Search

Background and Aims EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (the EDGE procedure) is a simplified method of performing ERCP in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients. The EDGE procedure involves placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) into the excluded stomach to serve as a conduit for passage of the duodenoscope for pancreatobiliary intervention. Originally a multistep process, urgent indications for ERCP have led to the development of single-session EDGE (SS-EDGE) with LAMS placement and ERCP performed in the same session. The goal of this study was to identify predictive factors of intraprocedural LAMS migration in SS-EDGE. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective review that included 9 tertiary medical centers across the United States. Data were collected and analyzed from 128 SS-EDGE procedures. The primary outcome was intraprocedural LAMS migration. Secondary outcomes were other procedural adverse events such as bleeding and perforation. Results Eleven LAMS migrations were observed in 128 procedures (8.6%). Univariate analysis of clinically relevant variables was performed, as was a binary logistic regression analysis of stent diameter and stent dilation. This revealed that use of a smaller (15 mm) diameter LAMS was an independent predictor of intraprocedural stent migration (odds ratio, 5.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-22.24; P = .021). Adverse events included 3 patients who required surgery and 2 who experienced intraprocedural bleeding. Conclusions Use of a larger-diameter LAMS is a predictive factor for a nonmigrated stent and improved procedural success in SS-EDGE. Although larger patient cohorts are needed to adequately assess these findings, performance of LAMS dilation and fixation may also decrease risk of intraprocedural LAMS migration and improve procedural success.

ColoWrap is an external abdominal compression device applied during colonoscopy to reduce looping and procedure time. It is unclear if a shorter procedure duration or increased abdominal pressure impacts polyp detection. We determined if use of ColoWrap affected adenoma detection rate (ADR) or detection of sessile serrated polyps (SSP) compared to sham.At a single center, participants aged 40-80 were randomized to have ColoWrap or a sham device applied to the lower abdomen. Baseline characteristics, procedural factors, location of polyps, ADR and SSP detection rate (SSPDR) were compared between the groups. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess whether ColoWrap was associated with detection of adenomas and SSP.Of 350 participants, 175 were assigned to each arm. Overall, there were no significant differences in ADR (43%Use of ColoWrap during colonoscopy did not negatively impact ADR or SSPDR, and there was an apparent improvement in polyp detection in certain colon locations and patient sub-groups. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size.

Background Endoscopic resection of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice remains a challenge. We aimed to report outcomes with the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for the resection of appendiceal lesions and identify factors associated with the occurrence of appendicitis. Methods This was a retrospective study at 18 tertiary-care centers (USA 12, Canada 1, Europe 5) between November 2016 and August 2020. Consecutive patients who underwent resection of an appendiceal orifice lesion using the FTRD were included. The primary outcome was the rate of R0 resection in neoplastic lesions, defined as negative lateral and deep margins on post-resection histologic evaluation. Secondary outcomes included the rates of: technical success (en bloc resection), clinical success (technical success without need for further surgical intervention), post-resection appendicitis, and polyp recurrence. Results 66 patients (32 women; mean age 64) underwent resection of colonic lesions involving the appendiceal orifice (mean [standard deviation] size, 14.5 (6.2) mm), with 40 (61 %) being deep, extending into the appendiceal lumen. Technical success was achieved in 59/66 patients (89 %), of which, 56 were found to be neoplastic lesions on post-resection pathology. Clinical success was achieved in 53/66 (80 %). R0 resection was achieved in 52/56 (93 %). Of the 58 patients in whom EFTR was completed who had no prior history of appendectomy, appendicitis was reported in 10 (17 %), with six (60 %) requiring surgical appendectomy. Follow-up colonoscopy was completed in 41 patients, with evidence of recurrence in five (12 %). Conclusions The FTRD is a promising non-surgical alternative for resecting appendiceal lesions, but appendicitis occurs in 1/6 cases.