Clinical and manometric results of peroral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia: experience in a latin american reference center. / Resultados clínicos y manométricos de la miotomía endoscópica peroral en pacientes con acalasia: experiencia en un centro de referencia latinoamericano.

INTRODUCTION: Currently there is little information in Latin America on the clinical outcome and manometric evolution of patients with Achalasia undergoing peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). PRIMARY OUTCOME: Evaluate the manometric and clinical changes in adult patients with achalasia after peroral endoscopic myotomy at a referral center in Bogotá, Colombia. METHODS: Observational, analytical, longitudinal study. Adult patients with achalasia according to the Chicago 4.0 criteria were included. Sociodemographic, clinical and manometric variables were described. To compare the pre- and post-surgical variables, the Student's or Wilcoxon's t test was used for the quantitative variables according to their normality, and McNemar's chi-square for the qualitative variables. RESULTS: 29 patients were included, 55.17% (n=16) women, with a mean age at the time of surgery of 48.2 years (±11.33). The mean post-procedure evaluation time was 1.88±0.81 years. After the procedure, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of patients with weight loss (37.93% vs 21.43% p 0.0063), chest pain (48.28% vs 21.43, p 0.0225) and the median Eckardt score (8 (IQR 8 -9) vs 2(IQR 1-2), p <0.0001). In addition, in fourteen patients with post-surgical manometry, significant differences were found between IRP values (23.05±14.83mmHg vs 7.69±6.06mmHg, p 0.026) and in the mean lower esophageal sphincter tone (9.63±7.2mmHg vs 28.8±18.60mmHg, p 0.0238). CONCLUSION: Peroral endoscopic myotomy has a positive impact on the improvement of symptoms and of some manometric variables (IRP and LES tone) in patients with achalasia.

Implementation of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection in Spain: Results from the nationwide registry. / Implementación de la disección endoscópica submucosa esofágica en España: resultados del registro nacional.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the esophagus have not been assessed in our country. Our primary aim was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of the technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of the prospectively maintained national registry of ESD. We included all superficial esophageal lesions removed by ESD in 17 hospitals (20 endoscopists) between January 2016 and December 2021. Subepithelial lesions were excluded. The primary outcome was curative resection. We conducted a survival analysis and used logistic regression analysis to assess predictors of non-curative resection. RESULTS: A total of 102 ESD were performed on 96 patients. The technical success rate was 100% and the percentage of en-bloc resection was 98%. The percentage of R0 and curative resection was 77.5% (n=79; 95%CI: 68%-84%) and 63.7% (n=65; 95%CI: 54%-72%), respectively. The most frequent histology was Barrett-related neoplasia (n=55 [53.9%]). The main reason for non-curative resection was deep submucosal invasion (n=25). The centers with a lower volume of ESD obtained worse results in terms of curative resection. The rate of perforation, delayed bleeding and post-procedural stenosis were 5%, 5% and 15.7%, respectively. No patient died or required surgery due to an adverse effect. After a median follow-up of 14months, 20patients (20.8%) underwent surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy, and 9 patients died (mortality 9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In Spain, esophageal ESD is curative in approximately two out of three patients, with an acceptable risk of adverse events.

Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: Prevalence, categorization and root-cause analysis based on the World Endoscopic Organization system.

AIMS: The World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) recommends that endoscopy units implement a process to identify postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). The aims of this study were to assess the 3-year PCCRC rate and to perform root-cause analyses and categorization in accordance with the WEO recommendations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cases of colorectal cancers (CRCs) in a tertiary care center were retrospectively included from January 2018 to December 2019. The 3-year and 4-year PCCRC rates were calculated. A root-cause analysis and categorization of PCCRCs (interval and type A, B, C noninterval PCCRCs) were performed. The level of agreement between two expert endoscopists was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 530 cases of CRC were included. A total of 33 were deemed PCCRCs (age 75.8±9.5 years; 51.5% women). The 3-year and 4-year PCCRC rates were 3.4% and 4.7%, respectively. The level of agreement between the two endoscopists was acceptable either for the root-cause analysis (k=0.958) or for the categorization (k=0.76). The most plausible explanations of the PCCRCs were 8 "likely new PCCRCs", 1 (4%) "detected, not resected", 3 (12%) "detected, incomplete resection", 8 (32%) "missed lesion, inadequate examination", and 13 (52%) "missed lesion, adequate examination". Most PCCRCs were deemed noninterval Type C PCCRCs (N=17, 51.5%). CONCLUSION: WEO recommendations for root-cause analysis and categorization are useful to detect areas for improvement. Most PCCRCs were avoidable and were likely due to missed lesions during an otherwise adequate examination.

Chilean consensus by expert panel using the Delphi technique for primary and secondary prevention of gastric cancer. / Estrategias para la prevención primaria y secundaria del cáncer gástrico: consenso chileno de panel de expertos con técnica Delfi.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric cancer (GC) is the first cause of cancer-related death in Chile and 6th in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is the main gastric carcinogen, and its treatment reduces GC incidence and mortality. Esophageal-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD) allows for the detection of premalignant conditions and early-stage GC. Mass screening programs for H. pylori infection and screening for premalignant conditions and early-stage GC are not currently implemented in LAC. The aim of this study is to establish recommendations for primary and secondary prevention of GC in asymptomatic standard-risk populations in Chile. METHODS: Two on-line synchronous workshops and a seminar were conducted with Chilean experts. A Delphi panel consensus was conducted over 2 rounds to achieve>80% agreement on proposed primary and secondary prevention strategies for the population stratified by age groups. RESULTS: 10, 12, and 12 experts participated in two workshops and a seminar, respectively. In the Delphi panel, 25 out of 37 experts (77.14%) and 28 out of 52 experts (53.85%) responded. For the population aged 16-34, there was no consensus on non-invasive testing and treatment for H. pylori, and the use of EGD was excluded. For the 35-44 age group, non-invasive testing and treatment for H. pylori is recommended, followed by subsequent test-of-cure using non-invasive tests (stool antigen test or urea breath test). In the ≥45 age group, a combined strategy is recommended, involving H. pylori testing and treatment plus non-invasive biomarkers (H. pylori IgG serology and serum pepsinogens I and II); subsequently, a selected group of subjects will undergo EGD with gastric biopsies (Sydney Protocol), which will be used to stratify surveillance according to the classification Operative Link for Gastritis Assessment (OLGA); every 3 years for OLGA III-IV and every 5 years for OLGA I-II. CONCLUSION: A "test-and-treat" strategy for H. pylori infection based on non-invasive studies (primary prevention) is proposed in the 35-44 age group, and a combined strategy (serology and EGD) is recommended for the ≥45 age group (primary and secondary prevention). These strategies are potentially applicable to other countries in LAC.

Comparison of urgent and early endoscopy for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: Data regarding early (within 24h) and urgent endoscopy (within 12h) in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NV-UGIB) revealed conflicting results. This study aimed to investigate the impact of endoscopy timing on the outcomes of high-risk patients with NV-UGIB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 2020 to February 2021, consecutive high-risk (Glasgow-Blatchford score ≥12) adults admitted to the emergency department with NV-UGIB were analyzed retrospectively. The primary composite outcome was 30-day mortality from any cause, inpatient rebleeding, need for endoscopic re-intervention, need for surgery or angiographic embolization. RESULTS: 240 patients were enrolled: 152 (63%) patients underwent urgent endoscopy (<12h) and 88 (37%) patients underwent early endoscopy (12-24h). One or more components of the composite outcome were observed in 53 (22.1%) patients: 30 (12.5%) had 30-day mortality, rebleeding occurred in 27 (11.3%), 7 (2.9%) underwent endoscopic re-intervention, and 5 (2.1%) required surgery or angiographic embolization. The composite outcome was similar between the groups. Multivariate analysis showed only hemodynamic instability on admission (OR: 3.05, p=0.006), and the previous history of cancer (OR: 2.42, p=0.029) were significant in predicting composite outcome. In terms of secondary outcomes, the endoscopic intervention was higher in the urgent endoscopy group (p=0.006), whereas the number of transfused erythrocyte suspensions and the length of hospital stay was higher in the early endoscopy group (p=0.002 and p=0.040, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Urgent endoscopy leads to a significant reduction in the length of hospitalization and the number of transfused erythrocyte suspensions in NV-UGIB, which can contribute to patient satisfaction, reduce healthcare expenditure, and improve hospital bed availability. The composite outcome and its sub-outcomes were the same among both groups.

Urgent endoscopy versus early endoscopy: Does urgent endoscopy play a role in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding? / Endoscopia urgente frente a endoscopia precoz: ¿tiene algún papel la endoscopia urgente en la hemorragia digestiva alta aguda no varicosa?

INTRODUCTION: The main clinical practice guidelines recommend endoscopy within 24hours after admission to the Emergency Department in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. However, it is a wide time frame and the role of urgent endoscopy (<6hours) is controversial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective observational study carried out at La Paz University Hospital, where all patients were selected, from January 1, 2015 to April 30, 2020, who attended the Emergency Room and underwent endoscopy for suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Two groups of patients were established: urgent endoscopy (<6hours) and early endoscopy (6-24hours). The primary endpoint of the study was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1096 were included, of whom 682 underwent urgent endoscopy. Mortality at 30days was 6% (5% vs 7.7%, P=.064) and rebleeding was 9.6%. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality, rebleeding, need for endoscopic treatment, surgery and/or embolization, but there were differences in the necessity for transfusion(57.5% vs 68.4%, P<.001) and the number of concentrates of transfused red blood cells (2.85±4.01 vs 3.51±4.09, P=.008). CONCLUSION: Urgent endoscopy, in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, as well as the high-risk subgroup (GBS ≥12), was not associated with lower 30-day mortality than early endoscopy. However, urgent endoscopy in patients with high-risk endoscopic lesions (ForrestI-IIB), was a significant predictor of lower mortality. Therefore, more studies are required for the correct identification of patients who benefit from this medical approach (urgent endoscopy).

Implementation of the updated Sydney system biopsy protocol improves the diagnostic yield of gastric preneoplastic conditions: Results from a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: The updated Sydney system biopsy protocol (USSBP) standardizes the sampling of gastric biopsies for the detection of preneoplastic conditions (e.g., gastric intestinal metaplasia [GIM]), but the real-world diagnostic yield is not well-described. AIM: To determine whether regular application of USSBP is associated with higher detection of chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG), GIM and autoimmune gastritis (AIG). METHODS: We performed a real-world retrospective study at an academic urban tertiary hospital in Chile. We manually reviewed medical records from consecutive patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) from January to December 2017. Seven endoscopists who performed EGDs were categorized into two groups (USSBP 'regular' and USSBP 'infrequent') based on USSBP adherence, using minimum 20% adherence as the prespecified threshold. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between endoscopist groups and the likelihood of diagnosing CAG, GIM or AIG. RESULTS: 1206 patients were included in the study (mean age: 58.5; 65.3% female). The USSBP regular group demonstrated a higher likelihood of detecting CAG (20% vs. 5.3%; aOR 4.03, 95%CI: 2.69-6.03), GIM (12.2% vs. 3.4%; aOR 3.91, 95%CI: 2.39-6.42) and AIG (2.9% vs. 0.8%; aOR 6.52, 95%CI: 1.87-22.74) compared to infrequent group. Detection of advanced-stage CAG (Operative Link for Gastritis Assessment stage III/IV) was significantly higher in the USSBP regular vs. infrequent group (aOR 5.84, 95%CI: 2.23-15.31). CONCLUSIONS: Routine adherence to USSBP increases the detection rates of preneoplastic conditions, including CAG, GIM and AIG. Standardized implementation of USSBP should be considered in high gastric cancer risk populations.

Coffee ground emesis and early endoscopy: Is timing actually relevant? / Vómitos en posos de café y valoración endoscópica precoz. ¿Es realmente el tiempo la clave?

OBJECTIVE: Coffee ground vomiting is a classical symptom of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. However, the clinical usefulness is limited, due to the low positive predictive value. Our goal is to determine if whether an urgent endoscopy does modify our therapeutic management with a real impact on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: It is a retrospective, observational and descriptive study. We selected all patients that underwent a gastroscopy in our center for coffee ground vomiting over the last 4 years (2017-2021). Two groups were established: urgent endoscopy (first 24h) and scheduled (over 24h). Then we studied differences between both groups regarding survival, ICU admission, hospitalization days and rebleeding. RESULTS: Three hundred and fourteen patients were identified, from which 276 were included, with 176 belonging to the urgency group and 109 to the scheduled group. There were no differences in the ICU admission, hospitalization days, survival or rebleeding after 30 days. There were no differences either in the number of potentially bleeding lesions or the need of endoscopic therapeutic. CONCLUSIONS: Coffee ground vomiting, without any other data supporting upper gastrointestinal bleeding, does not represent a reliable indicator. Performing urgent endoscopy is not beneficial in terms of morbimortality. Therefore, a more conservative strategy would allow to differ endoscopy, decreasing risks and reducing costs, without affecting the prognosis.

Clinical and endoscopic outcomes of patients with colonic Crohn's disease treated with 5-aminosalicylates as monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In spite of the lack of evidence regarding the clinical benefits of oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) compounds in Crohn's disease (CD), these drugs are frequently used in daily clinical practice, particularly for colonic CD. Our aim is to assess the use and clinical outcomes of 5-ASA of those patients with colonic CD treated with 5-ASA as monotherapy. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with isolated colonic CD and treated with 5-ASA but never exposed to immunosuppressants or biologicals were identified from the local databases of five referral centres. A retrospective review of clinical and endoscopic outcomes was performed. RESULTS: Out of 545 patients with isolated colonic CD, 106 (19%) were treated with oral 5-ASA in monotherapy as maintenance therapy. The median follow-up was 144 months (interquartile range [IQR], 48-234). Almost all of the patients (92%) presented an inflammatory pattern and 11% developed perianal disease. Half of the patients had already received 5-ASA at diagnosis, and the median duration of 5-ASA treatment was 107 months (IQR 22.5-187). Endoscopic remission, as defined by the absence of ulcers at the last complete colonoscopy, was observed in 65% of those patients undergoing at least one colonoscopy during follow-up. Male gender and extraintestinal manifestations were associated with a lower likelihood of achieving endoscopic remission. Nine patients required colectomy, but mostly soon after CD diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: 5-ASA seems to be of benefit in the long-term in one fifth of patients with colonic CD as the only maintenance therapy and should be considered in fragile patients with Crohn's colitis.

Image-enhanced endoscopy in the diagnosis of gastric premalignant conditions and gastric cancer. / Técnicas de imagen avanzada en la detección y caracterización de las lesiones precursoras del cáncer gástrico y del cáncer gástrico precoz.

Diagnosis of early gastric cancer and its precancerous lesions remains a challenge for great part of western endoscopists. Changes seen in the mucosal pattern are generally subtle and hence difficult to identify. In this article, we will review the usefulness of conventional and virtual chromoendoscopy and magnification endoscopy in the recognition and classification of these lesions.

One- or two-operator techniques for oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy in unsedated patients: A comparative prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: The standard oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy procedure is performed with a single endoscopist (SE). Nurse-assisted (NA) oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopies have not yet been studied. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of an NA endoscopy compared to an SE endoscopy. METHODS: A prospective, single-center, randomized trial, in which 500 adult patients were divided into two groups. In the first group, patients underwent an endoscopy with an SE. In the second group, the endoscopy was performed with an NA. The ease of the procedure (scores 1-4; 1 difficult, 2 satisfactory, 3 easy, 4 veryeasy), evaluation of patient satisfaction (scores 1-4; 1 uncomfortable, 2 satisfactory, 3 comfortable, 4 verycomfortable), total time of the procedure and vocal cord observation were determined as quality indicators. RESULTS: Mean patient satisfaction scores in groups 1 and 2 were 2.98±0.79 and 3.11±0.78, respectively (p=0.043), with uncomfortable ratings in 5.2% vs 4%, satisfactory in 16.8% vs 13.2%, comfortable in 53.2% vs 50.4%, and very comfortable in 24.8% vs 32.4% of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Retching rates during the procedure were 54.4% and 45.2% (p=0.040) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. No differences were seen in vocal cord observation (54.4% vs 56.0%), total procedure time (2.35±1.56 vs 2.41±1.48min) and easy score (3.26±0.603 vs 3.25±0.64) in groups 1 and 2 for the procedures. Very easy, easy, satisfactory, and difficult ratings were given by 33.6% vs 34.8%, 60.4% vs 56.4%, 4.8% vs 7.6% and 1.2% vs 1.2% of groups 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the conventional method, the assisted endoscopic technique provides more comfort and less gag reflex without increasing the processing time or difficulty of performing the procedure.

Endoscopic findings unrelated to portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing a varicose vein screening programme. / Hallazgos endoscópicos no relacionados con hipertensión portal en pacientes con cirrosis hepática sometidos a un programa de cribado de varices.

AIM: To determine the prevalence of endoscopic lesions unrelated with portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study including a consecutive cohort of patients with liver cirrhosis enrolled in a screening program of oesophageal varices who underwent an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy from November, 2013, to November, 2018. Clinical predictors of endoscopic lesions unrelated to portal hypertension were analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 379 patients were included. The most frequent aetiology of liver disease was alcohol consumption (60.4%). The prevalence of endoscopic lesions unrelated with portal hypertension was 39.6% (n=150). Among 96 patients with peptic lesions, urease was obtained in 56.2% of patients (positive in 44.4% of them). The prevalence of endoscopic lesions unrelated to portal hypertension was not associated with age, gender, liver function or ultrasound findings of portal hypertension. The prevalence of endoscopic lesions unrelated to portal hypertension was not associated with age, gender, liver function or ultrasound findings of portal hypertension. Smokers had a trend to increased prevalence of endoscopic lesions unrelated to portal hypertension (43.2% vs. 34.6%; p=0.09), particularly peptic ulcer (6.4% vs. 0.6%; p=0.05) and peptic duodenitis (17.3% vs. 6.3%; p=0.002). Active smoking was the only independent predictor of peptic ulcer or duodenitis (OR=2.56; p=0.017). CONCLUSION: Active smoking is a risk factor for endoscopic lesions unrelated to portal hypertension. This finding should be further investigated to reassess endoscopic screening programs in cirrhotic smokers.

Incidence and evolution of foreign body impaction in the upper gastrointestinal tract and its relationship with eosionophilic oesophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Foreign body impaction is a frequent indication of urgent endoscopy. One of the reasons for impaction is eosinophilic oesophagitis (EE). To analyze characteristics of oesophageal foreign body impactions and their relationship with eosinophilic oesophagitis. METHODS: In this retrospective study, urgent endoscopies in a tertiary care centre were analyzed. We included all urgent endoscopies due to bolus and foreign body impactions performed between September 1st 2018 and September 1st 2020. We reviewed clinical data of all patients who were diagnosed with EE and compared it to impactions that were due to other motives. The mean follow-up time was 18.7 months. RESULTS: 693 urgent endoscopy procedures were performed. 239 (34%) of these were due to foreign body ingestion. Mean age of the patients was 63 years old and 135 (63%) were men. EE was diagnosed in 36 (17%) patients. The factors associated with EE were age, to be younger than 50 years (OR, 7.3; 95% CI, 1.1-48.4; p=0.04), asthma/rhinitis/atopic dermatitis (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.3-35.3; p=0.002), findings in the endoscopy as trachealization (OR, 9.7; 95% CI, 1.3-70.9; p=0.03) and psychotropic/calcium channel blocker drugs (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.009-0.9; p=0.04). 15 (7%) patients died. In 6 of them death was impaction-related. None patients with EE died. CONCLUSIONS: Foreign body impaction in the upper gastrointestinal tract due to EE is a frequent cause of urgent endoscopy. Being under 50 years of age, having asthma/rhinitis/atopic dermatitis, trachealization on the oesophagus and not taking psychotropic/calcium channel blocker drugs are factors associated with the diagnosis of EE. Mortality in the follow-up of patients without EE is important.

High prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients scheduled for digestive endoscopy after the peak of the first wave of the pandemic. / Alta prevalencia de infección por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes programados para endoscopia digestiva después del pico de la primera onda pandémica.

Healthcare professionals in endoscopy units have a possible risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by different routes: inhalation of airborne droplets, aerosols, conjunctival contact and faecal-oral transmission. OBJECTIVE: To describe the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a series of patients scheduled for digestive endoscopy at the Hospital Santa Caterina. Salt. (Girona). METHODS: Descriptive study of a series of cases of patients scheduled for endoscopy during the month of May 2020, when endoscopic activity was resumed after the peak of the pandemic, following SCD, SEED, AEG and ESGE recommendations. We examined nasopharyngeal samples 48-72 hours before the appointment, by RT-PCR, in all patients. RNA extraction was performed using the kits: Qiagen®-adapted, BiosSprint®96-DNA-Blood-Kit (384). For amplification-detection of SARS-CoV-2, methods recommended by the WHO and the CDC were followed. RESULTS: 110 asymptomatic patients without close contact with a positive case in the previous 14 days were scheduled; 105 (96.4%) were negative and five (4.5%) were positive. Two patients developed respiratory symptoms after diagnosis (presymptomatic) and three remained asymptomatic. Allfive5 patients were autochthonous cases with no history of travel or residence in another city or country associated with high prevalence of infection. Four cases were women aged 60-81 years. The N gene was detected in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: A high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in patients scheduled for digestive endoscopy. Given the risk of transmission to professionals, we consider it advisable to perform SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR 48-72 hours before the examination in situations of high incidence in the population.

360° video recording inside a GI endoscopy room: Technical feasibility and its potential use for the acquisition of gastrointestinal endoscopy skills. Pilot experience.

New advances in video processing, 3-dimensional designs, and augmented/virtual reality are exciting and evolving fields. These new tools can facilitate the learning phase of basic or advanced endoscopic procedures. Herein, we explain our initial experience, creating an immersive virtual reality (IVR) by using 360-degree recording videos from an interventional endoscopy room. Some common terms used around this technology, such as Augmented reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), Three hundred sixty videos, and Mixed Reality (MR), are discussed below. Three examples of VR 360 endoscopic room videos are included in this article.

Quality of vision in endoscopy in the midst of a pandemic: Does PPE influence quality of vision during gastrointestinal endoscopy? / Calidad de la visión en endoscopia en tiempos de pandemia: ¿Influyen los EPP en la calidad visual durante la endoscopia digestiva?

INTRODUCTION: In the midst of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) pandemic, health professionals, specifically gastroenterologists, have had to use personal protective equipment (PPE) to reduce contact with droplets and aerosols generated during gastrointestinal endoscopy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the use of two types of PPE on quality of vision during gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational pilot study in gastroenterologists who undergo an ophthalmological examination of visual acuity and quality of vision when using two types of PPE. Type #1: 3M N95 1860 green respirator + 3M mono safety glasses + protective screen. Type #2: 3M 6800 full facepiece + 3M NIOSH 7093C HF/P100 filters. RESULTS: Visual acuity and quality of vison parameters while using the PPE that is routinely used when performing gastrointestinal endoscopy during the pandemic were evaluated. It was found that Modality #1 was associated with decreases of up to 37% in visual acuity, 25% in colour visualisation and 75% in contrast sensitivity among digestive endoscopists within minutes of placement. These figures worsened over the course of the procedure, rising to 75%, 60% and 100%, respectively. Modality #2 was not associated with any deterioration in quality of vision. CONCLUSIONS: The different PPE modalities used during gastrointestinal endoscopy could have an impact on the quality of endoscopy studies performed during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Quality in diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for the detection and surveillance of gastric cancer precursor lesions: Position paper of AEG, SEED and SEAP. / Documento de posicionamiento de la AEG, la SEED y la SEAP sobre calidad de la endoscopia digestiva alta para la detección y vigilancia de las lesiones precursoras de cáncer gástrico.

This position paper, sponsored by the Asociación Española de Gastroenterología [Spanish Association of Gastroenterology], the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva [Spanish Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Society] and the Sociedad Española de Anatomía Patológica [Spanish Anatomical Pathology Society], aims to establish recommendations for performing an high quality upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for the screening of gastric cancer precursor lesions (GCPL) in low-incidence populations, such as the Spanish population. To establish the quality of the evidence and the levels of recommendation, we used the methodology based on the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). We obtained a consensus among experts using a Delphi method. The document evaluates different measures to improve the quality of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in this setting and makes recommendations on how to evaluate and treat the identified lesions. We recommend that upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for surveillance of GCPL should be performed by endoscopists with adequate training, administering oral premedication and use of sedation. To improve the identification of GCPL, we recommend the use of high definition endoscopes and conventional or digital chromoendoscopy and, for biopsies, NBI should be used to target the most suspicious areas of intestinal metaplasia. Regarding the evaluation of visible lesions, the risk of submucosal invasion should be evaluated with magnifying endoscopes and endoscopic ultrasound should be reserved for those with suspected deep invasion. In lesions amenable to endoscopic resection, submucosal endoscopic dissection is considered the technique of choice.

Evaluation of long-term adherence to oesophagogastroduodenoscopy quality indicators. / Evaluación del cumplimiento a largo plazo de los indicadores de calidad en la esofagogastroduodenoscopia.

INTRODUCTION: In a previous study we demonstrated that a simple training programme improved quality indicators of Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) achieving the recommended benchmarks. However, the long-term effect of this intervention is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of OGDs performed 3 years after of having completed a training programme. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative study of 2 cohorts was designed as follows: Group A included OGDs performed in 2016 promptly after a training programme and Group B with OGDs performed from January to March 2019, this group was also divided into 2 subgroups: subgroup B1 of Endoscopists who had participated in the previous training programme and subgroup B2 of Endoscopists who had not. The intra-procedure quality indicators proposed by ASGE-ACG were used. RESULTS: A total of 1236 OGDs were analysed, 600 from Group A and 636 from Group B (439 subgroup B1 and 197 subgroup B2). The number of complete examinations was lower in Group B (566 [94.3%] vs. 551 [86.6%]; p<0.001). A significant decrease was observed in nearly all quality indicators and they did not reach the recommended benchmarks: retroflexion in the stomach (96% vs. 81%; p<0.001); Seattle biopsy protocol (86% vs. 50%; p=0.03), description of the upper GI bleeding lesion (100% vs. 62%; p<0.01), sufficient intestinal biopsy specimens (at least 4) in suspected coeliac disease (92.5% vs. 18%; p<0.001), photo documentation of the lesion (94% vs. 90%; p<0.05). Regarding the overall assessment of the procedure (including correct performance and adequate photo documentation), a significant decrease was also observed (90.5% vs. 62%; p<0.001). There were no differences between subgroups B1 and B2. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement observed in 2016 after a training programme did not prevail after 3 years. In order to keep the quality of OGDs above the recommended benchmarks, it is necessary to implement continuous training programmes.

AEG-SEED position paper for the resumption of endoscopic activity after the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. / Documento de posicionamiento AEG-SEED para el reinicio de la actividad endoscópica tras la fase pico de la pandemia de COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the suspension of programmed activity in most of the Endoscopy Units in our environment. The aim of this document is to facilitate the resumption of elective endoscopic activity in an efficient and safe manner. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of questions considered to be of clinical and logistical relevance were formulated. In order to elaborate the answers, a structured bibliographic search was carried out in the main databases and the recommendations of the main Public Health and Digestive Endoscopy institutions were reviewed. The final recommendations were agreed upon through telematic means. RESULTS: A total of 33 recommendations were made. The main aspects discussed are: 1) Reassessment and prioritization of the indication, 2) Restructuring of spaces, schedules and health personnel, 3) Screening for infection, 4) Hygiene measures and personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: The AEG and SEED recommend restarting endoscopic activity in a phased, safe manner, adapted to local resources and the epidemiological situation of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Involvement of the digestive system in covid-19. A review. / Afectación del aparato digestivo en la covid-19. Una revisión sobre el tema.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is leading to high mortality and a global health crisis. The primary involvement is respiratory; however, the virus can also affect other organs, such as the gastrointestinal tract and liver. The most common symptoms are anorexia and diarrhea. In about half of the cases, viral RNA could be detected in the stool, which is another line of transmission and diagnosis. covid19 has a worse prognosis in patients with comorbidities, although there is not enough evidence in case of previous digestive diseases. Digestive endoscopies may give rise to aerosols, which make them techniques with a high risk of infection. Experts and scientific organizations worldwide have developed guidelines for preventive measures. The available evidence on gastrointestinal and hepatic involvement, the impact on patients with previous digestive diseases and operating guidelines for Endoscopy Units during the pandemic are reviewed.