Search

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a novel, minimally invasive technique in the palliative treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Several studies have demonstrated feasibility and safety of EUS-GE, but evidence on long-term durability is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate patency of EUS-GE in treatment of malignant GOO. Patients and Methods An international multicenter study was performed in seven centers in four European countries. Patients who underwent EUS-GE with a LAMS between March 2015 and March 2019 for palliative treatment of symptomatic malignant GOO were included retrospectively. Our main outcome was recurrent obstruction due to LAMS dysfunction; other outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and survival. Results A total of 45 patients (mean age 69.9 ± 12.3 years and 48.9 % male) were included. Median duration of follow-up was 59 days (interquartile range [IQR] 41–128). Recurrent obstruction occurred in two patients (6.1 %), after 33 and 283 days of follow-up. Technical success was achieved in 39 patients (86.7 %). Clinical success was achieved in 33 patients (73.3 %). AEs occurred in 12 patients (26.7 %), of which five were fatal. Median overall survival was 57 days (IQR 32–114). Conclusions EUS-GE showed a low rate of recurrent obstruction. The relatively high number of fatal AEs underscores the importance of careful implementation of EUS-GE in clinical practice.

Background and study aims Delayed bleeding (DB) is the most frequent major adverse event after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Evidence-based guidelines for management of DB are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the clinical presentation, treatment and outcome of patients with DB and to determine factors associated with hemostatic therapy. Patients and methods Patients with DB were identified by analyzing all consecutive EMR procedures for LNPCPs (≥ 2 cm) from one academic center (2012–2017) and seven regional hospitals (2015–2017). DB was defined as any postprocedural bleeding necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalization or reintervention. Outcome of DB was assessed for three clinical scenarios: continued bleeding (CB), spontaneous resolution without recurrent bleeding during 24 hours observation (SR), and recurrent bleeding (RB). Variables associated with hemostatic therapy were analyzed using logistic regression. Results DB occurred after 42/542 (7.7 %) EMR procedures and re-colonoscopy was performed in 30 patients (72 %). Re-colonoscopy and hemostatic therapy rates were 92 % and 75 % for CB (n = 24), 25 % and 8 % for SR (n = 12), and 83 % and 67 % for RB (n = 6), respectively. Frequent hematochezia (≥ hourly) was the only factor significantly associated with hemostatic therapy (RR 2.23, p = 0.01). Re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostatic therapy occurred in 3/22 (13.6 %) patients. Conclusion Ongoing or recurrent hematochezia is associated with a high rate of hemostatic therapy, warranting re-colonoscopy in these patients. A conservative approach is justified when bleeding spontaneously settles, and without recurrent hematochezia during 24 hours observation patients can be safely discharged without endoscopic re-examination.

Background and study aims Based on pathology, locally resected T1 colorectal cancer (T1-CRC) can be classified as having low- or high-risk for irradicality and/or lymph node metastasis, the latter requiring adjuvant surgery. Reporting and application of pathological high-risk criteria is likely variable, with inherited variation regarding baseline oncological staging, treatment and surveillance. Methods We assessed practice variation using an online survey among gastroenterologists and surgeons participating in the Dutch T1-CRC Working Group. Results Of the 130 invited physicians, 53 % participated. Regarding high-risk T1-CRC criteria, lymphangio-invasion is used by 100 %, positive or indeterminable margins by 93 %, poor differentiation by 90 %, tumor-free margin ≤ 1 mm by 78 %, tumor budding by 57 % and submucosal invasion > 1000 µm by 47 %. Fifty-two percent of the respondents do not perform baseline staging in locally resected low-risk T1-CRC. In case of unoperated high-risk patients, we recorded 61 different surveillance strategies in 63 participants, using 19 different combinations of diagnostic tests. Endoscopy is used in all schedules. Mean follow-up time is 36 months for endoscopy, 26 months for rectal MRI and 30 months for abdominal CT (all varying 3–60 months). Conclusion We found variable use of pathological high-risk T1-CRC criteria, creating risk for misclassification as low-risk T1-CRC. This has serious implications, as most participants will not proceed to oncological staging in low-risk patients and adjuvant surgery nor radiological surveillance is considered. On the other hand, oncological surveillance in patients with a locally resected high-risk T1-CRC who do not wish adjuvant surgery is highly variable emphasizing the need for a uniform surveillance protocol.