Usefulness of virtual scale endoscope for early gastrointestinal lesions.

Objectives: For early gastrointestinal lesions, size is an important factor in the selection of treatment. Virtual scale endoscope (VSE) is a newly developed endoscope that can measure size more accurately than visual measurement. This study aimed to investigate whether VSE measurement is accurate for early gastrointestinal lesions of various sizes and morphologies. Methods: This study prospectively enrolled patients with early gastrointestinal lesions ≤20 mm in size visually. Lesion sizes were measured in the gastrointestinal tract visually, on endoscopic resection specimens with VSE, and finally on endoscopic resection specimens using a ruler. The primary endpoint was the normalized difference (ND) of VSE measurement. The secondary endpoints were the ND of visual measurement and the variation between NDs of VSE and visual measurements. ND was calculated as (100 × [measured size - true size] / true size) (%). True size was defined as size measured using a ruler. Results: This study included 60 lesions from April 2022 to December 2022, with 20 each in the esophagus, stomach, and colon. The lesion size was 14.0 ± 6.3 mm (mean ± standard deviation). Morphologies were protruded, slightly elevated, and flat or slightly depressed type in 8, 24, and 28 lesions, respectively. The primary endpoint was 0.3 ± 8.8%. In the secondary endpoints, the ND of visual measurement was -1.7 ± 29.3%, and the variability was significantly smaller in the ND of VSE measurement than in that of visual measurement (p < 0.001, F-test). Conclusions: VSE measurement is accurate for early gastrointestinal lesions of various sizes and morphologies.

Impact of an artificial intelligence-aided endoscopic diagnosis system on improving endoscopy quality for trainees in colonoscopy: Prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate whether the use of CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) for colonoscopy improves colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees. METHODS: The patients in this multicenter randomized controlled trial were divided into Group A (observation using CAD EYE) and Group B (standard observation). Six trainees performed colonoscopies using a back-to-back method in pairs with gastroenterology experts. The primary end-point was the trainees' adenoma detection rate (ADR), and the secondary end-points were the trainees' adenoma miss rate (AMR) and Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tool scores. Each trainee's learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 231 patients (Group A, n = 113; Group B, n = 118). The ADR was not significantly different between the two groups. Group A had a significantly lower AMR (25.6% vs. 38.6%, P = 0.033) and number of missed adenomas per patient (0.5 vs. 0.9, P = 0.004) than Group B. Group A also had significantly higher ACE tool scores for pathology identification (2.26 vs. 2.07, P = 0.030) and interpretation and identification of pathology location (2.18 vs. 2.00, P = 0.038). For the CUSUM learning curve, Group A showed a trend toward a lower number of cases of missed multiple adenomas by the six trainees. CONCLUSION: CAD EYE did not improve ADR but decreased the AMR and improved the ability to accurately locate and identify colorectal adenomas. CAD EYE can be assumed to be beneficial for improving colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000044031).

Usefulness of discharge standards in outpatients undergoing sedative endoscopy: a propensity score-matched study of the modified post-anesthetic discharge scoring system and the modified Aldrete score.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of discharge standards in outpatients undergoing sedative endoscopy by comparing the modified post-anesthetic discharge scoring system (MPADSS) and the modified Aldrete score. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 376 outpatients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy under midazolam sedation; 181 outpatients were assessed regarding discharge after sedative endoscopy using the MPADSS (group M), and 195 patients were assessed by the modified Aldrete score (group A). The clinical characteristics, types of endoscopy, endoscopic outcomes, and anesthesia outcomes were evaluated between the two groups. We compared discharge score, recovery time, and adverse events using propensity-score matching. RESULTS: Propensity-score matching created 120 matched pairs. The proportion of patients who had a recovery time within 60 min after endoscopy was significantly higher in group A than that in group M (42.5% versus 25.0%, respectively; P < 0.01). The proportion of patients who required > 120 min of recovery time after endoscopy was significantly lower in group A than that in group M (0.0% versus 5.0%, respectively; P = 0.03). However, significantly more patients had drowsiness at discharge in group A compared with group M (19.1% versus 5.0%, respectively; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the adverse event rate within 24 h of discharge between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients assessed by the modified Aldrete score were allowed to discharge earlier than those assessed by the MPADSS. However, a patient's level of consciousness should be assessed carefully, especially in patients who visit the hospital alone.

Successful retrograde transvenous embolization under balloon occlusion for rectal arteriovenous malformation.

A 57-year-old man was admitted to our hospital because of frequent hematochezia. Colonoscopy exhibited a submucosal tumor-like lesion in the lower rectum. Abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography showed a rectal arteriovenous malformation (AVM) on the right side wall of the lower rectum. The feeder was the superior rectal artery, with early venous return. Embolization of the draining vein and feeding artery of the AVM with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate under balloon occlusion was planned. Angiography of the superior rectal artery showed the nidus in the rectum with early venous return of contrast material. The portal vein was punctured percutaneously under ultrasound guidance, and a balloon catheter advanced to the distal part of the superior rectal vein. Venography under balloon occlusion showed the outflow vein and nidus. Transvenous and transarterial nidus embolization with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate under balloon occlusion was then performed. Since the embolization, there have been no further episodes of bleeding. There is no established treatment for AVMs. Successful treatment requires targeting and eradication of the nidus. We successfully performed embolization therapy for a rectal AVM via a retrograde transvenous approach. This technique may be suitable for completely eradicating the nidus without the risk of embolism.