Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) is the established method for the resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions (NPCRL) ≥ 10 mm. In the last decade, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been introduced as a potential alternative. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to compare the recurrence and safety of UEMR and CEMR by analyzing only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE until April 2023. Studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) RCTs, (2) comparing UEMR with CEMR, (3) NPCRL ≥ 10 mm, and (4) reporting the outcomes of interest. Primary outcomes were recurrence and safety. Secondary outcomes were en bloc, R0, complete resection, clipping and adverse events per type. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included. UEMR was associated with a lower recurrence rate (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.32-0.97). Thus, the RR of recurrence was 1.7 times higher in the CEMR group (95% CI, 1.04-2.77). There was no significant difference in the pooled safety analysis. UEMR showed better en bloc resection rates (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15-2.07), but subgroup analysis showed comparable rates in lesions ≥ 20 mm. R0 resection was higher in UEMR (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.23-2.41). Other outcomes were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: UEMR is as safe as CEMR, with a higher overall R0 rate and a higher en bloc resection rate for lesions < 20 mm, leading to a lower overall recurrence rate. The results of this meta-analysis support the widespread use of UEMR.

The Role of Probe-Based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (pCLE) in the Diagnosis of Sustained Clinical Complete Response Under Watch-and-Wait Strategy After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma: a Score Validation.

BACKGROUND: Watch-and-wait strategy has been increasingly accepted for patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after multimodal treatment for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. Close follow-up is essential to the early detection of local regrowth. It was previously demonstrated that probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) scoring using the combination of epithelial and vascular features might improve the diagnostic accuracy of cCR. AIM: To validate the pCLE scoring system in the assessment of patients with cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRxt) for advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Digital rectal examination, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and pCLE were performed in 43 patients with cCR, who presented either a scar (N = 33; 76.7%) or a small ulcer with no signs of tumor, and/or biopsy negative for malignancy (N = 10; 23.3%). RESULTS: Twenty-five (58.1%) patients were men, and the mean age was 58.4 years. During the follow-up, 12/43 (27.9%) patients presented local regrowth and underwent salvage surgery. There was an association between pCLE diagnostic scoring and final histological report (for patients who underwent surgical resection) or final diagnosis at the latest follow-up (p = 0.0001), while this association was not observed with MRI (p = 0.49). pCLE sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 66.7%, 93.5%, 80%, 88.9%, and 86%, respectively. MRI sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 66.7%, 48.4%, 66.7%, 78.9%, and 53.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: pCLE scoring system based on epithelial and vascular features improved the diagnosis of sustained cCR and might be recommended during follow-up. pCLE might add some valuable contribution for identifying local regrowth. Trial Registration This protocol was registered at the Clinical Trials (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02284802).

Impact of radiotherapy on adverse events of self-expanding metallic stents in patients with esophageal cancer.

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are considered the treatment of choice for the palliation of dysphagia and fistulas in inoperable esophageal neoplasms. However, the safety of SEMSs in patients who received or who will be submitted to radiotherapy (RT) is uncertain. The study aimed to evaluate the impact of RT on adverse events (AEs) in patients with esophageal cancer with SEMSs. This is a retrospective study conducted at a tertiary cancer hospital from 2009 to 2018. We collected information regarding RT, the histological type of the tumor, the model of SEMSs and AEs after stent placement. Three hundred twenty-three patients with malignant stenosis or fistula were treated with SEMSs. The predominant histological type was squamous cell carcinoma (79.6%). A total of 282 partially covered and 41 fully covered SEMSs were inserted. Of the 323 patients, 182 did not received RT, 118 received RT before SEMS placement and 23 after. Comparing the group that received RT before stent insertion with the group that did not, the first one presented a higher frequency of severe pain (9/118 7.6% vs. 3/182 1.6%; P = 0.02). The group treated with RT after stent placement had a higher risk of global AEs (13/23 56.5% vs. 63/182 34.6%; P = 0.019), ingrowth/overgrowth (6/23 26.1% vs. 21/182 11.5%; P = 0.045) and gastroesophageal reflux (2/23 8.7% vs. 2/182 1.1%; P = 0.034). Treatment with RT before stent placement in patients with inoperable esophageal neoplasm prolongs survival and is associated with an increased risk of severe chest pain. Treatment with RT of patients with an esophageal stent increases the frequency of minor, not life-threatening AEs.

Underwater versus conventional EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) is the standard modality for removing nonpedunculated colorectal lesions. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has emerged as an alternative method. There are few comparative studies between these techniques, especially evaluating recurrence. Therefore, the purpose of this trial was to compare CEMR and UEMR for the resection of colorectal lesions with respect to efficacy, safety, and recurrence rate. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial of UEMR versus CEMR for naïve and nonpedunculated lesions measuring between 10 and 40 mm. The primary outcome was adenoma recurrence at 6 months after the resection. Secondary outcomes were rates of technical success, en bloc resection, and adverse events. Block randomization was used to assign patients. Tattooing was performed to facilitate localization of the scars and eventual recurrences. Endoscopic follow-up was scheduled at 6 months after the procedure. The sites of resections were examined with white-light imaging, narrow-band imaging (NBI), and conventional chromoscopy with indigo carmine followed by biopsies. RESULTS: One hundred five patients with 120 lesions were included, with a mean size of 17.5 ± 7.1 (SD) mm. Sixty-one lesions were resected by UEMR and 59 by CEMR. The groups were similar at baseline regarding age, sex, average size, and histologic type. Lesions in the proximal colon in the CEMR group corresponded to 83% and in the UEMR group to 67.8% (P = .073). There was no difference between groups regarding success rate (1 failure in each group) and en bloc resection rate (60.6% UEMR vs 54.2% CEMR, P = .48). Intraprocedural bleeding was observed in 5 CEMRs (8.5%) and 2 UEMRs (3.3%) (P = .27). There was no perforation or delayed hemorrhage in either groups. Recurrence rate was higher in the CEMR arm (15%) than in the UEMR arm (2%) (P = .031). Therefore, the relative risk of 6-month recurrence rate in the CEMR group was 7.5-fold higher (95% CI, 0.98-58.20), with a number needed to treat of 7.7 (95% CI, 40.33-4.22). The higher recurrence rate in the CEMR group persisted only for lesions measuring 21 to 40 mm (35.7% vs 0%; P = .04). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that UEMR was associated with a lower adenoma recurrence rate than was CEMR. Both endoscopic techniques were effective and had similar rates of adverse events for the treatment of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions.

TC-325 hemostatic powder in the management of upper gastrointestinal malignant bleeding: a randomized controlled trial.

Background and study aims Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) from malignancy is associated with high rebleeding and mortality rates. Recently, TC-325 powder has shown promising results in the treatment of UGIB, including malignant bleeding. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of TC-325 versus best clinical management. Patients and methods From August 2016 to February 2020, all patients with evidence of UGIB from malignancy were randomized to receive TC-325 therapy or control group, in which endoscopic treatment was not mandatory. Exclusion criteria were hemoglobin drop without overt bleeding and UGIB from non-tumor origin. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day rebleeding, blood transfusion and length of hospital stay. Results Sixty-two patients were randomized, three were excluded and 59 were included in the final analysis (TC-325 group = 28; control = 31). Groups were similar at baseline. Active bleeding was observed in 22 patients in the TC-325 group and 19 in the control group ( P  = 0.15). Successful initial hemostasis with TC-325 was achieved in all cases. Additional therapy (radiotherapy, surgery or arterial embolization) was equally performed in both groups (42.9 % vs 58.1 %; P  = 0.243). There were no differences in 30-day mortality (28.6 % vs. 19.4 %, P  = 0.406) or 30-day rebleeding rates (32.1 % vs. 19.4 %, P  = 0.26). Logistic regression identified no significant predictors of rebleeding. Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score 3 to 4 and AIMS65 score > 1 predicted greater mortality. Conclusions TC-325 was effective in achieving immediate hemostasis in malignant gastrointestinal bleeding but did not reduce 30-day mortality, 30-day rebleeding, blood transfusion or length of hospital stay. Age, ECOG 3-4, and AIMS65 > 1 were predictive factors of mortality.

IS DAIRY FOODS RESTRICTION MANDATORY FOR INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE PATIENTS: A MULTINATIONAL CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY.

BACKGROUND: The role of dairy foods in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been controversial and it is debatable if patients with IBD should avoid milk and dairy products or not, as well as the relationship between these foods and symptoms among those population. OBJECTIVE: This multi centric cross-sectional study designed to evaluate if it is really necessary to deprive IBD patients from consumption of dairy foods. METHODS: A multicenter study with 12 gastroenterology referral centers in four countries was designed to evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after consumption of dairy foods from all outpatients with IBD during 6 months and to compare patients treated at the same centers without IBD (non IBD cases). RESULTS: Overall 1888 cases included (872 IBD patients and 1016 non IBD cases). 56.6% of participants were female with average age of 40.1 years. Racially 79.8% participants were Caucasians and originally they were citizens of 10 countries. Relative prevalence of IBD was higher in Africans and Indians and the most frequent prevalence of dairy foods intolerance was seen in Asians. Among IBD patients, 571 cases diagnosed as ulcerative colitis and 189 participants as Crohn's disease. Average duration of diagnosis as IBD was 6.8 years (from 2 months to 35 years). The most prevalent GI symptoms after consumption of all the dairy foods were bloating and abdominal pain. Totally, intolerance of dairy foods and lactase deficiency was more prevalent among IBD patients in comparison with non IBD cases (65.5% vs 46.1%, P=0.0001). But the rate of GI complains among IBD patients who had not any family history of lactase deficiency, history of food sensitivity or both were 59.91%, 52.87% & 50.33% respectively and similar to non IBD cases (P=0.68, 0.98 & 0.99 respectively). CONCLUSION: The rate of dairy foods intolerance among IBD patients without family history of lactase deficiency or history of food sensitivity is similar to non IBD cases and probably there is no reason to deprive them from this important source of dietary calcium, vitamin D and other nutrients.

A restrição de alimentos lácteos é obrigatória para pacientes com doença inflamatória intestinal? Estudo transversal multinacional / Is dairy foods restriction mandatory for inflammatory bowel disease patients: a multinational cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT Background: The role of dairy foods in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been controversial and it is debatable if patients with IBD should avoid milk and dairy products or not, as well as the relationship between these foods and symptoms among those population. Objective: This multi centric cross-sectional study designed to evaluate if it is really necessary to deprive IBD patients from consumption of dairy foods. Methods: A multicenter study with 12 gastroenterology referral centers in four countries was designed to evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after consumption of dairy foods from all outpatients with IBD during 6 months and to compare patients treated at the same centers without IBD (non IBD cases). Results: Overall 1888 cases included (872 IBD patients and 1016 non IBD cases). 56.6% of participants were female with average age of 40.1 years. Racially 79.8% participants were Caucasians and originally they were citizens of 10 countries. Relative prevalence of IBD was higher in Africans and Indians and the most frequent prevalence of dairy foods intolerance was seen in Asians. Among IBD patients, 571 cases diagnosed as ulcerative colitis and 189 participants as Crohn's disease. Average duration of diagnosis as IBD was 6.8 years (from 2 months to 35 years). The most prevalent GI symptoms after consumption of all the dairy foods were bloating and abdominal pain. Totally, intolerance of dairy foods and lactase deficiency was more prevalent among IBD patients in comparison with non IBD cases (65.5% vs 46.1%, P=0.0001). But the rate of GI complains among IBD patients who had not any family history of lactase deficiency, history of food sensitivity or both were 59.91%, 52.87% & 50.33% respectively and similar to non IBD cases (P=0.68, 0.98 & 0.99 respectively). Conclusion: The rate of dairy foods intolerance among IBD patients without family history of lactase deficiency or history of food sensitivity is similar to non IBD cases and probably there is no reason to deprive them from this important source of dietary calcium, vitamin D and other nutrients.

RESUMO Contexto: O papel dos alimentos lácteos na doença inflamatória intestinal (DII) tem sido controverso e é discutível se os pacientes com DII devem ou não evitar leite e laticínios, bem como a relação entre esses alimentos e sintomas nesta população. Objetivo: Estudo transversal multicêntrico foi projetado para avaliar se é realmente necessário privar os pacientes com DII do consumo desta classe de alimentos. Métodos: Um estudo multicêntrico com 12 centros de referência em gastroenterologia de quatro países foi projetado para avaliar sintomas gastrointestinais após o consumo de alimentos lácteos em todos os ambulatórios de DII durante seis meses e comparar pacientes tratados nos mesmos centros sem DII. Resultados: No total, foram incluídos 1888 casos (872 pacientes com DII e 1016 casos sem DII. 56,6% dos participantes eram do sexo feminino com idade média de 40,1 anos. 79,8% dos participantes eram caucasianos e originalmente eram cidadãos de 10 países. A prevalência relativa de DII foi maior em africanos e indianos e a prevalência mais frequente de intolerância a alimentos lácteos observada nos asiáticos. Entre os pacientes com DII, 571 casos foram diagnosticados como colite ulcerativa e 189 participantes como doença de Crohn. A duração média do diagnóstico como DII foi de 6,8 anos (de 2 meses a 35 anos). Os sintomas de gastrointestinais mais prevalentes após o consumo de todos os alimentos lácteos foram inchaço e dor abdominal. No total, a intolerância aos alimentos lácteos e a deficiência de lactase foi mais prevalente entre os pacientes com DII em comparação com os casos sem DII (65,5% vs 46,1%, P=0,0001). A taxa de queixas gastrointestinais entre os pacientes com DII que não tinham histórico familiar de deficiência de lactase, histórico de sensibilidade alimentar ou ambos foram de 59,91%, 52,87% e 50,33% respectivamente e semelhantes aos casos sem DII (P=0,68, 0,98 e 0,99, respectivamente). Conclusão: A taxa de intolerância de alimentos lácteos entre pacientes com DII sem histórico familiar de deficiência de lactase ou histórico de sensibilidade alimentar é semelhante aos casos sem DII e provavelmente não há razão para privá-los dessa importante fonte de cálcio dietético, vitamina D e outros nutrientes.

Tube-in-tube endoscopic vacuum therapy for the closure of upper gastrointestinal fistulas, leaks, and perforations.

BACKGROUND : Although endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has been successfully used to treat postoperative upper gastrointestinal (UGI) wall defects, its use demands special materials and several endoscopic treatment sessions. Herein, we propose a technical modification of EVT using a double tube (tube-in-tube drain) without polyurethane sponges for the drainage element. The tube-in-tube drainage device enables irrigation and application of suction. A flowchart for standardizing the management of postoperative UGI wall defects with this device is presented. METHODS : An EVT modification was made to achieve frequent fistula cleansing, with 3 % hydrogen peroxide rinsing, and the application of negative pressure. A tube-in-tube drain without polyurethane sponges can be inserted like a nasogastric tube or passed through a previously positioned surgical drain. This was a retrospective two-center observational study, with data collected from 30 consecutive patients. Technical success, clinical success, adverse events, time under therapy, interval time from procedure to fistula diagnosis and treatment start, size of transmural defect, volume of cavity, number of endoscopic treatment sessions, and mortality were reviewed. RESULTS : 30 patients with UGI wall defects were treated. The technical and clinical success rates were 100 % and 86.7 %, respectively. Three patients (10 %) had adverse events and three patients (10 %) died. The median time under therapy was of 19 days (range 1-70) and the median number of endoscopic sessions was 3 (range 1-9). CONCLUSIONS : This standardized approach and EVT modification using a tube-in-tube drain, with frequent fistula cleansing, were successful and safe in a wide variety of UGI wall defects.

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION FOR SMALL RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS.

BACKGROUND: A common site of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is the rectum. The technique most often used is endoscopic mucosal resection with saline injection. However, deep margins are often difficult to obtain because submucosal invasion is common. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a technique in which the bowel lumen is filled with water rather than air, precluding the need for submucosal lifting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for removing small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). METHODS: Retrospective study with patients who underwent UEMR in two centers. UEMR was performed using a standard colonoscope. No submucosal injection was performed. Board-certified pathologists conducted histopathologic assessment. RESULTS: UEMR for small rNET was performed on 11 patients (nine female) with a mean age of 55.8 years and 11 lesions (mean size 7 mm, range 3-12 mm). There were 9 (81%) patients with G1 rNET and two patients with G2, and all tumors invaded the submucosa with only one restricted to the mucosa. None case showed vascular or perineural invasion. All lesions were removed en bloc. Nine (81%) resections had free margins. Two patients had deep margin involvement; one had negative biopsies via endoscopic surveillance, and the other was lost to follow-up. No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred. CONCLUSION: UEMR appeared to be an effective and safe alternative for treatment of small rNETs without adverse events and with high en bloc and R0 resection rates. Further prospective studies are needed to compare available endoscopic interventions and to elucidate the most appropriate endoscopic technique for resection of rNETs.

Ressecção endoscópica sob imersão d'água de pequenos tumores neuroendócrinos retais / Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: A common site of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is the rectum. The technique most often used is endoscopic mucosal resection with saline injection. However, deep margins are often difficult to obtain because submucosal invasion is common. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a technique in which the bowel lumen is filled with water rather than air, precluding the need for submucosal lifting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for removing small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). METHODS: Retrospective study with patients who underwent UEMR in two centers. UEMR was performed using a standard colonoscope. No submucosal injection was performed. Board-certified pathologists conducted histopathologic assessment. RESULTS: UEMR for small rNET was performed on 11 patients (nine female) with a mean age of 55.8 years and 11 lesions (mean size 7 mm, range 3-12 mm). There were 9 (81%) patients with G1 rNET and two patients with G2, and all tumors invaded the submucosa with only one restricted to the mucosa. None case showed vascular or perineural invasion. All lesions were removed en bloc. Nine (81%) resections had free margins. Two patients had deep margin involvement; one had negative biopsies via endoscopic surveillance, and the other was lost to follow-up. No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred. CONCLUSION: UEMR appeared to be an effective and safe alternative for treatment of small rNETs without adverse events and with high en bloc and R0 resection rates. Further prospective studies are needed to compare available endoscopic interventions and to elucidate the most appropriate endoscopic technique for resection of rNETs.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: Um local comum de tumores neuroendócrinos (TNEs) é o reto. A técnica mais utilizada é a ressecção endoscópica da mucosa com injeção de solução salina. No entanto, as margens profundas costumam ser difíceis de ressecar porque a invasão da submucosa é comum. A ressecção endoscópica sob imersão d'água (RESI) é uma técnica em que o lúmen intestinal é preenchido com água em vez de ar, evitando a necessidade de elevação submucosa. OBJETIVO: Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a eficácia e segurança da RESI para a remoção de pequenos TNEs retais (rTNEs). MÉTODOS: Estudo retrospectivo com pacientes que realizaram RESI em dois centros. RESI foi realizada usando um colonoscópio padrão. Nenhuma injeção submucosa foi realizada. Patologistas certificados conduziram avaliação histopatológica. RESULTADOS: RESI foi realizada para pequenos rTNEs em 11 pacientes (nove mulheres) com média de idade de 55,8 anos e 11 lesões (tamanho médio de 7 mm, variando de 3-12 mm). Havia 9 (81%) pacientes com G1 rTNEs e dois pacientes com G2, sendo que todos os tumores invadiam a submucosa sendo apenas um restrito a mucosa. Nenhum caso mostrou invasão vascular ou perineural. Todas as lesões foram removidas em bloco. Nove (81%) ressecções tiveram margens livres. Dois pacientes tiveram envolvimento de margens profundas; um teve biópsias negativas por meio de vigilância endoscópica e o outro perdeu o acompanhamento. Não ocorreram perfurações ou sangramento tardios. CONCLUSÃO: A RESI parece ser uma alternativa eficaz e segura para o tratamento de pequenos rTNEs sem eventos adversos e com altas taxas de ressecção em bloco e R0. Mais estudos prospectivos são necessários para comparar as intervenções endoscópicas disponíveis e para elucidar a técnica endoscópica mais adequada para ressecção de rTNEs.

Endoscopy infection control strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience from a tertiary cancer center in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: Strategic planning for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) care has dominated the agenda of medical services, which have been further restricted by the need for minimizing viral transmission. Risk is particularly relevant in relation to endoscopy procedures. This study aimed to describe a contingency plan for a tertiary academic cancer center, define a strategy to prioritize and postpone examinations, and evaluate the infection rate among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the endoscopy unit of the Cancer Institute of the State of São Paulo (ICESP). METHODS: We created a strategy to balance the risk of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and to mitigate the effects of postponing endoscopic procedures in oncological patients. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all endoscopies between March and June 2020 compared with those during the same period in 2019 was carried out. All HCWs were interviewed to obtain clinical data and SARS-CoV-2 test results. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 outbreak, there was a reduction of 55% in endoscopy cases in total. Colonoscopy was the most affected modality. The total infection rate among all HCWs was 38%. None of the senior digestive endoscopists had COVID-19. However, all bronchoscopists had been infected. One of three fellows had a serological diagnosis of COVID-19. Two-thirds of all nurses were infected, whereas half of all technicians were infected. CONCLUSIONS: In this pandemic scenario, all endoscopy services must prioritize the procedures that will be performed. It was possible to maintain some endoscopic procedures, including those meant to provide nutritional access, tissue diagnosis, and endoscopic resection. Personal protective equipment (PPE) seems effective in preventing transmission of COVID-19 from patients to digestive endoscopists. These measures can be useful in planning, even for pandemics in the future.

Diagnosis of Clinical Complete Response by Probe-Based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (pCLE) After Chemoradiation for Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRxt) followed by radical surgery is the optimal treatment for advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) may be followed closely without immediate surgery. Probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) is a real-time in vivo method that allows acquisition of optical biopsies with 1000 times magnification, evaluating both epithelial and vascular patterns. AIM: To evaluate the role of pCLE in the diagnosis of cCR after nCRxt for advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: pCLE was performed in 47 patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (T3/T4, or N+) who underwent nCRxt (5-fluorouracil, 5040 cGy). RESULTS: Twenty-seven (57.5%) patients were men, and the mean age was 62.8 years. Thirty-seven had partial response confirmed by pCLE. Ten (21.3%) patients had good endoscopic response and presented small ulcer (n = 5) or residual scar (n = 5). After nCRxt, the essential features to differentiate malignancy from post-radiation alterations at pCLE were the presence of irregular crypts, budding, back-to-back glands, cribriform pattern, increased vessel/crypt ratio, and fluorescein leakage. A scoring system was created considering these epithelial and vascular features, with high accuracy for differentiating patients with complete response from those with residual neoplasia (p < 0.00001). pCLE sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 100%, 71.4%, 95.2%, 100%, and 95.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: (1) pCLE evaluation of epithelial and vascular features may improve the diagnosis of cCR and may alter patient management; (2) pCLE might be valuable for identifying patients with advanced rectal cancer who will benefit from watch and wait strategy, avoiding immediate surgical treatment.

Endoscopy infection control strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience from a tertiary cancer center in Brazil

OBJECTIVES: Strategic planning for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) care has dominated the agenda of medical services, which have been further restricted by the need for minimizing viral transmission. Risk is particularly relevant in relation to endoscopy procedures. This study aimed to describe a contingency plan for a tertiary academic cancer center, define a strategy to prioritize and postpone examinations, and evaluate the infection rate among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the endoscopy unit of the Cancer Institute of the State of São Paulo (ICESP). METHODS: We created a strategy to balance the risk of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and to mitigate the effects of postponing endoscopic procedures in oncological patients. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all endoscopies between March and June 2020 compared with those during the same period in 2019 was carried out. All HCWs were interviewed to obtain clinical data and SARS-CoV-2 test results. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 outbreak, there was a reduction of 55% in endoscopy cases in total. Colonoscopy was the most affected modality. The total infection rate among all HCWs was 38%. None of the senior digestive endoscopists had COVID-19. However, all bronchoscopists had been infected. One of three fellows had a serological diagnosis of COVID-19. Two-thirds of all nurses were infected, whereas half of all technicians were infected. CONCLUSIONS: In this pandemic scenario, all endoscopy services must prioritize the procedures that will be performed. It was possible to maintain some endoscopic procedures, including those meant to provide nutritional access, tissue diagnosis, and endoscopic resection. Personal protective equipment (PPE) seems effective in preventing transmission of COVID-19 from patients to digestive endoscopists. These measures can be useful in planning, even for pandemics in the future.

Long-term survival analysis after endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: comparison with emergency diverting colostomy.

OBJECTIVE: The use of colorectal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as bridge therapy for malignant colorectal obstruction was first reported more than 20 years ago. However, its use remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term survival of patients with potentially resectable malignant colorectal obstruction who had undergone colorectal SEMS placement and emergency surgery. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analyses. Patients who received treatment between 2009 and 2017 were included. According to the eligibility criteria, 21 patients were included in the SEMS group and 67 patients were included in the surgical group.. RESULTS: The majority of the patients in the SEMS group were female (57.1%), whereas the majority of those in the surgical group were male (53.7%). The median follow-up time was 60 months for both groups with the same interquartile range of 60 months. There was no difference in the overall survival rate (log rank p=0.873) and disease-free survival rate (log rank p=0.2821) in the five-year analysis. There was no difference in local recurrence rates (38.1% vs. 22.4%, p=0.14) or distant recurrence rates (33.3% vs. 50.7%, p=0.16) in the SEMS and the surgical groups. Technical and clinical success rates of endoscopic stenting were 95.3% and 85.7%, respectively. There were no immediate adverse events (AEs). Severe AEs included perforation (14.3%), silent perforation (4.7%), reobstruction (14.3%), and bleeding (14.3%). Mild AEs included pain (42.8%), tenesmus (9.5%), and incontinence (4.76%). The limitations of this study was retrospective and was conducted at a single center. CONCLUSIONS: No differences in disease-free and overall survival rates were observed in the five-year analysis of patients with resectable colorectal cancer who had undergone SEMS placement or colostomy for the treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction. Patients in the SEMS group had a higher rate of primary anastomosis and a lower rate of temporary colostomy than did those in the surgery group.

The global impact of COVID-19 on gastrointestinal endoscopy units: An international survey of endoscopists.

BACKGROUND & STUDY AIMS: Corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has markedly impacted routine medical services including gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. We aim to report the real-life performance in high volume GI endoscopy units during the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A web-based survey covering all aspects of daily performance in GI endoscopy units was sent to endoscopy units worldwide. Responses were collected and data were analyzed to reveal the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on endoscopy practice. RESULTS: Participants from 48 countries (n = 163) responded to the survey with response rate of 67.35%. The majority (85%) decreased procedure volume by over 50%, and four endoscopy units (2.45%) completely stopped. The top three indications for procedures included upper GI bleeding (89.6%), lower GI bleeding (65.6%) and cholangitis (62.6%). The majority (93.9%) triaged patients for COVID-19 prior to procedure. N95 masks were used in (57.1%), isolation gowns in (74.2%) and head covers in (78.5%). Most centers (65%) did not extend use of N95 masks, however 50.9% of centers reused N95 masks. Almost all (91.4%) centers used standard endoscopic decontamination and most (69%) had no negative pressure rooms. Forty-two centers (25.8%) reported positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients and 50 (30.7%) centers reported positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection among their healthcare workers. CONCLUSIONS: Most GI endoscopy centers had a significant reduction in their volume and most procedures performed were urgent. Most centers used the recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) by GI societies however there is still a possibility of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection in GI endoscopy units.

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION FOR NON-PEDUNCULATED COLORECTAL LESIONS. A PROSPECTIVE SINGLE-ARM STUDY.

BACKGROUND: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has emerged as a revolutionary method allowing resection of colorectal lesions without submucosal injection. Brazilian literature about this technique is sparse. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR technique for removing non-pedunculated colorectal lesions in two Brazilian tertiary centers. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted between June 2016 and May 2017. Naïve and non-pedunculated lesions without signs of submucosal invasion were resected using UEMR technique. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients with 65 lesions were included. All lesions, except one, were successfully and completely removed by UEMR (success rate 98.5%). During UEMR, two cases of bleeding were observed (3.0%). One patient had abdominal pain on the day after resection without pneumoperitoneum. There was no perforation or delayed bleeding. CONCLUSION: This study supports the existing data indicating acceptable rates of technical success, and low incidence of adverse events with UEMR. The results of this Brazilian study were consistent with previous abroad studies.

Ressecção da mucosa endoscópica sob imersão dágua para lesões colorretais não pediculadas. Um estudo prospectivo de braço único / Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. a prospective single-arm study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has emerged as a revolutionary method allowing resection of colorectal lesions without submucosal injection. Brazilian literature about this technique is sparse. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR technique for removing non-pedunculated colorectal lesions in two Brazilian tertiary centers. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted between June 2016 and May 2017. Naïve and non-pedunculated lesions without signs of submucosal invasion were resected using UEMR technique. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients with 65 lesions were included. All lesions, except one, were successfully and completely removed by UEMR (success rate 98.5%). During UEMR, two cases of bleeding were observed (3.0%). One patient had abdominal pain on the day after resection without pneumoperitoneum. There was no perforation or delayed bleeding. CONCLUSION: This study supports the existing data indicating acceptable rates of technical success, and low incidence of adverse events with UEMR. The results of this Brazilian study were consistent with previous abroad studies.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: A ressecção endoscópica da mucosa sob imersão d'água (REMS) surgiu como um método revolucionário que permite a ressecção de lesões colorretais sem injeção submucosa. A literatura brasileira sobre essa técnica é escassa. OBJETIVO: A finalidade deste estudo foi avaliar a eficácia e segurança da técnica REMS na remoção de lesões colorretais não pediculadas em dois centros terciários brasileiros. MÉTODOS: Este estudo prospectivo foi realizado entre junho de 2016 e maio de 2017. As lesões sem tentativa de ressecção prévia, não pediculadas e sem sinais de invasão submucosa foram ressecadas pela técnica REMS. RESULTADOS: Um total de 55 pacientes com 65 lesões foram incluídos. Todas as lesões, exceto uma, foram removidas com sucesso e completamente por REMS (taxa de sucesso de 98,5%). Durante a REMS, foram observados dois casos de sangramento (3,0%). Uma paciente apresentou dor abdominal no dia seguinte à ressecção sem pneumoperitônio. Não houve perfuração ou sangramento tardio. CONCLUSÃO: Este estudo apoia os dados existentes, indicando taxas aceitáveis de sucesso técnico e baixa incidência de eventos adversos com a REMS. Os resultados deste estudo brasileiro foram consistentes com estudos internacionais prévios.

Long-term survival analysis after endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: comparison with emergency diverting colostomy

The use of colorectal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as bridge therapy for malignant colorectal obstruction was first reported more than 20 years ago. However, its use remains controversial. Objective: In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term survival of patients with potentially resectable malignant colorectal obstruction who had undergone colorectal SEMS placement and emergency surgery. Methods: This study was a retrospective analyses. Patients who received treatment between 2009 and 2017 were included. According to the eligibility criteria, 21 patients were included in the SEMS group and 67 patients were included in the surgical group.. Results: The majority of the patients in the SEMS group were female (57.1%), whereas the majority of those in the surgical group were male (53.7%). The median follow-up time was 60 months for both groups with the same interquartile range of 60 months. There was no difference in the overall survival rate (log rank p=0.873) and disease-free survival rate (log rank p=0.2821) in the five-year analysis. There was no difference in local recurrence rates (38.1% vs. 22.4%, p=0.14) or distant recurrence rates (33.3% vs. 50.7%, p=0.16) in the SEMS and the surgical groups. Technical and clinical success rates of endoscopic stenting were 95.3% and 85.7%, respectively. There were no immediate adverse events (AEs). Severe AEs included perforation (14.3%), silent perforation (4.7%), reobstruction (14.3%), and bleeding (14.3%). Mild AEs included pain (42.8%), tenesmus (9.5%), and incontinence (4.76%). The limitations of this study was retrospective and was conducted at a single center. Conclusions: No differences in disease-free and overall survival rates were observed in the five-year analysis of patients with resectable colorectal cancer who had undergone SEMS placement or colostomy for the treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction. Patients in the SEMS group had a higher rate of primary anastomosis and a lower rate of temporary colostomy than did those in the surgery group.