ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND-GUIDED RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION FOR PANCREATIC ADENOCARCINOMA.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Emerging data suggest neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with improved survival. However, less than 40% demonstrate a meaningful radiographic response to NAC. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) has emerged as a new modality to treat PDAC. We hypothesize that NAC plus EUS-RFA can be used in the management of resectable PDAC. METHODS: Prospective review of PDAC patients meeting criteria of resectable tumor anatomy that underwent NAC chemotherapy plus EUS-RFA followed by pancreatic resection. Radiographic imaging, perioperative and short-term outcomes were recorded. Surgical pathology specimens were analyzed for treatment response. RESULTS: Three eligible patients with resectable PDAC received 4 months of NAC plus EUS-RFA. One month after NAC and EUS-RFA completion, all 3 patients underwent standard pancreaticoduodenectomy without complications. After a 6-week recovery, all patients completed 2 months of post-op adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In our institutional experience, this treatment protocol appears safe as patients tolerated the combination of chemotherapy and ablation. Patients underwent pancreatic resection with uneventful recovery. This novel neoadjuvant approach may provide a more effective alternative to chemotherapy alone.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic tumors.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgery is a cornerstone in the management of pancreatic cancer and precancerous pancreatic lesions. However, many patients are not suitable candidates for surgery at the time of diagnosis for various reasons. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) appears to be a promising treatment option for patients who are ineligible for surgery for management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs), and pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). RECENT FINDINGS: EUS-RFA may serve as an adjunct to chemotherapy or palliative measures for inoperable cases of PDAC. Given its feasibility and efficacy, EUS-RFA has an evolving niche as a minimally invasive and potentially definitive treatment for PNETs and high-risk PCLs such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). EUS-RFA is a generally well tolerated procedure, with abdominal pain and acute pancreatitis being the most common adverse effects, though the risk can be mitigated through prophylactic measures. SUMMARY: There is an increasing body of evidence to support the use of EUS-RFA in managing pancreatic lesions, either as definitive, adjunctive, or palliative treatment, depending on lesion type.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

Lifestyle Medicine for the Prevention and Treatment of Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Cancer.

The incidence of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer is on the upswing in the USA. These conditions often lead to higher healthcare costs due to the complex nature of diagnosis and the need for specialized medical interventions, surgical procedures, and prolonged medical management. The economic ramification encompasses direct healthcare expenses and indirect costs related to productivity losses, disability, and potential long-term care requirements. Increasing evidence underscores the importance of a healthy lifestyle in preventing and managing these conditions. Lifestyle medicine employs evidence-based interventions to promote health through six key pillars: embracing a whole-food, plant-predominant dietary pattern; regular physical activity; ensuring restorative sleep; managing stress effectively; removing harmful substances; and fostering positive social connections. This review provides a comprehensive overview of lifestyle interventions for managing and preventing the development of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.

Promising Response of Olaparib in Patient With Germline ATM-Mutated Metastatic Gastric Cancer.

Gastric cancer ranks as the fifth leading cause of global cancer incidences, exhibiting varied prevalence influenced by geographical, ethnic, and lifestyle factors, as well as Helicobacter pylori infection. The ATM gene on chromosome 11q22 is vital for genomic stability as an initiator of the DNA damage response, and mutations in this gene have been associated with various cancers. Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, such as olaparib, have shown efficacy in cancers with homologous recombination repair deficiencies, notably in those with ATM mutations. Here, we present a case of a 66-year-old patient with germline ATM-mutated metastatic gastric cancer with very high CA 19-9 (48 000 units/mL) who demonstrated an exceptional response to the addition of olaparib to chemo-immunotherapy and subsequent olaparib maintenance monotherapy for 12 months. CA 19-9 was maintained at low level for 18 months. Despite the failure of a phase II clinical trial on olaparib in gastric cancer (NCT01063517) to meet its primary endpoint, intriguing findings emerged in the subset of ATM-mutated patients, who exhibited notable improvements in overall survival. Our case underscores the potential clinical utility of olaparib in germline ATM-mutated gastric cancer and emphasizes the need for further exploration through larger clinical trials. Ongoing research and clinical trials are essential for optimizing the use of PARP inhibitors, identifying biomarkers, and advancing personalized treatment strategies for gastric cancer.

Endoscopy ergonomics: a survey-based study exploring gender differences.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Women, on average, have smaller hand sizes as well as lower muscle mass and strength. With the increasing number of women entering training programs in gastroenterology, our aim was to study the subtle gender differences in endoscopy ergonomics. METHODS: A survey instrument regarding demographic information, personal preferences in endoscopy styles and techniques, and endoscopy-related injury was sent to practicing gastroenterologists. Statistical analysis was performed on the data. RESULTS: The survey was answered by 107 gastroenterologists, 41 (38.3%) female subjects and 66 (61.7%) male subjects. Female participants were shorter in height, had smaller hand sizes, and performed fewer weekly cases. More men (45.5%) than women (20%) performed advanced endoscopic procedures. Women preferred the following: (1) holding the endoscope with the umbilical cord outside the forearm; (2) using the right hand to turn the small wheel; and (3) using a pediatric colonoscope to perform colonoscopy in a petite patient or one with a low body mass index. Endoscopy-related injury was reported in 49.5% of all gastroenterologists, with women reporting a significantly higher risk of injury (63.4%) than men (40.9%) (P = .02). Although higher weekly case volumes and performance of advanced endoscopy procedures were not independent risk factors for endoscopy-related injury, female gender was found to be an independent risk factor for injury. CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences exist in endoscopy styles and techniques, as well as endoscopy-related injury. Providing gender-specific training in endoscopy may improve ergonomics and decrease the risk of injury.

Comparing EUS-directed Transgastric ERCP (EDGE) Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted ERCP Versus Enteroscopic ERCP: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Management of choledocholithiasis in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery is challenging. This study aims to compare technical success rates, adverse events, and procedural time between 3 current approaches: endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (EDGE), enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP), and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP). METHODS: A systematic search of 5 databases was conducted. Direct and network meta-analyses were performed to compare interventions using the random effects model. A significance threshold of P < 0.05 was applied. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. On direct meta-analysis, technical success rates were comparable between EDGE and LA-ERCP (odds ratio: 0.768, CI: 0.196-3.006, P = 0.704, I2 = 14.13%). However, EDGE and LA-ERCP showed significantly higher success rates than E-ERCP. No significant differences in adverse events were found between EDGE versus LA-ERCP, EDGE versus E-ERCP, and LA-ERCP versus E-ERCP on direct meta-analysis. In terms of procedural time, EDGE was significantly shorter than E-ERCP [mean difference (MD): -31 minutes, 95% CI: -40.748 to -21.217, P < 0.001, I2 = 19.89%), and E-ERCP was shorter than LA-ERCP (MD: -44.567 minutes, 95% CI: -76.018 to -13.116, P = 0.005, I2 = 0%). EDGE also demonstrated a significant time advantage over LA-ERCP (MD: -78.145 minutes, 95% CI: -104.882 to -51.407, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%). All findings were consistent with network meta-analysis on random effects model. The heterogeneity of the model was low. CONCLUSIONS: EDGE and LA-ERCP showed superior technical success rates compared with E-ERCP. Adverse events did not significantly differ among the three approaches. Furthermore, EDGE demonstrated the shortest procedural duration. We recommend considering EDGE as a first-choice procedure.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related early perforations: A study of effects of procedure duration, complexity, and endoscopist experience.

BACKGROUND: Perforations (Perf) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are rare (< 1%) but potentially fatal events (up to 20% mortality). Given its rarity, most data is through case series studies from centers or analysis of large databases. Although a meta-analysis has shown fewer adverse events as a composite (bleeding, pancreatitis, Perf) during ERCP performed at high-volume centers, there is very little real-world data on endoscopist and center procedural volumes, ERCP duration and complexity on the occurrence of Perf. AIM: To study the profile of Perf related to ERCP by center and endoscopist procedure volume, ERCP time, and complexity from a national endoscopic repository. METHODS: Patients from clinical outcomes research initiative-national endoscopic database (2000-2012) who underwent ERCP were stratified based on the endoscopist and center volume (quartiles), and total procedure duration and complexity grade of the ERCP based on procedure details. The effects of these variables on the Perf that occurred were studied. Continuous variables were compared between Perf and no perforations (NoPerf) using the Mann-Whitney U test as the data demonstrated significant skewness and kurtosis. RESULTS: A total of 14153 ERCPs were performed by 258 endoscopists, with 20 reported Perf (0.14%) among 16 endoscopists. Mean patient age in years 61.6 ± 14.8 vs 58.1 ± 18.8 (Perf vs. NoPerf, P = NS). The cannulation rate was 100% and 91.5% for Perf and NoPerf groups, respectively. 13/20 (65%) of endoscopists were high-volume performers in the 4th quartile, and 11/20 (55%) of Perf occurred in centers with the highest volumes (4th quartile). Total procedure duration in minutes was 60.1 ± 29.9 vs 40.33 ± 23.5 (Perf vs NoPerf, P < 0.001). Fluoroscopy duration in minutes was 3.3 ± 2.3 vs 3.3 ± 2.6 (Perf vs NoPerf P = NS). 50% of the procedures were complex and greater than grade 1 difficulty. 3/20 (15%) patients had prior biliary surgery. 13/20 (65%) had sphincterotomies performed with stent insertion. Peritonitis occurred in only 1/20 (0.5%). CONCLUSION: Overall adverse events as a composite during ERCP are known to occur at a lower rate with higher volume endoscopists and centers. However, Perf studied from the national database show prolonged and more complex procedures performed by high-volume endoscopists at high-volume centers contribute to Perf.

The incremental yield of adenoma detection with I-Scan versus high-definition white light colonoscopy-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies.

INTRODUCTION: The incremental yield of I-Scan virtual chromoendoscopy compared to high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) in detection of colorectal adenomas has not been thoroughly elucidated. METHODS: A systematic search from inception to April 2023 was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing I-Scan to HD-WLE for detection of adenomas. A random effects model was used to compute risk difference (RD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals in adenoma detection rate (ADR). Influence analysis was done to assess robustness of findings. The number needed to diagnose was computed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and explored further by subgroup analyses defined a priori. Certainty in effect estimates was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We identified four studies (I-Scan n = 730, HD-WLE n = 765). I-Scan increased adenoma detection by 9% (risk difference (RD), 0.09; 0.04, 0.14; I2 02%; certainty, low). Influence analysis revealed that the gain in yield remained statistically significant with exclusion of all but one study. The number needed to capture one additional adenomatous polyp with I-Scan use was 11.2. I-Scan 1 use was associated with a statistically significant gain in ADR, whereas no significant difference in ADR was noted with I-Scan use on subgroup analysis. DISCUSSION: In conclusion, I-Scan increases the yield of adenoma detection by 9% compared to HD-WLE, with low certainty in the estimate of this effect. Data on the gain in yield of detecting large polyps, sessile serrated lesions, and on the impact of formally training endoscopists and trainees in I-Scan use and similar technology on adenoma detection rate are needed.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: methodology and review of evidence.

This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. It is accompanied by the document subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well- or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, we suggest surgical evaluation over endoscopic approaches.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: summary and recommendations.

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the role of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures. In the endoscopic workup of these patients, we suggest the use of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling in addition to brush cytology over brush cytology alone, especially for hilar strictures. We suggest the use of cholangioscopic and EUS-guided biopsy sampling especially for patients who undergo nondiagnostic sampling, cholangioscopic biopsy sampling for nondistal strictures and EUS-guided biopsy sampling distal strictures or those with suspected spread to surrounding lymph nodes and other structures.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: methodology and review of evidence.

Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, whereas the accompanying article subtitled "Summary and Recommendations" contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.