Endoscopic devices and techniques for the management of gastric varices (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric variceal bleeding occurs less commonly than bleeding from esophageal varices (EVs), although it is associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Bleeding from gastroesophageal varices type 1 (GOV1) is treated like EVs. In contrast, other forms of gastric variceal bleeding, including gastroesophageal varices type 2 (GOV2) and isolated gastric varices types 1 (IGV1) and 2 (IGV2), are treated with varying endoscopic approaches. Nonendoscopic methods include transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO). This technology report focuses on endoscopic management of gastric varices (GVs). METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through August 2022 for relevant articles by using key words such as gastric varices, glue, cyanoacrylate, thrombin, sclerosing agents, band ligation, topical hemostatic spray, coils, EUS, TIPS, and BRTO. The article was drafted, reviewed, and edited by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. RESULTS: Endoscopic injection with cyanoacrylate (CYA) glue has been the primary endoscopic method to treat GVs. EUS-guided angiotherapy with CYA glue and coil embolization has emerged as an alternative method enabling improved detection of GVs with a high technical success for targeting and obliterating GVs. Combining CYA glue with coil therapy allows the coil to act as a scaffold for the glue, reducing the risk of glue embolization and improving outcomes. Alternative injectates or topical treatments have been described but remain poorly studied. CONCLUSIONS: The mainstay paradigm for the endoscopic management of gastric variceal bleeding is the injection of CYA glue. The published success of EUS-guided angiotherapy using CYA glue with or without embolization coils has increased our treatment armamentarium.

Submucosal injection fluid and tattoo agents.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, developed for the removal of benign and early malignant lesions throughout the GI tract. Submucosal injection of a marking agent can help to identify lesions during surgery. Endoscopic resection frequently involves "lifting" of the lesions by injection of a substance within the submucosal space to create a cushion for safe resection. This review summarizes the current techniques and agents available for endoscopic marking and lifting of GI tract lesions. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2023 for relevant articles related to the lifting and marking aspect of EMR by using key words such as "endoscopy" or "endoscopic" combined with "marking," "tattoo," and "lifting." The report was drafted, reviewed, and edited by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and approved by the Governing Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. RESULTS: This technology review describes the techniques for endoscopic tattoo placement and submucosal lifting, along with currently available agents, safety, and costs. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists performing EMR and ESD have several choices in submucosal injection materials for lifting and marking agents for tattoos. These may be commercially prepared agents or off-the-shelf materials with or without additives to facilitate visualization. A thorough understanding of the indications, techniques, properties of various agents, costs, and adverse events is necessary in choosing the appropriate materials and technique to optimize lesion resection in EMR and ESD.

Novel through-the-scope suture closure of colonic EMR defects (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Large colon polyps removed by EMR can be complicated by delayed bleeding. Prophylactic defect clip closure can reduce post-EMR bleeding. Larger defects can be challenging to close using through-the-scope clips (TTSCs), and proximal defects are difficult to reach using over-the-scope techniques. A novel, through-the-scope suturing (TTSS) device allows direct closure of mucosal defects without scope withdrawal. The goal of this study was to evaluate the rate of delayed bleeding after the closure of large colon polyp EMR sites with TTSS. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed involving 13 centers. All defect closure by TTSS after EMR of colon polyps ≥2 cm from January 2021 to February 2022 were included. The primary outcome was rate of delayed bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients (52% female; mean age, 65 years) underwent EMR of predominantly right-sided (n = 62 [66%]) colon polyps (median size, 35 mm; interquartile range, 30-40 mm) followed by defect closure with TTSS during the study period. All defects were successfully closed with TTSS alone (n = 62 [66%]) or with TTSS and TTSCs (n = 32 [34%]), using a median of 1 (interquartile range, 1-1) TTSS system. Delayed bleeding occurred in 3 patients (3.2%), with 2 requiring repeated endoscopic evaluation/treatment (moderate). CONCLUSION: TTSS alone or with TTSCs was effective in achieving complete closure of all post-EMR defects, despite a large lesion size. After TTSS closure with or without adjunctive devices, delayed bleeding was seen in 3.2% of cases. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings before wider adoption of TTSS for large polypectomy closure.

Single-Pass vs 2-Pass Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy Sample Collection for Creation of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Organoids.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has one of the poorest prognoses of all malignancies, with a 5-year survival rate <8%.1,2 Suspicious lesions are typically diagnosed via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration or endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB).3 Fewer needle passes decreases the risk of postprocedure complications, including pancreatitis and hemorrhage, while allowing additional needle passes to be used for adjuvant tissue testing, such as organoid creation and DNA sequencing.

Endoscopic therapies for gallbladder drainage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis has expanded in patients who are considered nonoperative candidates. Traditionally managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC), improvement in techniques and devices has led to increased use of endoscopic methods for gallbladder drainage. This document reviews technical aspects of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) and EUS-guided GBD (EUS-GBD) as well as their respective technical/clinical success and adverse event rates. Available comparative data are also reviewed among nonsurgical gallbladder drainage techniques (PC, ET-GBD, and EUS-GBD). METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through March 2021 for relevant articles by using keywords including "acute cholecystitis," "interventional EUS," "percutaneous cholecystostomy," "transpapillary gallbladder drainage," "EUS-guided gallbladder drainage," "lumen-apposing metal stent," "gallbladder stenting," and "endoscopic gallbladder drainage." The manuscript was drafted by 2 authors and reviewed by members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and subsequently by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Governing Board. RESULTS: Multiple studies have demonstrated acceptable outcomes comparing PC and both endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques, ET-GBD and EUS-GBD. Published data suggest that endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques may be associated with lower rates of adverse events and improved quality of life. However, there are important clinical considerations for choosing among these treatment options, requiring a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach to therapeutic decision-making in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of EUS-GBD and ET-GBD in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis may result in favorable outcomes when compared with PC. Further improvements in techniques and training should lead to more widespread acceptance and dissemination of these treatment options.

Lumen-apposing metal stents (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are a novel class of devices that have expanded the spectrum of endoscopic GI interventions. LAMSs with their dumbbell configuration, short saddle length, and large inner luminal diameter provide favorable stent characteristics to facilitate anastomosis formation between the gut lumen and adjacent structures. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2021 for articles related to LAMSs by using additional relevant keywords such as "walled-off pancreatic necrosis," "pseudocysts," "pancreatic fluid collection," "cholecystitis," "gastroenterostomy," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others. RESULTS: This technology review describes the full spectrum of LAMS designs and delivery systems, techniques for deployment, procedural outcomes, safety, training issues, and financial considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Although LAMSs were initially introduced for drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis, the versatility of these devices has led to a variety of off-label uses including gallbladder drainage, enteric bypass with the creation of gastroenterostomies, and treatment of luminal GI strictures.

Single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with disposable end caps.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Multidrug-resistant infectious outbreaks associated with duodenoscopes have been documented internationally. Single-use duodenoscopes, disposable distal ends, or distal end cap sealants could eliminate or reduce exogenous patient-to-patient infection associated with ERCP. METHODS: This document reviews technologies that have been developed to help reduce or eliminate exogenous infections because of duodenoscopes. RESULTS: Four duodenoscopes with disposable end caps, 1 end sheath, and 2 disposable duodenoscopes are reviewed in this document. The evidence regarding their efficacy in procedural success rates, reduction of duodenoscope bacterial contamination, clinical outcomes associated with these devices, safety, and the financial considerations are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Several technologies discussed in this document are anticipated to eliminate or reduce exogenous infections during endoscopy requiring a duodenoscope. Although disposable duodenoscopes can eliminate exogenous ERCP-related risk of infection, data regarding effectiveness are needed outside of expert centers. Additionally, with more widespread adoption of these new technologies, more data regarding functionality, medical economics, and environmental impact will accrue. Disposable distal end caps facilitate duodenoscope reprocessing; postmarketing surveillance culture studies and real-life patient infection analyses are important areas of future research.

Evaluation and management of a pancreatic rest noted during pre-bariatric surgery screening endoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic rest (PR) is an ectopic pancreatic lesion that is usually found incidentally on endoscopy or surgery. While most lesions do not have clinical significance, some patients are symptomatic and rarely, PR can predispose to malignancy. With the growing popularity of bariatric surgery, it has been unclear how to manage PR found on screening endoscopies, prior to bariatric surgery. Through review of the current literature, we propose an algorithm for clinicians to evaluate and manage PR found on screening endoscopies prior to bariatric surgery. METHODS: We performed a literature search in PubMed pertaining to PR, clinical characteristics, risk of malignant transformation, endoscopic characteristics, histological descriptions, and resection techniques. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we found 33 published articles from 2001 to 2019, including case reports, case series, retrospective cohorts, and a review paper. RESULTS: PR is commonly found incidentally in the gastric antrum. Larger lesions have a higher risk of being symptomatic or predisposing to malignant transformation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can assist in the diagnosis of PR and guide resection technique. Certain histological characteristics, such as Heinrich class, grading of neoplasia, and genetic alterations, can determine malignancy risk of PR. Resection technique, either endoscopically or surgically, should be based on lesion size, depth of wall invasion, and the endoscopists' level of skill in endoscopic resection. CONCLUSIONS: Proper evaluation and treatment of PR should be considered because of the risk for symptoms and malignant transformation. Symptomatic lesions and those at risk for malignant transformation should be considered for resection. EUS can guide the diagnosis and type of resection, either endoscopically through EMR or ESD or surgically through sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

Radiopaque Short Pancreatic Stents Reliably Migrate in Nearly All Patients When Inserted for Prevention of Pancreatitis.

Placement of a pancreatic duct (PD) stent for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP)1-3 often necessitates a second procedure for stent removal, generally within 2-4 weeks to avoid stent occlusion or injury to the duct.4 These procedures are associated with increased costs and may result in procedure-related complications. Stents without internal anchoring flaps were developed to allow spontaneous migration into the duodenum,5 thus obviating the need for a repeat procedure. However, radiographic confirmation of a migrated stent can be challenging.6.

Donning a New Approach to the Practice of Gastroenterology: Perspectives From the COVID-19 Pandemic Epicenter.

The COVID-19 pandemic seemingly is peaking now in New York City and has triggered significant changes to the standard management of gastrointestinal diseases. Priorities such as minimizing viral transmission, preserving personal protective equipment, and freeing hospital beds have driven unconventional approaches to managing gastroenterology (GI) patients. Conversion of endoscopy units to COVID units and redeployment of GI fellows and faculty has profoundly changed the profile of most GI services. Meanwhile, consult and procedural volumes have been reduced drastically. In this review, we share our collective experiences regarding how we have changed our practice of medicine in response to the COVID surge. Although we review our management of specific consults and conditions, the overarching theme focuses primarily on noninvasive measures and maximizing medical therapies. Endoscopic procedures have been reserved for those timely interventions that are most likely to be therapeutic. The role of multidisciplinary discussion, although always important, now has become critical. The support of our faculty and trainees remains essential. Local leadership can encourage well-being by frequent team check-ins and by fostering trainee development through remote learning. Advancing a clear vision and a transparent process for how to organize and triage care in the recovery phase will allow for a smooth transition to our new normal.

Combined versus single use 20 G fine-needle biopsy and 25 G fine-needle aspiration for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling of solid gastrointestinal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Instead of choosing one endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) needle over the other, some advocate the use of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) consecutively. We explored the yield of combined use of 20 G FNB and 25 G FNA needles in patients with a suspicious solid gastrointestinal lesion. METHODS: Patients from the ASPRO study who were sampled with both needles during the same procedure were included. The incremental yield of dual sampling compared with the yield of single needle use on the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was assessed for both dual sampling approaches - FNA followed by FNB, and vice versa. RESULTS: 73 patients were included. There were 39 (53 %) pancreatic lesions, 18 (25 %) submucosal masses, and 16 (22 %) lymph nodes. FNA was used first in 24 patients (33 %) and FNB was used first in 49 (67 %). Generally, FNB was performed after FNA to collect tissue for ancillary testing (75 %), whereas FNA was used after FNB to allow for on-site pathological assessment (76 %). Diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of single needle use increased from 78 % to 92 % with dual sampling (P = 0.002). FNA followed by FNB improved the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy (P = 0.03), whereas FNB followed by FNA did not (P = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Dual sampling only improved diagnostic accuracy when 25 G FNA was followed by 20 G FNB and not vice versa. As the diagnostic benefit of the 20 G FNB over the 25 G FNA needle has recently been proven, sampling with the FNB needle seems a logical first choice.

A newly designed uncovered biliary stent for palliation of malignant obstruction: results of a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary decompression can reduce symptoms and improve quality of life in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. Endoscopically placed stents have become the standard of care for biliary drainage with the aim of improving hepatic function, relieving jaundice, and reducing adverse effects of obstruction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance characteristics of a newly-designed, uncovered metal biliary stent for the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. METHODS: This post-market, prospective study included patients with biliary obstruction due to a malignant neoplasm treated with a single-type, commercially available uncovered self-expanding metal stent (SEMS). Stents were placed as clinically indicated for palliation of jaundice and to potentially facilitate neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. The main outcome measure was freedom from recurrent biliary obstruction (within the stent) requiring re-intervention within 1, 3, and 6 months of stent insertion. Secondary outcome measures included device-related adverse events and technical success of stent deployment. RESULTS: SEMS were placed in 113 patients (73 men; mean age, 69); a single stent was inserted in 106 patients, and 2 stents were placed in 7 patients. Forty-eight patients survived and/or completed the 6 month study protocol. Freedom from symptomatic recurrent biliary obstruction requiring re-intervention was achieved in 108 of 113 patients (95.6, 95%CI = 90.0-98.6%) at study exit for each patient. Per interval analysis yielded the absence of recurrent biliary obstruction in 99.0% of patients at 1 month (n = 99; 95%CI = 97.0-100%), 96.6% of patients at 3 months (n = 77; 95%CI = 92.7-100%), and 93.3% of patients at 6 months (n = 48; 95%CI = 86.8-99.9%). In total, only 5 patients (4.4%) were considered failures of the primary endpoint. Most of these failures (4/5) were due to stent occlusion from tumor ingrowth or overgrowth. Overall technical success rate of stent deployment was 99.2%. There were 2 cases of stent-related adverse events (1.8%). There were no cases of post-procedure stent migration, stent-related perforation, or stent-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: This newly designed and marketed biliary SEMS system appears to be effective at relieving biliary obstruction and preventing re-intervention within 6 months of insertion in the overwhelming majority of patients. The device has an excellent safety profile, and associated high technical success rate during deployment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov on 14 October 2013 and the study registration number is NCT01962168. University of Massachusetts Medical School did not participate in the study.

A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P = .043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P < .001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P = .002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P = .002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P = .004), and did not differ among centers (P = .836). CONCLUSION: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.).

Agreement on endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue specimens: Comparing a 20-G fine-needle biopsy to a 25-G fine-needle aspiration needle among academic and non-academic pathologists.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: A recently carried out randomized controlled trial showed the benefit of a novel 20-G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) over a 25-G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle. The current study evaluated the reproducibility of these findings among expert academic and non-academic pathologists. METHODS: This study was a side-study of the ASPRO (ASpiration versus PROcore) study. Five centers retrieved 74 (59%) consecutive FNB and 51 (41%) FNA samples from the ASPRO study according to randomization; 64 (51%) pancreatic and 61 (49%) lymph node specimens. Samples were re-reviewed by five expert academic and five non-academic pathologists and rated in terms of sample quality and diagnosis. Ratings were compared between needles, expert academic and non-academic pathologists, target lesions, and cytology versus histological specimens. RESULTS: Besides a higher diagnostic accuracy, FNB also provided for a better agreement on diagnosing malignancy (ĸ = 0.59 vs ĸ = 0.76, P < 0.001) and classification according to Bethesda (ĸ = 0.45 vs ĸ = 0.61, P < 0.001). This equally applied for expert academic and non-academic pathologists and for pancreatic and lymph node specimens. Sample quality was also rated higher for FNB, but agreement ranged from poor (ĸ = 0.04) to fair (ĸ = 0.55). Histology provided better agreement than cytology, but only when a core specimen was obtained with FNB (P = 0.004 vs P = 0.432). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the 20-G FNB outperforms the 25-G FNA needle in terms of diagnostic agreement, independent of the background and experience of the pathologist. This endorses use of the 20-G FNB needle in both expert and lower volume EUS centers.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine-Needle Aspiration and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine-Needle Biopsy for Solid Lesions in a Multicenter, Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the standard of care for tissue sampling of solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. Fine-needle biopsy (FNB) may provide higher diagnostic yield with fewer needle passes. The aim of this study was to assess the difference in diagnostic yield between FNA and FNB. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial from 6 large tertiary care centers. Patients referred for tissue sampling of solid lesions were randomized to either FNA or FNB of the target lesion. Demographics, size, location, number of needle passes, and final diagnosis were recorded. RESULTS: After enrollment, 135 patients were randomized to FNA (49.3%), and 139 patients were randomized to FNB (50.7%).The following lesions were sampled: mass (n = 210, 76.6%), lymph nodes (n = 46, 16.8%), and submucosal tumors (n = 18, 6.6%). Final diagnosis was malignancy (n = 192, 70.1%), reactive lymphadenopathy (n = 30, 11.0%), and spindle cell tumors (n = 24, 8.8%). FNA had a diagnostic yield of 91.1% compared with 88.5% for FNB (P = .48). There was no difference between FNA and FNB when stratified by the presence of on-site cytopathology or by type of lesion sampled. A median of 1 needle pass was needed to obtain a diagnostic sample for both needles. CONCLUSIONS: FNA and FNB obtained a similar diagnostic yield with a comparable number of needle passes. On the basis of these results, there is no significant difference in the performance of FNA compared with FNB in the cytologic diagnosis of solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01698190.

Development of Patient-Derived Gastric Cancer Organoids from Endoscopic Biopsies and Surgical Tissues.

BACKGROUND: Organoids are three-dimensional in vitro models of human disease developed from benign and malignant gastrointestinal tissues with tremendous potential for personalized medicine applications. We sought to determine whether gastric cancer patient-derived organoids (PDOs) could be safely established from endoscopic biopsies for rapid drug screening. METHODS: Patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for surveillance or staging and had additional forceps biopsies taken for PDO creation. Cancer tissues from operative specimens were also used to create PDOs. To address potential tumor heterogeneity, we performed low-coverage whole-genome sequencing of endoscopic-derived PDOs with paired surgical PDOs and whole-tumor lysates. The stability of genomic alterations in endoscopic organoids was assessed by next-generation sequencing and nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. The feasibility and potential accuracy of drug sensitivity screening with endoscopic-derived PDOs were also evaluated. RESULTS: Gastric cancer PDOs (n = 15) were successfully established from EGD forceps biopsies (n = 8) and surgical tissues (n = 7) from five patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Low-coverage whole-genomic profiling of paired EGD and surgical PDOs along with whole-tumor lysates demonstrated absence of tumor heterogeneity. Nested PCR assay identified similar KRAS alterations in primary tumor and paired organoids. Drug sensitivity testing of endoscopic-derived PDOs displayed standard dose-response curves to current gastric cancer cytotoxic therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results demonstrate the feasibility of developing gastric cancer PDOs from EGD biopsies. These results also indicate that endoscopic-derived PDOs are accurate surrogates of the primary tumor and have the potential for drug sensitivity screening and personalized medicine applications.