Indian Journal of Gastroenterology最新文献

Introduction: There is sparse data from India on indications, technical success, safety and outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) using standard adult duodenoscope in the pediatric population.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained electronic endoscopy and clinical database was performed to identify pediatric patients (age ≤ 18 years) who underwent ERCP between January 2017 and December 2022. Demographics and procedural details including indications, cholangio-pancreatogram findings, endotherapy type performed, technical and clinical success and complications were noted.

Results: As many as 150 pediatric patients were included of whom 88 had pancreatic (mean age-13.7 years) and 62 had biliary disease (mean age- 14.9 years). Common pancreatic ERCP indications were chronic pancreatitis (n = 45 [51.1%]), pancreatic duct disruption fistula (n = 21 [23.9%]) and recurrent acute pancreatitis (n = 16 [18.2%]). Among biliary indications were choledocholithiasis (n = 29 [46.8%]), benign bile duct strictures (n = 13 [21%]), bile duct injury/leak and biliary stent removal (n = 7 [11.3%]) , choledochal cyst (n = 5  [8.1%]) and pancreatic mass causing biliary compression (n = 1 [1.6%]). Technical success in pancreatic and biliary ERCP was 94.3% and 95.2%, respectively, and clinical success was 84.1% and 93.5%, respectively. Most common complications following pancreatic ERCPs were acute pancreatitis (n = 9 [10.2%]) (mild = 5, moderate = 4) patients and post sphincterotomy bleed in one (1.1%). Among biliary ERCPs, post ERCP pancreatitis was seen in (n = 3 [4.8%]) (mild = 2, moderate = 1).

Conclusion: ERCP can be safely and effectively performed in children using standard duodenoscope. Chronic pancreatitis, choledocholithiasis and pancreatic divisum are common pediatric ERCP indications.

Screening colonoscopy and polypectomy are the cornerstone in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Despite the low incidence of colorectal cancer in India, there has been a rising trend in the incidence of colonic polyps and cancer over the last decade. It is, hence, imperative that we are well equipped in the management of colonic polyps. Adequate training in the detection and characterization of polyps to aid in their management is necessary. Detection of polyps can be increased by adhering to the standards of colonoscopy, including good bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, adequate withdrawal time and use of distal attachment devices. A detected polyp needs optimal characterization to predict histology in real time and decide on the management strategies. Characterization of the polyps requires high-definition-white light endoscopy and/or image-enhanced endoscopy (dye based or digital). Various factors that help in predicting histology include size, location and morphology of the polyp and the pit pattern, vascular and surface pattern of the polyp. Polyps can be differentiated as neoplastic or non-neoplastic with reasonable accuracy with the above features. Prediction of advanced pathology including high-grade dysplasia and deep sub-mucosal invasion is essential, as it helps in deciding if the lesion is amenable to endotherapy and the technique of endoscopic resection. Adequate training in image-enhanced endoscopy is necessary to assess advanced pathology in polyps. Technology pertaining to image-enhanced endoscopy includes narrow banding imaging and blue laser imaging; newer variations are being introduced every few years making it necessary to be abreast with growing information. The recent advances in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy with the advent of endocytoscopy and artificial intelligence seem promising and are predicted to be the future of GI endoscopy.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) includes EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AG) and EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV). While EUS-HGS, EUS-CDS and EUS-GBD are transluminal drainage procedures, EUS-AG is a traspapillary drainage procedure and EUS-RV is a procedure intended to facilitate endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) in instances of failed cannulation. These procedures were initially developed as options for endoscopic salvage of failed ERCP, but have evolved to become first-line interventions also for select indications over time as the technique and expertise improved. Several randomised controlled trials have demonstrated EUS-BD, especially EUS-CDS has similar or even better outcomes as compared to ERCP in malignant biliary obstruction. However, widespread adoption of these modalities is limited by the availability of expertise, steep learning curve, lack of standardization of techniques and cost. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of various EUS-BD procedures including the indications, accessories, technique, outcomes and follow-up of each of these procedures.

Background and aim: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may help detect cholangiocarcinoma in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), but it may be associated with complications. This study was aimed at determining the prognostic impact of ERCP on patients with PSC without cholangitis.

Methods: Patients with PSC without cholangitis were divided into two groups: those who underwent ERCP within three years after diagnosis (ERCP-performed group) and those who did not (non-ERCP group). These groups were compared in terms of clinical outcomes (liver-related death or liver transplantation, endoscopic treatment requirement and repeated cholangitis) and the composite outcome.

Results: Of 99 patients with PSC with detailed medical history, 49 were included in the ERCP-performed group and 21 in the non-ERCP group. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the non-ERCP group was less likely to achieve the three outcomes and the composite outcome, showing statistical significance (endoscopic treatment requirement; p = 0.017 and composite outcome; p = 0.014). A Cox proportional hazards model indicated that ERCP in the asymptomatic state was a significant predictor of endoscopic treatment requirement (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-18.59) and the composite outcome (HR: 4.54, 95% CI: 1.07-19.28).

Conclusion: ERCP in patients with PSC without cholangitis is likely to require further endoscopic treatment and may be associated with poor prognosis.