Endoscopy International Open最新文献

Background and study aims In patients with ascites, percutaneous liver biopsy is generally contraindicated. Because endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) allows tissue sample obtention from the digestive tract lumen, a biopsy without the intervention of ascites may prevent adverse events (AEs). This study aimed to evaluate the safety of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions in the presence of ascites. Patients and methods A retrospective study was conducted using medical records of cases in which EUS-TA was performed on focal liver lesions between 2016 and 2022. Study participants were classified into two groups: those with ascites and those without it, and the outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was AEs. Results We included 109 cases of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions. Ascites was present in 20.1% of cases (22/109) and absent in 79.8% of cases (87/109). There were no significant differences between the two groups in clinical backgrounds and EUS-TA procedure, although fine-needle biopsy needles were significantly more frequently used in patients without ascites. In the ascites group, puncture without intervening ascites was successful in 90.9% of cases (20/22). The incidence of AEs was 4.5% (1/22) in the ascites group and 1.1% (1/87) in the non-ascites group, showing no significant difference. The two AEs were mild self-limiting abdominal pain. Conclusions In focal liver lesions with ascites, EUS-TA allows biopsy without the intervention of ascites in most cases. The incidence of AEs did not differ significantly between patients with and without ascites.

Background and study aims Use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy is an essential aid in advanced endoscopic interventions. However, it also raises concerns about radiation exposure. This study aimed to develop consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, prioritizing the safety and well-being of healthcare workers and patients. Methods A modified Delphi approach was employed to achieve consensus over three rounds of surveys. Proposed statements were generated in Round 1. In the second round, panelists rated potential statements on a 5-point scale, with consensus defined as ≥80% agreement. Statements were subsequently prioritized in Round 3, using a 1 (lowest priority) to 10 (highest priority) scale. Results Forty-six experts participated, consisting of 34 therapeutic endoscopists and 12 endoscopy nurses from six continents, with an overall 45.6% female representation (n = 21). Forty-three item statements were generated in the first round. Of these, 31 statements achieved consensus after the second round. These statements were categorized into General Considerations (n = 6), Education (n = 10), Pregnancy (n = 4), Family Planning (n = 2), Patient Safety (n = 4), and Staff Safety (n = 5). In the third round, accepted statements received mean priority scores ranging from 7.28 to 9.36, with 87.2% of statements rated as very high priority (mean score ≥ 9). Conclusions This study presents consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, addressing the well-being of healthcare workers and patients. These consensus-based statements aim to mitigate risks associated with radiation exposure while maintaining benefits of fluoroscopy, ultimately promoting a culture of safety in healthcare settings.

Endoscopic examination is not risk free. Not only are there well-known complications associated with the procedure, but malignant and pre-malignant lesions can be missed due to human factors or failures in organizational process. Duty of candor (DoC) is a legal requirement if significant harm occurs in delivery of healthcare. Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) and post-endoscopy upper gastrointestinal cancer (PEUGIC) audits have identified missed diagnoses that are associated with harm and require consideration of DoC. This article explores the new and unique challenges associated with DoC in endoscopy audits. There are unresolved questions around the place of DoC in retrospective audits, agreement of harm thresholds, and constitution of review teams. Involved departments must be committed to transparency and trained in governance processes. Fear of institutional and personal reputational damage, as well as future litigation, may influence decisions. Patient expectations need to be clarified, as do supportive structures for individual endoscopists who will be involved in DoC processes when significant lesions have been missed. Further consensus around DoC is required so that clear guidance can be given to endoscopy units.

Background and study aims High-quality bowel preparation is integral to high-quality colonoscopy and adenoma detection. Studies evaluating the effect of pre-colonoscopy educational videos on bowel preparation quality have been variable. We investigated whether augmenting bowel preparation education using our professionally produced, patient-oriented, online educational video series would improve preparation quality, reduce need for repeat procedures, and improve adenoma detection rate (ADR). Patients and methods We conducted a pilot, retrospective, single-center observational study using endoscopy data from a tertiary hospital. Colonoscopy outcomes were compared between two discrete 6-month study periods, before (control group) and after (video group) implementation of the online video intervention. All patients received standard-of-care written and verbal instructions. The video group received a link providing access to the video platform. Primary outcome was adequacy of bowel preparation (defined by the Aronchick Scale). Secondary outcomes included rate of repeat colonoscopy due to inadequate preparation, ADR, and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rate. Results The video intervention group had a lower rate of inadequate bowel preparation compared with the control group (6.3% vs 9.8%, P = 0.018). There was no difference between groups in rate of repeat colonoscopies due to inadequate preparation ( P = 0.62), ADR ( P = 0.11), or SSL detection rate ( P = 0.94). Multivariable analysis did not reveal any independent predictors of bowel preparation quality. Conclusions Our study supports the addition of a novel patient-oriented online educational video resource as an effective tool in enhancing bowel preparation adequacy while maintaining provision of high-quality colonoscopy.

Background and study aims Reduction of colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality is one of the primary objectives of colonoscopy. Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) are critical outcome parameters. Analysis of PCCRC rates can validate quality assurance measures in colonoscopy. We assessed the effectiveness of implementing a gastroenterologist-led quality framework that monitors key procedure quality indicators (i.e., bowel preparation quality, adenoma detection rates, or patient satisfaction) by comparing the PCCRC rate before and after implementation. Patients and methods Individuals who had a colonoscopy between 2010 and 2017 at a single tertiary center in Queensland, Australia, were included and divided into two groups: baseline (2010-2014) and redesign phase (2015-2017). Data linkage of the state-wide cancer registry and hospital records enabled identification of subjects who developed colorectal cancers within 5 years of a negative colonoscopy. Costs associated with quality improvement were assessed for effectiveness. Results A total of 19,383 individuals had a colonoscopy during the study period. Seventeen PCCRCs were detected. The PCCRC rate was 0.376 per 1,000 person-years and the average 5-year PCCRC risk ranged from 0.165% to 0.051%. The rate of PCCRCs was higher at the beginning (0.166%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15%-0.17%) compared with the later period with full implementation of quality control measures (0.027%; 95% CI 0.023%-0.03%). The quality process determined an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -$5,670.53 per PCCRC avoided. Conclusions This large cohort study demonstrated that a formal gastroenterologist-led quality assurance framework embedded into the routine operations of a clinical department not only reduces interval cancers but is also cost-effective regarding life years gained and quality-adjusted life years.

Background and study aims Rectal mucosal prolapse syndrome (RMPS) usually manifests as rectal bleeding and tenesmus. Endoscopically it can be easily misdiagnosed as malignant rectal tumor (MRT). This study aimed to investigate factors to distinguish RMPS and MRT and to explore endoscopic features of RMPS. Patients and methods Data from patients endoscopically diagnosed with rectal lesions, masses, or tumors, were retrospectively collected. Clinical information, endoscopic images, and histologic reports were reviewed. Patients endoscopically and histologically diagnosed with RMPS were included for phenotype classification. Results 826 patients were enrolled, among them 755 (91.4%), 22 (2.7%), 10 (1.2%), and 39 (4.7%) were respectively diagnosed with MRT, RMPS, endometriosis, and neuroendocrine tumors. Compared with MRT, patients with RMPS were significantly younger (33.5 vs. 62, P < 0.001) and lesions were significantly smaller (2 cm vs. 3 cm, P = 0.007). Moreover, the clinical course of patients with RMPS was significantly longer than for those with MRT (12 months vs. 3 months, P < 0.001). Morphologically, we classified lesions of RMPS into five phenotypes, that is, lesions with circumferential stenosis (19.4%), protrusions (41.7%), both ulcers and protrusions (11.1%), ulcers (11.1%), and flat manifestations (16.7%). Protruding lesions were more frequently observed in females ( P = 0.039), whereas ulcerative lesions were found involving a smaller proportion of the rectal circumference ( P = 0.028). Lesions with only ulcers were found with a shorter distance compared with those with only protrusions (5 cm vs. 10 cm, P = 0.034). Conclusions Age, clinical course, and size of the lesion can be applied to distinguish MRT and RMPS. Five phenotypes have been identified and features of ulcers/protrusions should be further explored.

Background and study aims Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), pancreatoscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are primary treatments for symptomatic main pancreatic duct (MPD) stones. However, incomplete clearance of residual/microstones post-treatment may cause symptom recurrence. We hypothesized that the 8-wire biliary basket catheter could be suitable for MPD stone extraction and aimed to analyze its ability to achieve more complete clearance of MPD residual/microstones. Patients and methods Patients suspected of having MPD residual/microstones ≤ 5 mm because of abdominal symptoms, computed tomography examination results, and pancreatography results after previous therapy, including ERCP, EHL, and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, were retrospectively enrolled. Patients with severe MPD stenosis/biliary obstruction requiring ERCP drainage were excluded. Extraction of residual/microstones was attempted using an 8-wire basket that is widely expandable in the narrow pancreatic duct and can capture and sweep stones in the narrow pancreatic duct. Technical success was defined as extraction of residual/microstones. The primary outcome was the technical success rate. Secondary outcomes were therapeutic details of stone extraction using the 8-wire basket catheter, including symptom improvements. Results The technical success rate was 100% for seven patients; 1 to 8 residual/microstones were extracted. An improvement was observed in five patients with symptoms after the previous therapy. Three patients underwent residual stone extraction after extraction using a dedicated basket. No patient experienced symptom recurrence during the 270-day follow-up period. Conclusions The 8-wire basket resulted in successful MPD residual/microstone extraction and pancreatic symptom improvement. This method may prevent symptom recurrence caused by incomplete residual/microstone clearance.