Ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for esophageal granular cell tumors is safe and effective.

Given their malignant potential, resection of esophageal granular cell tumors (GCTs) is often undertaken, yet the optimal technique is unknown. We present a large series of dedicated endoscopic resection using band ligation (EMR-B) of esophageal GCTs. Patients diagnosed with esophageal GCTs between 2002 and 2019 were identified using a prospectively collected pathology database. Endoscopic reports were reviewed, and patients who underwent dedicated EMR-B of esophageal GCTs were included. Medical records were queried for demographics, findings, adverse events, and follow-up. We identified 21 patients who underwent dedicated EMR-B for previously identified esophageal GCT. Median age was 39 years; 16 (76%) were female. Eight (38%) had preceding signs or symptoms, potentially attributable to the GCT. Upon endoscopic evaluation, 12 (57%) were found in the distal esophagus. Endoscopic ultrasound was used in 15 cases (71%). Median lesion size was 7 mm, interquartile range 4 mm-8 mm. The largest lesion was 12 mm. A total of 20 (95%) had en bloc resection confirmed with pathologic examination. The only patient with tumor extending to the resection margin underwent surveillance endoscopy that showed no residual tumor. No patients experienced bleeding, perforation, or stricturing in our series. No patients have had known recurrence of their esophageal GCT. EMR-B of esophageal GCT achieves complete histopathologic resection with minimal adverse events. EMR-B is safe and effective and seems prudent compared with observation for what could be an aggressive and malignant tumor. EMR-B should be considered first-line therapy when resecting esophageal GCT up to 12 mm in diameter.

Rectal Indomethacin Reduces Pancreatitis in High- and Low-Risk Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Rectal indomethacin reduces the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Most studies of its efficacy included high-risk cohorts and excluded low-risk patients, including those with malignant biliary obstruction. We investigated the potential of rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in a variety of patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 4017 patients who underwent ERCP at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, from 2009 and 2015, including 823 patients with malignant biliary obstruction. After June 2012, with a few exceptions, patients received indomethacin after their procedure. We collected data from patients' records on demographic and clinical features, procedures, and development of PEP. PEP was defined by consensus criteria. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the association between indomethacin and PEP. RESULTS: Rectal indomethacin reduced the odds of PEP by 65% (OR, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.51; P < .001) and moderate-to-severe PEP by 83% (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.32; P < .001). In patients with malignant obstruction, rectal indomethacin reduced the risk of PEP by 64% (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17-0.75; P < .001) and moderate-to-severe PEP by 80% (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.07-0.63; P < .001). Among patients with malignant obstruction, rectal indomethacin provided the greatest benefit to patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: 2.31% of these patients who received rectal indomethacin developed PEP vs 7.53% who did not receive rectal indomethacin (P < .001) and 0.59% of these patients who received rectal indomethacin developed moderate-to-severe PEP vs 4.32% who did not receive rectal indomethacin (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ERCP that included low-risk patients and patients with malignant biliary obstruction, rectal indomethacin was associated with a significant decrease in the absolute rate and severity of pancreatitis.

Poor discriminatory function for endoscopic skills on a computer-based simulator.

BACKGROUND: Computer-based endoscopy simulators may enable trainees to learn and develop technical skills before performing on patients. Simulators require validation as adequate models of live endoscopy before being used for training or assessment purposes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate content and criterion validity of the CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator colonoscopy and EGD modules as predictors of clinical endoscopic skills. DESIGN: Prospective, observational, non-randomized, parallel cohort study. SETTING: Single academic center with accredited gastroenterology training program. PARTICIPANTS: Five novice first-year gastroenterology fellows and 6 expert gastroenterology attending physicians. INTERVENTION: Participants performed 18 simulated colonoscopies and 6 simulated EGDs. The simulator recorded objective performance parameters. Participants then completed feedback surveys. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The 57 objective performance parameters measured by the endoscopy simulator were compared between the two study groups. Novice and expert survey responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Significant differences between novice and expert performance were detected in only 19 of 57 (33%) performance metrics. Eight of these 19 (42%) were time-related metrics, such as total procedure time, time to anatomic landmarks, and time spent in contact with GI mucosa. Of 49 non-time related measures, the few additional statistically significant differences between novices and experts involved air insufflation, sedation management, endoscope force, and patient comfort. These findings are of uncertain clinical significance. Survey data found multiple aspects of the simulation to be unrealistic compared with human endoscopy. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size. CONCLUSION: The CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator displays poor content and criterion validity and is thereby incapable of predicting skill during in vivo endoscopy.

Chronic Intestinal Pseudo-Obstruction.

Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction (CIP) is a gastrointestinal motility disorder characterized by chronic symptoms and signs of bowel obstruction in the absence of a fixed, lumen-occluding lesion. Radiographic findings consist of dilated bowel with air-fluid levels. Pseudo-obstruction is an uncommon condition and can result from primary or secondary causes. The management is primarily focused on symptom control and nutritional support to prevent weight loss and malnutrition. The principles of management of patients with CIP involve 1) establishing a correct clinical diagnosis and excluding mechanical obstruction; 2) differentiating between idiopathic and secondary forms; 3) performing a symptomatic and physiologic assessment of the parts of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract involved by manometric and whole gut transit scintigraphic studies; 4) careful assessment of nutritional status of the patient; and 5) developing a therapeutic plan addressing the patient's symptoms and nutritional status. Treatment of CIP includes frequent small meals with a low-fat, low-fiber diet, liquid nutritional supplements may be needed; prokinetic agents such as metoclopramide may help to reduce upper GI symptoms. Trials of drugs such as erythromycin, domperidone, cisapride, and tegaserod may be considered if there is no response. Subcutaneous octreotide may be helpful to improve small bowel dysmotility especially in patients with scleroderma. In patients with symptoms suggestive of bacterial overgrowth, courses of antibiotics such as metronidazole, ciprofloxacin, and doxycycline may be needed. Nutritional assessment and support is an important aspect of management. Enteral nutrition is usually preferred. In carefully selected patients, feeding jejunostomy with or without decompression gastrostomy may be tried. Long term parenteral nutrition should be reserved for patients who can not tolerate enteral nutrition. Complications associated with total parenteral nutrition include infections, sepsis, and cholestatic hepatic dysfunction.

Risk of esophageal variceal bleeding based on endoscopic ultrasound evaluation of the sum of esophageal variceal cross-sectional surface area.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of future variceal bleeding, based on the endoscopic ultrasound measurement of the sum of the cross-sectional surface area (CSA) of all of the esophageal varices in the distal esophagus. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with portal hypertension and esophageal varices, but no prior history of variceal bleeding, were evaluated using endoscopic ultrasound (20-MHz ultrasound probe, Microvasive, Boston, MA; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). The entire esophagus was imaged, and an image was selected at a point where the varices appeared the largest. This image was digitized, and the sum of the CSA of all of the varices was measured (Image Pro Plus, Silver Springs, MD) by an investigator blinded to the patients' clinical status. The follow-up time for each patient was calculated (time to first bleed, time to liver transplantation, time to death, or time to the end of study). The Cox Proportional Hazards Model was used to determine if there was a significant difference between the sums of the CSA in the patients who bled compared with those who did not bleed. An OR was calculated to determine the risk of future variceal bleeding based on the sum of the CSA as measured in cm(2)/month. Positive and negative predictive values were calculated for future variceal bleeding. RESULTS: Six of 28 patients (21%) experienced esophageal variceal bleeding on follow-up. The mean CSA +/- SEM of the sum of the esophageal varices in these patients was 0.77 cm(2) +/- 0.31 cm(2) (range 0.07-2.09 cm(2)). The mean time to bleeding was 15.5 months +/- 4.95 months (range 1-29 months). Twenty-two of 28 patients (79%) did not experience variceal bleeding. The mean CSA +/- SEM of the sum of the varices in these patients was 0.36 cm(2) +/- 0.08 cm(2) (range 0.02-1.19 cm(2)). The mean time to follow-up was 35.7 months +/- 6.69 months (range 1.2-103.2 months). The sum of the CSA between the patients who bleed and those who did not bleed was significantly different at the p < 0.018 level. The OR for the risk of variceal bleeding for each one cm(2) difference in the sum of the CSA per month was 6.34. Using a cutoff of 0.45 cm(2), the sensitivity and specificity for future variceal bleeding was 83% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant difference (p < 0.018) in the sum of the esophageal variceal CSA between those patients who will experience future variceal bleeding and those who will not. There is a 76-fold increase per year in the risk of future variceal bleeding for each one cm(2) increase in variceal CSA. Using a cutoff value for the CSA of 0.45 cm(2), the sensitivity and specificity for future variceal bleeding above and below this point is 83% and 75%, respectively.

Functional (Nonulcer) Dyspepsia.

Functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia refers to upper abdominal pain or discomfort with or without symptoms of early satiety, nausea, or vomiting with no definable organic cause. The current Rome II criteria help to diagnose functional dyspepsia and avoid misdiagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease and irritable bowel syndrome as functional dyspepsia. Assessment of gastric emptying with scintigraphy or breath testing may be useful in identifying delayed gastric emptying in patients with dyspeptic symptoms and may be helpful in patient management. Electrogastrography is a noninvasive test that evaluates for gastric dysrhythmias. Satiety testing is being evaluated as an indirect test for impaired fundic relaxation and visceral hypersensitivity. The symptom response to Helicobacter pylori therapy in patients with functional dyspepsia and a negative endoscopy examination but a positive H. pylori test is marginal. Lifestyle modifications often are suggested for initial treatment of functional dyspepsia. Dietary changes such as frequent small meals, low-fat diet, and avoidance of certain aggravating foods may improve symptoms. Additional measures include cessation of smoking, avoiding excess alcohol intake, and minimizing coffee intake. Antacids and over-the-counter histamine type 2 receptor antagonists may be helpful as an "on-demand" therapy for intermittent symptoms. They are safe and relatively inexpensive. Different subgroups of functional dyspepsia are based on the predominant symptom and may help in choosing an appropriate drug to initiate therapy. If the predominant symptom is epigastric pain (ulcer-like functional dyspepsia), histamine-2 receptor antagonists or proton pump inhibitors are the initial treatment of choice. If fullness, bloating, early satiety or nausea is the predominant complaint (dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia), a prokinetic agent may help. Metoclopramide is the only available effective prokinetic agent at present. If metoclopramide is used, short-term treatment and discussion of possible side effects with the patient are advised. If there is no response to these initial treatments, switching therapy from proton pump inhibitor to prokinetic or vice versa can be tried. If these treatment options fail, patient re-evaluation for other disorders (including other functional bowel disorders) is advised. A low-dose tricyclic antidepressant at bedtime may be helpful for treatment of visceral hypersensitivity.