Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy.

GI endoscopy is highly resource-intensive with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and waste generation. Sustainable endoscopy in the context of climate change is now the focus of mainstream discussions between endoscopy providers, units and professional societies. In addition to broader global challenges, there are some specific measures relevant to endoscopy units and their practices, which could significantly reduce environmental impact. Awareness of these issues and guidance on practical interventions to mitigate the carbon footprint of GI endoscopy are lacking. In this consensus, we discuss practical measures to reduce the impact of endoscopy on the environment applicable to endoscopy units and practitioners. Adoption of these measures will facilitate and promote new practices and the evolution of a more sustainable specialty.

Ethics of providing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration: current issues.

The provision of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) often presents clinicians with ethical dilemmas. As the population grows there is increasing prevalence of patients with conditions such as stroke, dementia, advanced malignancy, cerebral palsy and eating disorders and a greater demand for CANH. It is important that healthcare professionals are familiar with the ethical and legal position for the provision of CANH. In addition, it is important to be aware of the clinical indications, relative contraindications and alternative means of supporting patients for whom CANH is not appropriate; this includes education and training for staff, patients, carers and relatives. The lack of high-quality evidence around clinical outcomes, particularly in the form of randomised clinical trials, and the challenges of accurate prognostication in patients who are approaching the end of life make decisions around the provision of CANH difficult for healthcare professionals.

Supporting people who have eating and drinking difficulties.

Eating and drinking are essential for maintenance of nutrition and hydration, but are also important for pleasure and social interactions. The ability to eat and drink hinges on a complex and coordinated system, resulting in significant potential for things to go wrong.The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has published updated guidance on how to support people who have eating and drinking difficulties, particularly towards the end of life.Decisions about nutrition and hydration and when to start, continue or stop treatment are some of the most challenging to make in medical practice. The newly updated guidance aims to support healthcare professionals to work together with patients, their families and carers to make decisions around nutrition and hydration that are in the best interests of the patient. It covers the factors affecting our ability to eat and drink, strategies to support oral nutrition and hydration, techniques of clinically-assisted nutrition and hydration, and the legal and ethical framework to guide decisions about giving and withholding treatment, emphasising the two key concepts of capacity and best interests.This article aims to provide an executive summary of the guidance.

How COVID-19 has changed the unselected medical take: an observational study.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has had a profound effect on the NHS. Little information has been published as to how the unselected medical take has been affected. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who were referred to general medicine during March 2020. We compared clinical outcomes of patients with and without COVID-19. RESULTS: 814 patients were included, comprising 777 unique patients. On average, 26 patients were admitted per day. 38% of admitted patients were suspected of COVID-19, with greater numbers of COVID-19 patients in the second half compared to the first half of the month (p<0.001). Logistic regression analyses showed suspected COVID-19 was an independent predictor for inpatient mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 6.09, p<0.001) and 30-day mortality (OR = 4.66, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients had worse clinical outcomes and increased healthcare use compared to non-COVID-19 patients. Our study highlights some of the challenges in healthcare provision faced during this pandemic.

Surgical risks associated with the management of Grade I and II brain arteriovenous malformations.

OBJECTIVE: Grade I and II arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) have been considered safe to resect. However, unoperated low-grade AVMs have not been considered in previously reported series. The aim of this study was to examine all cases, both operated and unoperated, to identify any characteristics of low-grade AVMs that comprise a subgroup that might pose a relatively higher risk. METHODS: A prospectively enrolled AVM database included 237 patients in Spetzler-Martin Grade I or II. These patients were analyzed on the basis of demographic characteristics, angiographic and magnetic resonance imaging features, clinical presentation, method of treatment, and outcome. RESULTS: Surgery was performed in 220 patients in Spetzler-Martin Grade I or II. Seventeen patients did not undergo treatment because of poor neurological condition (six patients), patient refusal (nine patients), and perceived surgical difficulty (AVM size approaching 3 cm adjacent to Broca's area) (two patients). The overall surgical morbidity rate was 0.9%, and the mortality rate was 0.5%. Adverse outcomes occurred in 1 (0.6%) of 180 patients with AVMs located away from eloquent cortex and in 2 (5%) of 40 patients with AVMs adjacent to eloquent cortex. None of 28 surgical patients with deep venous drainage had an adverse outcome. All 219 patients who survived surgery underwent postoperative angiography that confirmed cure. No postoperative hemorrhage has occurred in 1143 patient-years of follow-up (mean follow-up, 5.3 yr). CONCLUSION: When considering adverse outcome in the surgical series of Grade I and II AVMs alone, no statistical difference between non-eloquently located AVMs (0.6%) and eloquently located AVMs (5% adverse outcome) can be detected. However, consideration of all Grade I and II AVMs, both surgical and nonsurgical, may prove that a difference in outcome exists between these two groups masked by case selection. Generalization of the chances of adverse outcomes to all Grade I and II AVMs (both operated and unoperated) suggests that the risk of performing surgery on noneloquent brain in our series was 0.6% and that in eloquent brain could have been as high as 9.5%, had all such patients undergone surgery.

Surgical risks associated with the management of Grade I and II brain arteriovenous malformations.

OBJECTIVE: Grade I and II arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) have been considered safe to resect. However, unoperated low-grade AVMs have not been considered in previously reported series. The aim of this study was to examine all cases, both operated and unoperated, to identify any characteristics of low-grade AVMs that comprise a subgroup that might pose a relatively higher risk. METHODS: A prospectively enrolled AVM database included 237 patients in Spetzler-Martin Grade I or II. These patients were analyzed on the basis of demographic characteristics, angiographic and magnetic resonance imaging features, clinical presentation, method of treatment, and outcome. RESULTS: Surgery was performed in 220 patients in Spetzler-Martin Grade I or II. Seventeen patients did not undergo treatment because of poor neurological condition (six patients), patient refusal (nine patients), and perceived surgical difficulty (AVM size approaching 3 cm adjacent to Broca's area) (two patients). The overall surgical morbidity rate was 0.9%, and the mortality rate was 0.5%. Adverse outcomes occurred in 1 (0.6%) of 180 patients with AVMs located away from eloquent cortex and in 2 (5%) of 40 patients with AVMs adjacent to eloquent cortex. None of 28 surgical patients with deep venous drainage had an adverse outcome. All 219 patients who survived surgery underwent postoperative angiography that confirmed cure. No postoperative hemorrhage has occurred in 1143 patient-years of follow-up (mean follow-up, 5.3 yr). CONCLUSION: When considering adverse outcome in the surgical series of Grade I and II AVMs alone, no statistical difference between non-eloquently located AVMs (0.6%) and eloquently located AVMs (5% adverse outcome) can be detected. However, consideration of all Grade I and II AVMs, both surgical and nonsurgical, may prove that a difference in outcome exists between these two groups masked by case selection. Generalization of the chances of adverse outcomes to all Grade I and II AVMs (both operated and unoperated) suggests that the risk of performing surgery on noneloquent brain in our series was 0.6% and that in eloquent brain could have been as high as 9.5%, had all such patients undergone surgery.