Socioeconomic Disparities Affect Outcomes in Early-Stage Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A SEER Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Socioeconomic determinants of health are understudied in early stage esophageal adenocarcinoma. We aimed to assess how socioeconomic status influences initial treatment decisions and survival outcomes in patients with T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We performed an observational study using the 2018 submission of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-18 database. A total of 1526 patients from 2004 to 2015 with a primary T1aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma were subdivided into 3 socioeconomic tertiles based on their median household income. Endoscopic trends over time, rates of endoscopic and surgical treatment, 2- and 5-year overall survival, cancer-specific mortality, and non-cancer-specific mortality were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using R-studio. RESULTS: Patients within the lowest median household income tertile ($20,000-$54,390) were associated with higher cancer-specific mortality at 2 years (P < .01) and 5 years (P < .02), and lower overall survival at 2 and 5 years (P < .01) compared with patients in higher income tertiles. Patients with a higher income had a decreased hazard ratio for cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99) in a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model. Patients within the higher income tertile were more likely to receive endoscopic intervention (P < .001), which was associated with improved cancer-specific mortality compared with patients who received primary surgical intervention (P = .001). The South had lower rates of endoscopy compared with other regions. CONCLUSIONS: Lower median household income was associated with higher rates of cancer-specific mortality and lower rates of endoscopic resection in T1aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma. Population-based strategies aimed at identifying and rectifying possible etiologies for these socioeconomic and geographic disparities are paramount to improving patient outcomes in early esophageal cancer.

Comparison of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus surgical sleeve gastrectomy: a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an incisionless, transoral, restrictive bariatric procedure designed to imitate sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Comparative studies and large-scale population-based data are limited. Additionally, no studies have examined the impact of race on outcomes after ESG. This study aims to compare short-term outcomes of ESG with SG and evaluate racial effects on short-term outcomes after ESG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed over 600,000 patients in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database from 2016 to 2020. We compared occurrences of adverse events (AEs), readmissions, reoperations, and reinterventions within 30 days after procedures. Multivariate regression evaluated the impact of patient factors, including race, on AEs. RESULTS: A total of 6054 patients underwent ESG and 597,463 underwent SG. AEs were low after both procedures with no significant difference in major AEs (SG vs ESG: 1.1% vs 1.4%; P > .05). However, patients undergoing ESG had more readmissions (3.8% vs 2.6%), reoperations (1.4% vs .8%), and reinterventions (2.8% vs .7%) within 30 days (P < .05). Race was not significantly associated with AEs after ESG, with black race associated with a higher risk of AEs in SG. CONCLUSIONS: ESG demonstrates a comparable major AE rate with SG. Race did not impact short-term AEs after ESG. Further prospective studies long-term studies are needed to compare ESG with SG.

Blood kidney injury molecule-1 is a biomarker of acute and chronic kidney injury and predicts progression to ESRD in type I diabetes.

Currently, no blood biomarker that specifically indicates injury to the proximal tubule of the kidney has been identified. Kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) is highly upregulated in proximal tubular cells following kidney injury. The ectodomain of KIM-1 is shed into the lumen, and serves as a urinary biomarker of kidney injury. We report that shed KIM-1 also serves as a blood biomarker of kidney injury. Sensitive assays to measure plasma and serum KIM-1 in mice, rats, and humans were developed and validated in the current study. Plasma KIM-1 levels increased with increasing periods of ischemia (10, 20, or 30 minutes) in mice, as early as 3 hours after reperfusion; after unilateral ureteral obstruction (day 7) in mice; and after gentamicin treatment (50 or 200 mg/kg for 10 days) in rats. In humans, plasma KIM-1 levels were higher in patients with AKI than in healthy controls or post-cardiac surgery patients without AKI (area under the curve, 0.96). In patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass, plasma KIM-1 levels increased within 2 days after surgery only in patients who developed AKI (P<0.01). Blood KIM-1 levels were also elevated in patients with CKD of varous etiologies. In a cohort of patients with type 1 diabetes and proteinuria, serum KIM-1 level at baseline strongly predicted rate of eGFR loss and risk of ESRD during 5-15 years of follow-up, after adjustment for baseline urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio, eGFR, and Hb1Ac. These results identify KIM-1 as a blood biomarker that specifically reflects acute and chronic kidney injury.

Evolution of interventional endoscopic ultrasound.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become an indispensable modality for the assessment of the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent structures since its origin in the 1980s. Following the development of the linear echoendoscope, EUS has evolved from a purely diagnostic modality to a sophisticated tool for intervention, with numerous luminal, pancreaticobiliary, and hepatic applications. Broadly, these applications may be subdivided into three categories: transluminal drainage or access procedures, injection therapy, and EUS-guided liver interventions. Transluminal drainage or access procedures include management of pancreatic fluid collection, EUS-guided biliary drainage, EUS-guided bile duct drainage, EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage, and enteral anastomosis formation. Injection therapies include therapeutic EUS-guided injections for management of malignancies accessible by EUS. EUS-guided liver applications include EUS-guided liver biopsy, EUS-guided portal pressure gradient measurement, and EUS-guided vascular therapies. In this review, we discuss the origins of each of these EUS applications, evolution of techniques leading to the current status, and future directions of EUS-guided interventional therapy.

Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty: A Safe Bariatric Intervention for Class III Obesity (BMI > 40).

PURPOSE: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is primarily offered to patients with class I and II obesity (BMI 30-40), although there are no guidelines specifying applicability. There is little data comparing ESG to bariatric surgery in patients with class III obesity (BMI > 40). This study evaluates the short-term safety of ESG compared to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) in patients with class III obesity. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed over 500,000 patients who underwent ESG, SG, and RNYGB from 2016 to 2020 in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. ESG patients were stratified by BMI to compare outcomes between class I and II versus class III obese patients. Class III obese patients who underwent ESG were also propensity matched to SG and RNYGB patients for matched comparisons. Primary outcomes included adverse events (AE), readmissions, re-operations, and re-interventions within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included procedure time, length of stay (LOS), and total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 30 days. RESULTS: Among ESG patients, those with BMI > 40 had no difference in AE, readmissions, or re-interventions versus patients with BMI 30-40 (p > 0.05), while achieving greater %TBWL at 30 days (p < 0.05). In comparison to surgery, ESG had similar AE to SG and less than RNYGB, while producing comparable %TBWL to SG and RNYGB at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The feasibility and safety of ESG in patients with class III obesity are comparable to patients with class I and II obesity. Additionally, the safety of ESG in patients with class III obesity is comparable to SG and safer than RYGB. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: a safe bariatric intervention for class III obesity (BMI > 40).

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in esophageal cancer.

Esophageal cancer (ECA) affects 1 in 125 men and 1 in 417 for women and accounts for 2.6% of all cancer related deaths in the United States. The associated survival rate depends on the stage of the cancer at the time of diagnosis, making adequate work up and staging imperative. The 5-year survival rate for localized disease is 46.4%, regional disease is 25.6%, and distant/metastatic disease is 5.2%. Additionally, treatment is stage-dependent, making staging all that much important. For nonmetastatic transmural tumors (T3) and/or those that have locoregional lymph node involvement (N), neoadjuvant therapy is recommended. Conversely, for those who have earlier tumors, upfront surgical resection is reasonable. While positron emission tomography/computed tomography and other cross sectional imaging modalities are exceptional for detecting distant disease, they are inaccurate in staging locoregional disease. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has played a key role in the locoregional (T and N) staging of newly diagnosed ECA and has an evolving role in restaging after neoadjuvant therapy. There is even data to support that the use of EUS facilitates proper triaging of patients and may ultimately save money by avoiding unnecessary or futile treatment. This manuscript will review the current role of EUS on staging and restaging of ECA.

Post-Treatment Ulceration and Bleeding After Cyanoacrylate Injection of Duodenal Varices.

We report a case of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding in the setting of diffuse duodenal and colorectal varices. These varices were secondary to either congenital absence of the portal vein or chronic occlusion of the portal vein leading to cavernous transformation of a collateral network of varices. He was acutely managed with injection of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate into a large complex of duodenal varices. His hospital course was complicated by a postprocedural gastrointestinal bleed within the first 24 hours after the procedure arising from a new duodenal ulcer at the site of injection, likely secondary to ischemia after obliteration of the varices.

Use of endoscopic ultrasound in pre-treatment staging of esophageal cancer did not alter management plan.

BACKGROUND: Initial staging of esophageal cancer relies on EUS in addition to FDG-PET/CT. It is our hypothesis that with the advancement of FDG-PET/CT staging, endoscopic ultrasound may not be required for initial staging in all cases. The purpose of this study is to analyze whether EUS affects initial treatment stratification in patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective database at the University of Virginia was queried for patients diagnosed with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma who underwent EGD with EUS and FDG-PET/CT at their initial evaluation from 10/2013 to 5/2017. Two thoracic surgeons were asked to determine appropriate management for each case. Options included surgical resection, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by resection, definitive chemoradiotherapy, or chemotherapy with or without palliative radiation. Both surgeons received the FDG-PET/CT report along with the EGD report. For each case, one or both surgeons were randomly allocated to review EUS results in addition to the clinical information. The treatment decisions of each thoracic surgeon were compared to determine if EUS reports impacted clinical management. Simple and weighted correlation coefficients (kappa) were calculated to compare agreement of treatment choices between the two surgeons using McNemars test. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess the influence of EUS on the treatment recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients (44 male and 6 female) were enrolled and data was collected. The thoracic surgeons agreed on treatment decisions in 39 cases and disagreed on 11 cases. Agreement between surgeons was good despite lack of EUS information for one surgeon on each case (weighted Kappa =0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.89). Using conditional logistic regression, EUS did not have a statistically independent association with agreement on treatment plan (P for model =0.17). CONCLUSIONS: EUS did not have a statistically independent association with agreement on treatment plan for newly diagnosed esophageal cancer (P for model =0.17). Our findings suggest that EUS may not be necessary in the algorithm for the initial staging of every case of esophageal cancer. Selective, rather than mandatory use of EUS seems warranted.