown. We aimed to describe differences between rectal and colonic LNPCPs to better inform treatment decisions. METHODS: Patients with LNPCPs referred to tertiary centers for endoscopic resection within a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort were evaluated. Data recorded were participant demographics, LNPCP location, morphology, resection modality, and histopathologic data. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify those variables independently associated with rectal versus nonrectal location in the colon. RESULTS: Patients with LNPCPs referred for endoscopic resection between July 2008 and July 2021 were included. Rectal LNPCPs (n = 618) were larger (median size, 40 mm vs 30 mm; P < .001) and more likely to be granular (79% vs 50%, P < .001) with a nodular component (53% vs 17%, P < .001) compared with nonrectal LNPCPs (n = 2787). Rectal LNPCPs were more likely to have tubulovillous histopathology (72% vs 47%, P < .001) and contain cancer (15% vs 6%, P < .001). After adjusting for the other features independently associated with location, cancer was more common in the rectum compared with the colon (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.53). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that compared with LNPCPs in the rest of the colon, rectal LNPCPs are more likely to be larger and contain more advanced pathology. These findings have implications for curative endoscopic resection techniques particularly where early cancer is present. (Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT01368289 and NCT02000141.).

Outcomes of Deep Mural Injury After Endoscopic Resection: An International Cohort of 3717 Large Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although perforation is the most feared adverse event associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), limited data exists concerning its management. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of intra-procedural deep mural injury (DMI) in an international multi-center observational cohort of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent EMR for a LNPCP ≥20 mm were evaluated. Significant DMI (S-DMI) was defined as Sydney DMI Classification type III (muscularis propria injury, target sign) or type IV/V (perforation without or with contamination, respectively). The primary outcome was successful S-DMI defect closure. Secondary outcomes included technical success (removal of all visible polypoid tissue during index EMR), surgical referral and recurrence at first surveillance colonscopy (SC1). RESULTS: Between July 2008 to May 2020, 3717 LNPCPs underwent EMR. Median lesion size was 35mm (interquartile range (IQR) 25 to 45mm). Significant DMI was identified in 101 cases (2.7%), with successful defect closure in 98 (97.0%) using a median of 4 through-the-scope clips (TTSCs; IQR 3 to 6 TTSCs). Three (3.0%) patients underwent S-DMI-related urgent surgery. Technical success was achieved in 94 (93.1%) patients, with 46 (45.5%) admitted to hospital (median duration 1 day; IQR 1 to 2 days). Comparing LNPCPs with and without S-DMI, no differences in technical success (94 (93.1%) vs 3316 (91.7%); P = .62) or SC1 recurrence (12 (20.0%) vs 363 (13.6%); P = .15) were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Significant DMI is readily managed endoscopically and does not appear to affect technical success or recurrence.

Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections using a lumen-apposing metal stent with an electrocautery-enhanced delivery system.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a lumen-apposing metal stent with an electrocautery-enhanced delivery system (EDS-LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) in regular clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective and subsequent prospective analysis was undertaken of all patients who underwent EUS-guided drainage of their PFCs using the EDS-LAMS at 17 tertiary therapeutic endoscopy centers. RESULTS: Two hundred eight cases of EDS-LAMS deployment were attempted in 202 patients (mean age 52.9 years) at time of evaluation. Ninety-seven patients had pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs), 75 walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN), 10 acute peripancreatic fluid collections (APFCs), 6 acute necrotic collections (ANCs), and 14 postoperative collections (POCs). Procedural technical success was achieved in 202/208 cases (97.1%). Maldeployment occurred in 7/208 cases (3.4%). Clinical success was achieved in 142/160 (88.8%) patients (PP 90%, WOPN 85.2%, APFC 100%, ANC 75%, POC 100%). Delayed adverse events included stent migration in 15/202 (7.4%), stent occlusion and infection in 16/202 (7.9%), major bleeding in 4/202 (2%), and buried EDS-LAMS in 2/202 (1%). PFC recurrence occurred in 13/142 (9.2%) patients; 9/202 (4.5%) required surgical or radiological intervention for PFC management after EDS-LAMS insertion. CONCLUSIONS: This large international multicenter study evaluating the EDS-LAMS for drainage of PFCs in routine clinical practice suggests that the EDS-LAMS are safe and effective for drainage of all types of PFCs; however, further endoscopic therapy is often required for WOPN. Major bleeding was a rare complication in our cohort.

Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia: high rate of upstaging at Barrett's esophagus referral units suggests progression rates may be overestimated.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The reported progression rate from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) ranges from .4% to 13.4% per year. We hypothesize that some reported progression rates may be overestimated because of prevalent HGD or EAC that was not identified during endoscopic assessments performed in the community. Our aim is to determine the proportion of prevalent HGD or EAC detected by BE referral units (BERUs) in patients referred from the community with a recent diagnosis of LGD. METHODS: All patients referred from the community to 6 BERUs with a diagnosis of BE with LGD were identified. Patients with an assessment endoscopy performed at BERUs more than 6 months from their referral endoscopy in the community were excluded. Visible lesions and histology outcomes were compared between the community referral endoscopy and the assessment endoscopy performed at BERUs. RESULTS: The median time between BERU assessment and referral endoscopy was 79 days (interquartile range, 54-114). Of the 75 patients referred from the community with LGD, BERU assessment identified HGD or EAC in 20 patients (27%). BERU assessment identified more visible lesions than referral endoscopy performed in the community (39 [52%] vs 9 [12%], respectively; P = .029). CONCLUSIONS: BERU assessment endoscopy identified more visible lesions than community referral endoscopy and identified HGD or EAC in 27% of patients referred from the community with a recent diagnosis of LGD. Reported progression rates from LGD to HGD or EAC may be overestimated.

Optical Evaluation for Predicting Cancer in Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps Is Accurate for Flat Lesions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The ability of optical evaluation to diagnose submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC) prior to endoscopic resection of large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is critical to inform therapeutic decisions. Prior studies suggest that it is insufficiently accurate to detect SMIC. It is unknown whether lesion morphology influences optical evaluation performance. METHODS: LNPCPs ≥20 mm referred for endoscopic resection within a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort were evaluated. Optical evaluation was performed prior to endoscopic resection with the optical prediction of SMIC based on established features (Kudo V pit pattern, depressed morphology, rigidity/fixation, ulceration). Optical evaluation performance outcomes were calculated. Outcomes were reported by dominant morphology: nodular (Paris 0-Is/0-IIa+Is) vs flat (Paris 0-IIa/0-IIb) morphology. RESULTS: From July 2013 to July 2019, 1583 LNPCPs (median size 35 [interquartile range, 25-50] mm; 855 flat, 728 nodular) were assessed. SMIC was identified in 146 (9.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.9%-10.8%). Overall sensitivity and specificity were 67.1% (95% CI, 59.2%-74.2%) and 95.1% (95% CI, 93.9%-96.1%), respectively. The overall SMIC miss rate was 3.0% (95% CI, 2.3%-4.0%). Significant differences in sensitivity (90.9% vs 52.7%), specificity (96.3% vs 93.7%), and SMIC miss rate (0.6% vs 5.9%) between flat and nodular LNPCPs were identified (all P < .027). Multiple logistic regression identified size ≥40 mm (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-3.8), rectosigmoid location (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7), and nodular morphology (OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 2.8-18.9) as predictors of missed SMIC (all P < .039). CONCLUSIONS: Optical evaluation performance is dependent on lesion morphology. In the absence of features suggestive of SMIC, flat lesions can be presumed benign and be managed accordingly.

Outcomes of Thermal Ablation of the Mucosal Defect Margin After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: A Prospective, International, Multicenter Trial of 1000 Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Thermal ablation of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-T) for treating large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) has shown efficacy in a randomized trial, with a 4-fold reduction, in residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) at first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1). The clinical effectiveness of this treatment, in the real world, remains unknown. METHODS: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of EMR-T in an international multicenter prospective trial (NCT02957058). The primary endpoint was the frequency of RRA at SC1. Detailed demographic, procedural, and outcome data were recorded. Exclusion criteria were LNPCPs involving the ileo-caecal valve, the appendiceal orifice, and circumferential LNPCPs. RESULTS: During 51 months (May 2016-August 2020) 1049 LNPCPs in 1049 patients (median size, 35 mm; interquartile range, 25-45 mm; right colon location, 53.5%) were enrolled. Uniform completeness of EMR-T was achieved in 989 LNPCPs (95.4%). In this study, 755/803 (94.0%) eligible LNPCPs underwent SC1 (median time to SC1, 6 months; interquartile range, 5-7 months). For LNPCPs that underwent complete EMR-T, the frequency of RRA at SC1 was 1.4% (10/707). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, EMR-T is a simple, inexpensive, and highly effective auxiliary technique that is likely to significantly reduce RRA at first surveillance. It should be universally used for the management of LNPCPs after EMR. https://clinicaltrials.gov; Clinical Trial Number, NCT02957058.

A prospective multicentre study of per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and procedural outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia in Australia. DESIGN, SETTING: Prospective observational study in three Australian tertiary referral centres, 5 May 2014 - 27 October 2019 (66 months). PARTICIPANTS: Patients who had undergone POEM for achalasia. MAJOR OUTCOME MEASURES: Eckardt scores calculated prior to POEM and six months, one year, and two years after POEM. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as an Eckardt score of 3 or less without a second intervention. RESULTS: 142 patients underwent POEM for achalasia; their mean age was 52 years (SD, 18 years), 83 were men (58%), and the median length of hospital stay two days (IQR, 1-3 days). Their mean Eckardt score before POEM was 8.0 (SD, 2.4) and 1.1 (SD, 1.6) six months after POEM; it did not change significantly between six months and two years after POEM (mean monthly increase, 0.014 points; 95% CI, -0.001 to 0.029). A total of 127 patients (89%) improved clinically after POEM. Intra-procedural capnoperitoneum was the only risk factor associated with treatment failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.08-7.51). Previous treatments - botulinum toxin injection (25 patients, 18%), endoscopic balloon dilatation (69, 49%), and Heller myotomy (14, 10%) - did not affect POEM outcomes. Five patients (4%) experienced major adverse events, including pneumonia, oesophageal leak, empyema and melaena, that were managed during admission and without sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is an effective treatment for achalasia. Significant reductions in Eckardt scores achieved by six months are sustained at two years. POEM can be both a first line definitive therapy and a salvage therapy for patients not helped by other treatments.

Endoscopic ampullectomy for non-invasive ampullary lesions: a single-center 10-year retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lesions involving the ampulla of Vater have traditionally been managed by surgical resection, albeit with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic ampullectomy is increasingly recognized as an efficacious and safer treatment option. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ampullectomy for non-invasive ampullary lesions in a single tertiary referral center. METHODS: Patients with non-invasive ampullary lesions, with or without familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), were identified using pathology and endoscopy databases. The study included all patients who underwent the index ampullectomy between January 2007 and January 2017. Outcome parameters included accuracy of forceps biopsies, adverse events, success of endoscopic resection, and rate of recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients underwent endoscopic ampullectomy over the 10-year period. Histological upstaging was seen in 37.8% of cases at ampullectomy compared to biopsy, including 5 cases (9.4%) of invasive adenocarcinoma. Adverse events occurred in 10 patients (18.9%) consisting of bleeding (11.3%), benign papillary stenosis (3.8%), acute pancreatitis (1.9%), and duodenal perforation (1.9%). Recurrence occurred in 32.7% over a median follow-up of 30 months (range 6-104 months), with the majority (18.4%) occurring at the first surveillance endoscopy. Nonetheless, 75% of recurrences were able to be cleared endoscopically. Endoscopic resection was successful in 91.1% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ampullectomy is an effective and safer therapeutic modality for non-invasive ampullary lesions, in addition to being a valuable diagnostic and staging tool. Nevertheless, careful patient selection and a commitment to endoscopic follow-up are of primary importance to achieve an optimal therapeutic outcome.

Improving the Quality of Bowel Preparation: Rewarding Patients for Success or Intensive Patient Education?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The quality of the bowel preparation is a critical parameter for the outcome of colonoscopies. It is well established that the bowel preparation modality (e.g., split or larger volume preparation) significantly improves the quality of the bowel preparation. Patient compliance is another important factor impacting on the quality of bowel preparations that receives relatively little research attention. We aimed to explore if intensified education or a lottery ticket as reward for good bowel preparation could improve outcomes. METHODS: After informed consent, all patients received a standardized printed information booklet. In a randomized fashion, patients were offered (a) a lottery scratchy ticket with an opportunity to win $25,000 as "reward" for good bowel preparation, (b) an education session delivered over the phone by a trained nurse, or (c) no additional measure. RESULTS: Overall, the quality of the bowel preparation was rated good or very good in 69.1% (95% CI 61.7-75.7%) of patients. Reward intervention did not influence the quality of bowel preparation (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.09-1.91, p = 0.260); however, bowel preparation quality decreased in patients randomized to receive the additional education (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.96, p = 0.042). Neither intervention significantly impacted on polyp detection rates. CONCLUSIONS: Contrasting general beliefs, additional interventions (e.g., incentives or phone consultation) did not improve the quality of the bowel preparation. The unexpected result shows that utilizing extra resources must be balanced against real-world outcomes and may not always provide the expected result.

Is a Fundamental Design Change for Gastrointestinal Endoscopes Required?

Since the first fiberoptic instruments, gastrointestinal endoscopy has shaped the field of gastroenterology and is now a key diagnostic and therapeutic tool. Compared with the initial fiberoptic endoscopes state-of-the-art optical chips (or charge-coupled device technology) allowed a quantum leap in image quality. Despite these advances, gastrointestinal endoscopy is far from being perfect. The diagnostic yield (eg, for adenoma detection rates) is highly operator dependent and there is still the need for sedation or even anesthesia to address discomfort during the procedure. Despite highly standardized cleaning and high-level disinfection the reuse of contemporary (and difficult to clean) endoscopes with multiple channels exposes patients to the risk of transmission of infections. Artificial intelligence and pattern recognition should eliminate interindividual variability including polyp detection rates, self-propelled, and (potentially remotely controlled) scopes with a soft shaft could reduce the discomfort during procedures and abolish the need for sedation and anesthesia altogether and single-use designs should eliminate the risk of patient-to-patient transmission of infections. While these innovations are feasible and could be implemented rapidly utilizing available technology, they require a paradigm shift affecting all levels of the value chain from the supplier of the instruments to the end-users. Some may negate the need for a paradigm shift, but it is evident that a major redesign of the endoscopic equipment is overdue to fully utilize novel technologies and most importantly ensure the best possible outcomes for patients.

Snare-tip soft coagulation is effective and efficient as a first-line modality for treating intraprocedural bleeding during Barrett's mucosectomy.

BACKGROUND : Intraprocedural bleeding (IPB) during multiband mucosectomy (MBM) for Barrett's neoplasia can obscure the endoscopic field. Current hemostatic devices may affect procedure continuity and technical success. Snare-tip soft coagulation (STSC) as a first-line therapy for primary hemostasis has not previously been studied in this setting. METHODS: Between January 2014 and November 2019, 191 consecutive patients underwent 292 MBM procedures for Barrett's neoplasia within a prospective observational cohort in two tertiary care centers. A standard MBM technique was performed. IPB was defined as bleeding obscuring the endoscopic field that required intervention. The primary outcome was the technical success and efficacy of STSC. RESULTS: IPB occurred in 63 MBM procedures (21.6 %; 95 % confidence interval 17.3 % - 26.7 %). STSC was attempted as first-line therapy in 51 IPBs, with the remainder requiring alternate therapies because of pooling of blood. STSC achieved hemostasis in 48 cases (94.1 % by per-protocol analysis; 76.2 % by intention-to-treat analysis). No apparatus disassembly was required to perform STSC. CONCLUSIONS: STSC is a safe, effective, and efficient first-line hemostatic modality for IPB during MBM for Barrett's neoplasia.

Clinical pathways and outcomes of patients with Barrett's esophagus in tertiary care settings: a prospective longitudinal cohort study in Australia, 2008-2016.

BACKGROUND: Clinical services for Barrett's esophagus have been rising worldwide including Australia, but little is known of the long-term outcomes of such patients. Retrospective studies using data at baseline are prone to both selection and misclassification bias. We investigated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of Barrett's esophagus patients in a prospective cohort. METHODS: We recruited patients diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus in tertiary settings across Australia between 2008 and 2016. We compared baseline and follow-up epidemiological and clinical data between Barrett's patients with and without dysplasia. We calculated age-adjusted incidence rates and estimated minimally and fully adjusted hazard ratios (HR) to identify those clinical factors related to disease progression. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 268 patients with Barrett's esophagus (median follow-up 5 years). At recruitment, 224 (84%) had no dysplasia, 44 (16%) had low-grade or indefinite dysplasia (LGD/IND). The age-adjusted incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) was 0.5% per year in LGD/IND compared with 0.1% per year in those with no dysplasia. Risk of progression to high-grade dysplasia/EAC was associated with prior LGD/IND (fully adjusted HR 6.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.96-21.8) but not long-segment disease (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.29-3.58). CONCLUSIONS: These prospective data suggest presence of dysplasia is a stronger predictor of progression to cancer than segment length in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

Piecemeal cold snare polypectomy versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile serrated lesions: a retrospective comparison across two successive periods.

OBJECTIVE: Large (≥20 mm) sessile serrated lesions (L-SSL) are premalignant lesions that require endoscopic removal. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the existing standard of care but carries some risk of adverse events including clinically significant post-EMR bleeding and deep mural injury (DMI). The respective risk-effectiveness ratio of piecemeal cold snare polypectomy (p-CSP) in L-SSL management is not fully known. DESIGN: Consecutive patients referred for L-SSL management were treated by p-CSP from April 2016 to January 2020 or by conventional EMR in the preceding period between July 2008 and March 2016 at four Australian tertiary centres. Surveillance colonoscopies were conducted at 6 months (SC1) and 18 months (SC2). Outcomes on technical success, adverse events and recurrence were documented prospectively and then compared retrospectively between the subsequent time periods. RESULTS: A total of 562 L-SSL in 474 patients were evaluated of which 156 L-SSL in 121 patients were treated by p-CSP and 406 L-SSL in 353 patients by EMR. Technical success was equal in both periods (100.0% (n=156) vs 99.0% (n=402)). No adverse events occurred in p-CSP, whereas delayed bleeding and DMI were encountered in 5.1% (n=18) and 3.4% (n=12) of L-SSL treated by EMR, respectively. Recurrence rates following p-CSP were similar to EMR at 4.3% (n=4) versus 4.6% (n=14) and 2.0% (n=1) versus 1.2% (n=3) for surveillance colonoscopy (SC)1 and SC2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a historical comparison on the endoscopic management of L-SSL, p-CSP is technically equally efficacious to EMR but virtually eliminates the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. p-CSP should therefore be considered as the new standard of care for L-SSL treatment.

Endoscopic mucosal resection is effective for laterally spreading lesions at the anorectal junction.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal approach for removing large laterally spreading lesions at the anorectal junction (ARJ-LSLs) is unknown. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a definitive therapy for colorectal LSLs. It is unclear whether it is an effective modality for ARJ-LSLs. DESIGN: EMR outcomes for ARJ-LSLs (distal margin of ≤20 mm from the dentate line) in comparison with rectal LSLs (distal margin of >20 mm from the dentate line) were evaluated within a multicentre observational cohort of LSLs of ≥20 mm. Technical success was defined as the removal of all polypoid tissue during index EMR. Safety was evaluated by the frequencies of intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, deep mural injury (DMI) and delayed perforation. Long-term efficacy was evaluated by the absence of recurrence (either endoscopic or histologic) at surveillance colonoscopy (SC). RESULTS: Between July 2008 and August 2019, 100 ARJ-LSLs and 313 rectal LSLs underwent EMR. ARJ-LSL median size was 40 mm (IQR 35-60 mm). Median follow-up at SC4 was 54 months (IQR 33-83 months). Technical success was 98%. Cancer was present in three (3%). Recurrence occurred in 15.4%, 6.8%, 3.7% and 0% at SC1-SC4, respectively. Among 30 ARJ-LSLs that received margin thermal ablation, no recurrence was identified at SC1 (0.0% vs 25.0%, p=0.002). Technical success, recurrence and adverse events were not different between groups, except for DMI (ARJ-LSLs 0% vs rectal LSLs 4.5%, p=0.027). CONCLUSION: EMR is an effective technique for ARJ-LSLs and should be considered a first-line resection modality for the majority of these lesions.

Impact of en bloc resection on long-term outcomes after endoscopic mucosal resection: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) is the major limitation of piecemeal EMR (p-EMR) for large colonic laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) ≥20 mm. En bloc EMR (e-EMR) has been shown to achieve low rates of RRA but specific procedural and long-term outcomes are unknown. Our aim was to compare long-term outcomes of size-matched LSLs stratified by whether they were resected e-EMR or p-EMR. METHODS: Data from a prospective tertiary referral multicenter cohort of large LSLs referred for EMR over a 10-year period were analyzed. Outcomes were compared between sized-matched LSLs (20-25 mm) resected by p-EMR or e-EMR. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy LSLs met the inclusion criteria of which 259 (45.4%) were resected by e-EMR. The risk of major deep mural injury (DMI) was significantly higher in the e-EMR group (3.5% vs 1.0%, P = .05), whereas rates of other intraprocedural adverse events did not differ significantly. Five of 9 (56%) LSLs, with endoscopic features of submucosal invasion (SMI), resected by e-EMR were saved from surgery. RRA at first surveillance was lower in the e-EMR group (2.0% vs 5.7%, P = .04), but this difference was negated at subsequent surveillance. Rates of surgical referral were not significantly different between the groups at either surveillance interval. CONCLUSION: When comparing e-EMR against p-EMR for lesions ≤25 mm in size of similar morphology in a large prospective multicenter cohort, e-EMR offered no additional advantage for predicted-benign LSLs. However, it was associated with an increased risk of major DMI. Thus, en bloc resection techniques should be reserved for lesions suspicious for invasive disease. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01368289.).

An Evidence-based Approach Towards Targeted Patient Education to Improve Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy.

GOALS AND BACKGROUND: Quality of bowel preparation is an important factor influencing adenoma detection. Patient education is believed to improve the quality of bowel preparation but might be resource-intensive. We aimed to (a) identify risk factors for failed bowel preparations and (b) develop and test the efficacy of a screening tool that allows to prospectively identify and target patients at increased risk. STUDY: Part 1: 76 consecutive outpatients with poor bowel preparation were compared with 76 age-matched and gender-matched outpatients with good preparation from the same procedure lists. Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained from centralized databases. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for poor bowel preparation. Part 2: on the basis of results of part 1, a screening tool for prospectively identifying patients at high risk was developed, and targeted education tested. RESULTS: We identified the use of opioids or other constipating agents and low socioeconomic status as risk factors for poor bowel preparation [odds ratio (OR)=2.88; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22-6.80 and OR=2.43; 95% CI: 1.25-4.72]. Diabetes, hypothyroidism, age, and gender were found to have no effect on quality. When education was provided only to patients at increased risk, the targeted approach did not negatively affect the proportion of poor preparation (OR=6.12%; 95% CI: 4.79%-7.78% vs. OR=5.73%; 95% CI: 4.61%-7.10%). CONCLUSIONS: Poor bowel preparation is associated with specific risk factors. Identifying and specifically targeting education at patients with these risk factors appears to facilitate more efficient use of education resources in endoscopy.

An in vitro and clinical dose-finding study of antifoaming effects of simethicone during colonoscopy.

Simethicone is an antifoaming agent frequently added to endoscopic rinse solutions but has recently been implicated as a risk factor for transmission of infections due to the formation of simethicone deposits within scope channels. Since the build-up of residue is likely dose-related, the smallest effective dose of simethicone should be used but there are no data available on the effective dose. Thus, we conducted a dose-finding study in an "in vitro bubble model" to determine the appropriate simethicone dose. Six 100-mL test tubes were filled with a 1% (v/v) solution of kitchen detergent (Fairy®, Procter & Gamble, London, England) in water for irrigation (Baxter®, Sydney, Australia). One test tube served as the control, while different doses of simethicone (Infacol®, Nice Pak, Melbourne, Australia) were added to the other five tubes (0.02, 0.2, 2.0, 20, and 200 mg/100 mL). Oxygen was streamed for 30 s into the test tubes at a rate of 2 L/min. After 10 s, photographs were taken and the visible bubbles were semi-quantitatively rated by independent assessors blinded to the dosing of simethicone. Simethicone at doses of 2 mg/100 mL had no appreciable antifoaming effect, whereas concentrations ≥ 20 mg/100 mL were sufficient to suppress bubble formation. This is substantially lower compared with frequently used doses of up to 200 mg/100 mL. Subsequently, we tested the lower simethicone dose with previously used higher doses, in 1475 and 1340 patients, respectively. We found it to have no impact on polyp detection with a rate of 56.7% (54.2-59.3% [95% CI]) at the lower dose and 56.5% (53.8-59.1% [95% CI]) at the higher dose.