Search

Objective: Routine urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (ES) does not improve outcome in patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis. Improved patient selection for ERCP by means of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for stone/sludge detection may challenge these findings., Design: A multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Patients underwent urgent EUS, followed by ERCP with ES in case of common bile duct stones/sludge, within 24 hours after hospital presentation and within 72 hours after symptom onset. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or mortality within 6 months after inclusion. The historical control group was the conservative treatment arm (n=113) of the randomised APEC trial (Acute biliary Pancreatitis: urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment, patient inclusion 2013-2017) applying the same study design., Results: Overall, 83 patients underwent urgent EUS at a median of 21 hours (IQR 17-23) after hospital presentation and at a median of 29 hours (IQR 23-41) after start of symptoms. Gallstones/sludge in the bile ducts were detected by EUS in 48/83 patients (58%), all of whom underwent immediate ERCP with ES. The primary endpoint occurred in 34/83 patients (41%) in the urgent EUS-guided ERCP group. This was not different from the 44% rate (50/113 patients) in the historical conservative treatment group (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29; p=0.65). Sensitivity analysis to correct for baseline differences using a logistic regression model also showed no significant beneficial effect of the intervention on the primary outcome (adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.90, p=0.92)., Conclusion: In patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis, urgent EUS-guided ERCP with ES did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, as compared with conservative treatment in a historical control group., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN15545919., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JEvH received personal speakers fees from Medtronic, Abbvie, Cook and Boston Scientific outside of the submitted work. PF reports personal fees from Olympus and Cook Endoscopy outside the submitted work. MJB reports personal fees from Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Pentax Medical and Mylan, and grants from Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Pentax Medical, 3M, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are believed to clinically improve endoscopic transluminal drainage of infected necrosis when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents. However, comparative data from prospective studies are very limited., Design: Patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, who underwent an endoscopic step-up approach with LAMS within a multicentre prospective cohort study were compared with the data of 51 patients in the randomised TENSION trial who had been assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach with double-pigtail plastic stents. The clinical study protocol was otherwise identical for both groups. Primary end point was the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. Secondary end points included mortality, major complications, hospital stay and healthcare costs., Results: A total of 53 patients were treated with LAMS in 16 hospitals during 27 months. The need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy was 64% (n=34) and was not different from the previous trial using plastic stents (53%, n=27)), also after correction for baseline characteristics (OR 1.21 (95% CI 0.45 to 3.23)). Secondary end points did not differ between groups either, which also included bleeding requiring intervention-5 patients (9%) after LAMS placement vs 11 patients (22%) after placement of plastic stents (relative risk 0.44; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17). Total healthcare costs were also comparable (mean difference -€6348, bias-corrected and accelerated 95% CI -€26 386 to €10 121)., Conclusion: Our comparison of two patient groups from two multicentre prospective studies with a similar design suggests that LAMS do not reduce the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis. Also, the rate of bleeding complications was comparable., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MGB reports grants from Intuitive, grants from Ethicon Endo-Surgery, grants from Medtronic, outside the submitted work; MBo reports grants and personal fees from Johnson & Johnson, grants and personal fees from Acelity/KCI, grants and personal fees from Bard, grants from Ipsen, grants from New Compliance, grants from Mylan, personal fees from Gore, personal fees from Smith & Newphew, outside the submitted work; MBr reports grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Cook Medical, grants from Pentax Medical, grants from Mylan, grants from 3M, grants from InterScope, outside the submitted work; PF reports personal fees from Cook Medical, personal fees from Olympus, personal fees from Ethicon Endo-Surgery, outside the submitted work; J-WP reports personal fees and other from Cook Endoscopy, personal fees and other from Boston Scientific, personal fees and other from Pentax Medical, outside the submitted work; E-JvG reports grants from Mylan, grants from Olympus, personal fees from MTW-Endoskopie, outside the submitted work; JEvH reports personal fees from Olympus Endoscopy, grants from Cook Medical, personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Medtronic, outside the submitted work; FV reports grants from Boston Scientific, outside the submitted work; RPV reports grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, grants from Zambon, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Aims: Colonoscopy is the current reference standard for the detection of colorectal neoplasia, but nevertheless adenomas remain undetected. The Endocuff, an endoscopic cap with plastic projections, may improve colonic visualisation and adenoma detection. The aim of this study was to compare the mean number of adenomas per patient (MAP) and the adenoma detection rate (ADR) between Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and conventional colonoscopy (CC)., Methods: We performed a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in five hospitals and included fecal immonochemical test (FIT)-positive screening participants as well as symptomatic patients (>45 years). Consenting patients were randomised 1:1 to EAC or CC. All colonoscopies were performed by experienced colonoscopists (≥500 colonoscopies) who were trained in EAC. All colonoscopy quality indicators were prospectively recorded., Findings: Of the 1063 included patients (52% male, median age 65 years), 530 were allocated to EAC and 533 to CC. More adenomas were detected with EAC, 722 vs 621, but the gain in MAP was not significant: on average 1.36 per patient in the EAC group versus 1.17 in the CC group (p=0.08). In a per-protocol analysis, the gain was 1.44 vs 1.19 (p=0.02), respectively. In the EAC group, 275 patients (52%) had one or more adenomas detected versus 278 in the CC group (52%; p=0.92). For advanced adenomas these numbers were 109 (21%) vs 117 (22%). The adjusted caecal intubation rate was lower with EAC (94% vs 99%; p<0.001), however when allowing crossover from EAC to CC, they were similar in both groups (98% vs 99%; p value=0.25)., Interpretation: Though more adenomas are detected with EAC, the routine use of Endocuff does not translate in a higher number of patients with one or more adenomas detected. Whether increased detection ultimately results in a lower rate of interval carcinomas is not yet known., Trial Registration Number: http://www.trialregister.nl Dutch Trial Register: NTR3962., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background and Aims: Impaired accommodation and hypersensitivity to distension of the proximal stomach are considered to be important factors in the pathogenesis of dyspeptic complaints. As fundus relaxing agents may be effective in the treatment of these symptoms, insight into the mediators involved in fundic accommodation and associated perceptual responses is important. Therefore, we studied the effect of nitric oxide (NO) synthase inhibition by N(G)-monomethyl-L-arginine (L-NMMA) on fundic tone, postprandial sensations, and gastric perception in healthy volunteers., Subjects and Methods: Eighteen healthy volunteers participated in a double blind, placebo controlled, randomised study. They underwent a gastric barostat study to evaluate the effect of L-NMMA on meal and distension induced sensations and on fundic relaxation in response to oral meal intake, intraduodenal lipid, and glucagon administration., Results: Compared with placebo, L-NMMA decreased fundic volume after oral meal intake (438 (55) v 304 (67) ml; n=8; p<0.05) and during intraduodenal lipid infusion (384 (37) v 257 (43) ml; n=10; p<0.05) but not after glucagon injection (570 (62) v 540 (52) ml; n=4; p=0.4). In addition, basal fundic volume was significantly reduced by L-NMMA. Scores for nausea and satiation were decreased by L-NMMA after oral meal intake but not during intraduodenal lipid infusion. Perception scores to gastric distension were not altered by L-NMMA., Conclusions: NO is involved in maintaining basal fundic tone and in meal induced fundic relaxation in humans, but not in visceral perception.