Search

Background and Aims: Biliary drainage by ERCP in patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction (MBO) is frequently associated with adverse events, such as pancreatitis, hampering patient outcomes. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a promising alternative in patients with MBO but is associated with a worrisome risk of stent dysfunction. Placement of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) through the LAMS, thereby changing the axis of biliary drainage toward the descending duodenum, may decrease the risk of stent dysfunction while maintaining high technical success and low adverse event rates., Methods: This was a prospective single-center pilot study in patients with pathology-confirmed MBO without gastric outlet obstruction. The primary outcome was stent dysfunction, defined as recurrent jaundice after initial clinical success, ongoing jaundice in combination with persistent bile duct dilatation, or cholangitis., Results: Overall, 27 consecutive patients eligible for EUS-CDS were enrolled. The placement of a LAMS was successful in 24 of 27 patients (89%), and placement of a FCSEMS through the LAMS was successful in 20 of 24 (83%); in the remaining 4 patients, a coaxial double-pigtail plastic stent was placed. Two of these 20 patients experienced persistent jaundice requiring stent revision (10%), leading to a clinical success rate of 90%. No patients developed stent dysfunction after initial clinical success., Conclusions: This study showed a stent dysfunction rate of 10% after technically successful EUS-CDS with placement of a FCSEMS through the LAMS. Improving the design of LAMSs may further reduce the rate of stent dysfunction. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05595122.)., Competing Interests: Disclosure The following authors disclosed financial relationships: P. Fockens: Consultant for Olympus and Cook Endoscopy. F. Daams: Research support from Medtronic; speaker for Medtronic; proctor for Intuitive. J. W. Wilmink: Research support from Servier, Merck, Nordic, and Astra Zeneca. R. P. Voermans: Research support from Boston Scientific and Prion Medical; consultant for Boston Scientific; speaker for Mylan and Zambon. R. L. J. van Wanrooij: Consultant for Boston Scientific. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to surgery for complex colorectal lesions. Previous studies have demonstrated favorable safety results; however, large studies representing a generalizable estimation of adverse events (AEs) are lacking. Our aim was to provide further insight in AEs after eFTR., Methods: Data from all registered eFTR procedures in the German and Dutch colorectal full-thickness resection device registries between July 2015 and March 2021 were collected. Safety outcomes included immediate and late AEs., Results: Of 1892 procedures, the overall AE rate was 11.3% (213/1892). No AE-related mortality occurred. Perforations occurred in 2.5% (47/1892) of all AEs, 57.4% (27/47) of immediate AEs, and 42.6% (20/47) of delayed AEs. Successful endoscopic closure was achieved in 29.8% of cases (13 immediate and 1 delayed), and antibiotic treatment was sufficient in 4.3% (2 delayed). The appendicitis rate for appendiceal lesions was 9.9% (13/131), and 46.2% (6/13) could be treated conservatively. The severe AE rate requiring surgery was 2.2% (42/1892), including delayed perforations in .9% (17/1892) and immediate perforations in .7% (13/1892). Delayed perforations occurred between days 1 and 10 (median, 2) after eFTR, and 58.8% (10/17) were located on the left side. Other severe AEs were appendicitis (.4%, 7/1892), luminal stenosis (.1%, 2/1892), delayed bleeding (.1%, 1/1892), pain after eFTR close to the dentate line (.1%, 1/1892), and grasper entrapment in the clip (.1%, 1/1892)., Conclusions: Colorectal eFTR is a safe procedure with a low risk for severe AEs in everyday practice and without AE-related mortality. These results further support the position of eFTR as an established minimally invasive technique for complex colorectal lesions., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Publicly available databases containing colonoscopic imaging data are valuable resources for artificial intelligence (AI) research. Currently, little is known regarding the available number and content of these databases. This review aimed to describe the availability, accessibility, and usability of publicly available colonoscopic imaging databases, focusing on polyp detection, polyp characterization, and quality of colonoscopy., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE and Embase to identify AI studies describing publicly available colonoscopic imaging databases published after 2010. Second, a targeted search using Google's Dataset Search, Google Search, GitHub, and Figshare was done to identify databases directly. Databases were included if they contained data about polyp detection, polyp characterization, or quality of colonoscopy. To assess accessibility of databases, the following categories were defined: open access, open access with barriers, and regulated access. To assess the potential usability of the included databases, essential details of each database were extracted using a checklist derived from the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging., Results: We identified 22 databases with open access, 3 databases with open access with barriers, and 15 databases with regulated access. The 22 open access databases contained 19,463 images and 952 videos. Nineteen of these databases focused on polyp detection, localization, and/or segmentation; 6 on polyp characterization, and 3 on quality of colonoscopy. Only half of these databases have been used by other researcher to develop, train, or benchmark their AI system. Although technical details were in general well reported, important details such as polyp and patient demographics and the annotation process were under-reported in almost all databases., Conclusions: This review provides greater insight on public availability of colonoscopic imaging databases for AI research. Incomplete reporting of important details limits the ability of researchers to assess the usability of current databases., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Advanced endoscopic resection techniques for complex colorectal polyps have evolved significantly over the past decade, leading to a management shift from surgical to endoscopic resection as the preferred treatment. However, in practice, interhospital consultation and appropriate referral management remain challenging, leading to unnecessary surgical resections. To support regional care for patients with complex colorectal polyps, facilitate peer consultations, and lower thresholds for referrals, an expert panel consultation platform was initiated in the northwestern region of the Netherlands., Methods: We initiated a regional expert panel in the northwestern region of the Netherlands for patients with complex colorectal polyps and studied the implementation, adaption, and clinical impact. All panel consultations between June 2019 and May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, and user satisfaction among panel members was evaluated., Results: Eighty-eight patients with complex colorectal polyps from 11 of 15 participating centers (73.3%) were discussed in our panel. The most common reason for panel consultation was suspicion of invasive cancer in 36.4% (n = 32). After panel consultation, 43.2% of the consulting endoscopists (n = 38) changed their initial treatment strategy, and in 63.6% (n = 56) patients were referred to another endoscopy center. Of 26 cases submitted with a primary proposal for surgical treatment, surgery was avoided in 7 (26.9%). User satisfaction was rated high in most participating centers (91.7%)., Conclusions: Our study shows that implementation of and consultation with a regional expert panel can be a valuable tool for endoscopists to guide and optimize treatment of complex colorectal polyps and facilitate interhospital referrals in a regional network., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Standardized registration and evaluation of adverse events (AEs) are essential to assess the safety of endoscopic procedures. We propose a novel classification system, named adverse events in GI endoscopy (AGREE), adapted from a widely accepted surgical tool., Methods: The Clavien-Dindo classification for surgical AEs was adapted for endoscopy. To validate the novel classification, we assessed if the severity of AEs, as perceived by 10 endoscopists, 10 endoscopy nurses, and 10 patients, corresponded with the severity grading used in the AGREE classification in 10 pairwise comparisons. We additionally assessed the correlation between the AGREE classification and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) classification. The acceptability of the AGREE classification was evaluated through an international questionnaire., Results: The perception of endoscopists, endoscopy nurses, and patients corresponded with the severity grading of the AGREE classification in 80% of cases (238/299). The AGREE classification significantly correlated with the ASGE classification (ρ = .760). Fifty-seven of 84 experts (68%) completed a questionnaire regarding the acceptability of the AGREE classification. The experts consulted considered the AGREE classification as simple (86%), reproducible (98%), logical (98%), and useful (96%). Most case presentations (84%) were correctly graded according to the AGREE classification., Conclusions: The AGREE classification provides a standardized and reproducible approach to the assessment of AEs in diagnostic and therapeutic GI endoscopy. Broad implementation of the AGREE classification may facilitate the evaluation of AEs across different endoscopists, disciplines, endoscopy services, and regions. This standardization of AE reporting will support improved quality assurance in GI endoscopy., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Consensus regarding an optimal algorithm for endoscopic treatment of papillary adenomas has not been established. We aimed to assess the existing degree of consensus among international experts and develop further concordance by means of a Delphi process., Methods: Fifty-two international experts in the field of endoscopic papillectomy were invited to participate. Data were collected between August and December 2019 using an online survey platform. Three rounds were conducted. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement., Results: Sixteen experts (31%) completed the full process, and consensus was achieved on 47 of the final 79 statements (59%). Diagnostic workup should include at least an upper endoscopy using a duodenoscope (100%) and biopsy sampling (94%). There should be selected use of additional abdominal imaging (75%-81%). Patients with (suspected) papillary malignancy or over 1 cm intraductal extension should be referred for surgical resection (76%). To prevent pancreatitis, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be administered before resection (82%) and a pancreatic stent should be placed (100%). A biliary stent is indicated in case of ongoing bleeding from the papillary region (76%) or concerns for a (micro)perforation after resection (88%). Follow-up should be started 3 to 6 months after initial papillectomy and repeated every 6 to 12 months for at least 5 years (75%)., Conclusions: This is the first step in developing an international consensus-based algorithm for endoscopic management of papillary adenomas. Surprisingly, in many areas consensus could not be achieved. These aspects should be the focus of future studies., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: In the management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) seems to be safe and more effective than enteral stent placement. However, comparisons with laparoscopic GE (L-GE) are scarce. Our aim was to perform a propensity score-matched comparison between EUS-GE and L-GE., Methods: An international, multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive EUS-GE and L-GE procedures in 3 academic centers (January 2015 to May 2020) using propensity score matching to minimize selection bias. A standard maximum propensity score difference of .1 was applied, also considering underlying disease and oncologic staging., Results: Overall, 77 patients were treated with EUS-GE and 48 patients with L-GE. By means of propensity score matching, 37 patients were allocated to both groups, resulting in 74 (1:1) matched patients. Technical success was achieved in 35 of 37 EUS-GE-treated patients (94.6%) versus 100% in the L-GE group (P = .493). Clinical success, defined as eating without vomiting or GOO Scoring System ≥2, was achieved in 97.1% and 89.2%, respectively (P = .358). Median time to oral intake (1 [interquartile range {IQR}, .3-1.0] vs 3 [IQR, 1.0-5.0] days, P < .001) and median hospital stay (4 [IQR, 2-8] vs 8 [IQR, 5.5-20] days, P < .001) were significantly shorter in the EUS-GE group. Overall (2.7% vs 27.0%, P = .007) and severe (.0% vs 16.2%, P = .025) adverse events were identified more frequently in the L-GE group., Conclusions: For patients with GOO, EUS-GE and L-GE showed almost identical technical and clinical success. However, reduced time to oral intake, shorter median hospital stay, and lower rate of adverse events suggest that the EUS-guided approach might be preferable., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Almost all patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) develop duodenal adenomas, with a 4% to 18% risk of progression into duodenal cancer. Prophylactic endoscopic resection of duodenal adenomas may prevent cancer and is considered safer than surgical alternatives; however, data are limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess safety and effectiveness of endoscopic duodenal interventions in patients with FAP., Methods: We performed a historical cohort study including patients with FAP who underwent an endoscopic duodenal intervention between 2002 and 2018. Safety was defined as adverse event rate per intervention and effectiveness as duodenal surgery-free and duodenal cancer-free survival. Change in Spigelman stage was assessed as a secondary outcome., Results: In 68 endoscopy sessions, 139 duodenal polypectomies were performed in 49 patients (20 men; median age, 43). Twenty-nine patients (14 men; median age, 49) underwent a papillectomy. After polypectomy, 9 (13%) bleedings and 1 (2%) perforation occurred, all managed endoscopically. Six (21%) bleedings (endoscopically managed), 4 (14%) cases of pancreatitis, and 1 (3%) perforation (conservatively treated) occurred after papillectomy. Duodenal surgery-free survival was 74% at 89 months after polypectomy and 71% at 71 months after papillectomy; no duodenal cancers were observed. After a median of 18 months (interquartile range, 10-40; range, 3-121) after polypectomy, Spigelman stages were significantly lower (P < .01)., Conclusions: In our FAP patients, prophylactic duodenal polypectomies were relatively safe. Papillectomies showed substantial adverse events, suggesting its benefits and risk should be carefully weighted. Both were effective, however, because surgical interventions were limited and none developed duodenal cancer., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: The importance of having quality assessment, assurance, and improvement tools in health care is increasingly recognized. However, the additional associated administration burden progressively interferes with the structural implementation and adoption of such tools, especially when it concerns high-volume procedures such as colonoscopies. The development of the Dutch Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Audit (DGEA), a registry with automated extraction of colonoscopy quality data, and its first results are described., Methods: In close cooperation with commercial endoscopy reporting systems and a national histopathology database, healthcare professionals performing colonoscopies initiated a quality registry that extracts data from its core hospital resource or histology database without manual interference of the healthcare providers. Data extracted consisted of patient age, gender, indication of the colonoscopy, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Boston Bowel Preparation Score, and cecal intubation; for the colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test in the colorectal cancer screening program, other data were polyp detection rate, which was available for all 48 hospitals or endoscopy centers, and adenoma detection rate, which was available for 26 hospitals or endoscopy centers., Results: Between January 1, 2016 and March 31, 2019, 48 hospitals or endoscopy centers voluntarily participated in the DGEA, and 275,017 unique patients with 313,511 colonoscopies were registered. Overall missing values were limited to <1%., Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate that it is feasible to deploy a quality registry collecting uniform data without additional administration burden for healthcare professionals., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: High rates of technical and clinical success were reported for lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) placement for peripancreatic fluid collection (PFC) drainage. However, data on the adverse event (AE) rates are heterogeneous. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, severity, management, and risk factors of AEs related to the use of LAMSs for drainage of PFCs in a large cohort of patients., Methods: This is a multicenter, international, retrospective review from 15 centers of all patients who underwent placement of LAMSs for the management of PFCs. A nested case-control study was conducted in patients with (case) or without (control) AEs., Results: Three hundred thirty-three procedures in 328 patients were performed (5 patients treated with 2 LAMSs). Technical success was achieved in 321 patients (97.9%). Three hundred four patients were finally included in the study (7 excluded for lost to follow-up information; 10 excluded for deaths unrelated to LAMSs). The rate of clinical success was 89.5%. Seventy-nine LAMS-related AEs occurred in 74 of 304 patients (24.3%), after a mean time of 25.3 days (median, 18 days; interquartile range, 6-30) classified as 20 (25.3%) mild, 54 (68.4%) moderate, or 5 (6.3%) severe. On multivariable analysis compared with control subjects, cases were more likely to have walled-off necrosis (WON) versus pancreatic pseudocysts (odds ratio, 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-4.46; P = .028), whereas cases were less likely to have undergone tract (balloon) dilation (yes vs no; odds ratio, .47; 95% confidence interval, .22-.93; P = .034)., Conclusions: Data from this large international retrospective study confirm that the use of LAMSs for management of PFCs has excellent technical and good clinical success rates. The rate of AEs, however, is not negligible and should be carefully considered before using these stents for drainage of PFCs and in particular for WON. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03544008.)., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Numerous randomized studies have shown that changing certain features of colonoscopes, usually incorporated when switching from one endoscope generation to the next, mostly do not increase adenoma yield. There is, however, indirect evidence that it may be necessary to skip one instrument generation (ie, changing from one generation to the next but one) to achieve this effect., Methods: We compared the latest-generation colonoscopes from one company (Olympus Exera III, 190-C) with the next to last one (Olympus 160/5-C) in a prospective multicenter study randomized for the order of colonoscopes in a tandem fashion, involving 2 different examiners. Patients with increased risk for colorectal neoplasia undergoing colonoscopy (positive fecal occult blood test, personal/familial history of colorectal cancer/adenoma, rectal bleeding, recent change in bowel movements) were included. The primary outcome was the adenoma miss rate with the 190 (190-C) colonoscope in comparison with the 160/5 colonoscope (160/5-C)., Results: A total of 856 patients (48.8% male; mean age, 58.3 years) with a personal (41%) or family (38%) history of colorectal neoplasia, rectal bleeding (19%), and other indications were included. Of the 429 patients in the 190-C first group, 16.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0%-20.1%) had at least one adenoma missed during the first procedure, compared with 30.2% (95% CI, 25.9%-34.6%) in the group with 160/5-C first (P < .001). Similarly, the adenoma detection rate during the first colonoscopy was 43.8% versus 36.5% (P = .030) for 190-C versus 160/5-C, respectively., Conclusions: This randomized tandem trial showed lower adenoma miss rates and higher adenoma detection rates for the newer 190 colonoscopes compared with the 160/5 series. These results suggest that it takes multiple improvements, such as those implemented over 2 instrument generations, before an effect on adenoma (miss) rate can be observed. (Study registration number: ISRCTN 2010-A01256-33.)., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Large non-pedunculated rectal polyps are most commonly resected by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Despite pre-procedural diagnostics, unexpected rectal cancer is incidentally encountered within the resected specimen. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic assessment and procedural characteristics of lesions with and without unexpected submucosal invasion., Methods: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized trial (TREND study) was performed in which patients with a non-pedunculated rectal polyp of ≥3 cm without endoscopic suspicion of invasive growth were randomized between EMR and TEM., Results: Unexpected rectal cancer was detected in 13% (27/203) of patients; 15 after EMR and 12 after TEM. Most consisted of low-risk T1 cancers (78%, n = 18). There were no differences in the diagnostic assessment between lesions with and without unexpected submucosal invasion. Diagnostic biopsies revealed similar rates of high-grade dysplasia (28% [7/25] vs 18% [26/144]). When compared with EMR of adenomas, EMR procedures of unexpected cancers had a lower success rate of submucosal lifting (60% vs 93%, P < .001), were more often assessed as endoscopically incomplete (33% vs 10%, P = .01), and were more frequently terminated prematurely (60% vs 8%, P = .001)., Conclusions: Diagnostic assessment of large non-pedunculated rectal polyps revealed similar characteristics between unexpected cancers and adenomas. Unexpected cancers during EMR were non-lifting in 40%, endoscopically assessed as incomplete in 33%, and terminated prematurely in 60%. In treatment-naive patients, these factors should raise suspicion of malignancy and need discussion in a multidisciplinary team meeting for decision on further treatment strategies., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Traditionally large, complex colorectal polyps were managed by surgical resection (SR), and in recent years endoscopic resection (ER) has progressed significantly. However, to what extent ER has replaced SR remains largely unknown. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study to assess the volume and volume changes of SR for benign colorectal polyps over the past decade., Methods: Patients who underwent SR for a benign colorectal polyp in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2015 were selected from the prospective nationwide Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA database). Clinical characteristics were obtained from the charts of patients who underwent SR in the province of Noord-Holland., Results: A total of 5937 patients were treated with SR for a colorectal polyp and the absolute (454-739 per year) and relative volumes (0.20%-0.37% per colonoscopy per year) of SR remained stable. In the province of Noord-Holland, 928 patients (15.6%) underwent SR. In these patients, submucosal lifting and ER were attempted in 19.9% (n = 175) and 15.0% (n = 134). After 2010, patients were more likely to undergo lifting (27.7% vs 11.4%, P < .001) and ER attempts (18.8% vs 10.9%, P = .001) before definitive SR. Twenty-two patients (2.4%) had been referred to another endoscopy clinic., Conclusions: SR for large, complex colorectal polyps is still frequently performed and has remained stable. A small percentage of patients underwent ER attempts before SR, and referral for an additional ER attempt only occurred in a minority of cases. To increase ER attempts, implementation of a regional multidisciplinary referral network should be considered., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been rapidly gaining ground as a treatment for achalasia. Although POEM is a safe and effective treatment, a subset of patients has persistent or recurrent symptoms after POEM. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of different retreatments after failed POEM., Methods: POEM was performed on 441 patients with achalasia at 3 tertiary-care hospitals between 2010 and 2015. A review of prospectively collected data was conducted. All patients with achalasia with significant persistent or recurrent symptoms within 3 years after POEM, defined as an Eckardt symptom score >3, were included., Results: Forty-three of 441 patients (9.8%) had persistent or recurrent symptoms after POEM, of which 34 (8%) received 1 or more retreatments. Retreatment with laparoscopic Heller myotomy and retreatment with POEM showed a modest efficacy of 45% and 63%, respectively, whereas pneumatic dilatation showed a poor efficacy of only 0% to 20%, depending on the size of the balloon. Male patients were more likely to have retreatment failure than female patients (P = .038)., Conclusions: In patients with achalasia with persistent or recurrent symptoms after failed POEM, retreatment with laparoscopic Heller myotomy or retreatment with POEM has a higher efficacy than retreatment with pneumatic dilatations. Failure of retreatment occurred more often in male patients., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Diminutive (1-5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) polyps comprise 90% of detected lesions during colonoscopy and rarely contain advanced histology or colorectal cancer (CRC). Routine removal of these lesions results in a significant burden to colonoscopy programs. At the same time, the risk for progression of these polyps to CRC is unclear. We performed a systematic review to explore the natural history of diminutive and small colorectal polyps., Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies investigating the natural history of colorectal polyps. Studies were considered eligible when they assessed patients with 1- to 9-mm polyps that were not treated with polypectomy and that underwent follow-up. We excluded studies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, polyposis syndromes, and previously diagnosed CRC. We independently extracted study characteristics and evaluated CRC and advanced adenoma (size ≥ 10 mm, containing high-grade dysplasia or villous features) as outcome parameters., Results: Of 8775 retrieved studies, 9 studies with 721 patients were included that prospectively evaluated the evolution of 1- to 9-mm polyps. In 7 studies the average duration of observation was 2 to 3 years. There was only 1 study in which 1 small polyp might have progressed to cancer. Of 1034 adenomas sized 1 to 9 mm in those studies, 6% progressed to advanced adenomas over time., Conclusions: Based on this systematic review, it appears that some 1- to 9-mm adenomas progress to advanced adenomas within 2 to 3 years. No information on long-term CRC transition rates was found. Defining the biologic significance of these polyps is needed to balance between benefits and harm of polypectomy. (PROSPERO database registration number: CRD42016036577.)., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Currently, 3 guidelines are available for the management of pancreatic cysts. These guidelines vary in their indication for resection of high-risk cysts. We retrospectively compared the final pathologic outcome of surgically removed pancreatic cysts with the indications for resection according to 3 different guidelines., Methods: Patients who underwent pancreatic resection were extracted from our prospective pancreatic cyst database (2006-present). The final histopathologic diagnosis was compared with the initial indication for surgery stated by the guidelines of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP), European Study Group on Cystic tumors of the Pancreas and American Gastroenterological Association (AGA). We considered surgery in retrospect justified for malignancy, high-grade dysplasia, solid pseudopapillary neoplasms, neuroendocrine tumors or symptom improvement. Furthermore, we evaluated the patients with suspected intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) separately., Results: Overall, 115 patients underwent pancreatic resection. The preoperative diagnosis was correct in 83 of 115 patients (72%) and differentiation between benign and premalignant in 99 of 115 patients (86%). In retrospect, surgery was justified according to the aforementioned criteria in 52 of 115 patients (45%). For patients with suspected IPMN (n = 75) resection was justified in 36 of 67 (54%), 36 of 68 (53%), and 32 of 54 (59%) of patients who would have had surgery based on the IAP, European, or AGA guidelines, respectively. The AGA guideline would have avoided resection in 21 of 75 (28%) patients, versus 8 of 75 (11%) and 7 of 75 (9%) when the IAP or European guideline would have been applied strictly. Nevertheless, 4 of 33 patients (12%) with high-grade dysplasia or malignancy would have been missed with the AGA guidelines, compared with none with the IAP or European guidelines., Conclusion: Although fewer patients undergo unnecessary surgery based on the AGA guidelines, the risk of missing malignancy or high-grade dysplasia with this guideline seems considerably high., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: EUS-guided FNA or biopsy sampling is widely practiced. Optimal sonographic visualization of the needle is critical for image-guided interventions. Of the several commercially available needles, bench-top testing and direct comparison of these needles have not been done to reveal their inherent echogenicity. The aims are to provide bench-top data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development., Methods: Descriptive bench-top testing and comparison of 8 commonly used EUS-FNA needles (all size 22 gauge): SonoTip Pro Control (Medi-Globe); Expect Slimline (Boston Scientific); EchoTip, EchoTip Ultra, EchoTip ProCore High Definition (Cook Medical); ClearView (Conmed); EZ Shot 2 (Olympus); and BNX (Beacon Endoscopic), and 2 new prototype needles, SonoCoat (Medi-Globe), coated by echogenic polymers made by Encapson. Blinded evaluation of standardized and unedited videos by 43 EUS endoscopists and 17 radiologists specialized in GI US examination who were unfamiliar with EUS needle devices., Results: There was no significant difference in the ratings and rankings of these needles between endosonographers and radiologists. Overall, 1 prototype needle was rated as the best, ranking 10% to 40% higher than all other needles (P < .01). Among the commercially available needles, the EchoTip Ultra needle and the ClearView needle were top choices. The EZ Shot 2 needle was ranked statistically lower than other needles (30%-75% worse, P < .001)., Conclusions: All FNA needles have their inherent and different echogenicities, and these differences are similarly recognized by EUS endoscopists and radiologists. Needles with polymeric coating from the entire shaft to the needle tip may offer better echogenicity., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the most important surrogate quality parameter for colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. However, serrated polyps also are precursors of CRC. Large, prospective studies comparing the detection rate of serrated polyps among endoscopists in an era of awareness about the malignant potential of serrated polyps have not yet been performed. We aimed to compare the proximal serrated polyp (PSP) detection rate and the clinically relevant serrated polyp (RSP) detection rate among endoscopists and to analyze the association between these parameters and the ADR., Methods: Colonoscopy data were retrieved in one expert center between January 2011 and July 2014 by using a structured reporting system, enabling prospective and automatic quality assessment. Endoscopists who performed at least 50 colonoscopies within the timeframe were included for analysis. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare the ADR, PSP detection rate, and RSP detection rate among endoscopists. The association among these parameters was calculated by using the Pearson r correlation coefficient. All lesions were assessed by an expert pathologist., Results: In total, 16 endoscopists and 2088 colonoscopies were included for analysis. The PSP detection rate ranged from 2.9% to 18.6% (mean 10.4%) among endoscopists. Corrected for confounders, the odds ratio to detect ≥1 PSP, compared with endoscopists with the highest detection rate, ranged from 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.52) to 0.12 (95% CI, 0.03-0.55). The PSP detection rate was highly correlated with the RSP detection rate (ρ 0.94; P < .001), ranging from 4.3% to 20.9% (mean 13.9%). The PSP detection rate moderately correlated with the ADR (0.55; P = .03), which ranged from 23.2% to 49.2% (mean 35.2%)., Conclusions: The PSP detection rate is widely variable among endoscopists, strongly correlated with the RSP detection rate, and moderately correlated with the ADR. These results suggest a high miss rate of RSPs among endoscopists with low rates of PSP detection. Future research should determine the association between endoscopists' PSP detection rates and the risk of interval cancer., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical repair of endoscopic perforations of the GI tract used to be the standard, but immediate, secure endoscopic closure has become an attractive alternative treatment with the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality., Objective: We aimed to perform a systematic review of the medical literature on endoscopic closure of acute iatrogenic perforations of the GI tract., Design: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines., Setting: Available medical literature from 1966 through November 2013., Patients: Patients with an acute perforation after an endoscopic procedure that was closed endoscopically., Interventions: Endoscopic closure of an acute perforation of the GI tract., Main Outcome Measurements: Clinically successful endoscopic closure., Results: In our search, we identified 726 studies, 702 of which had to be excluded. Twenty-four cohort studies (21 retrospective, 3 prospective) were included in the analysis. No randomized trials were identified. Overall, the methodological quality was low. The 24 studies included described 466 acute perforations in which endoscopic closure was attempted. Successful endoscopic closure was achieved in 419 cases (89.9%; 95% CI, 87%-93%). Successful closure was achieved in 90.2% (n = 359; 95% CI, 87%-93%) of cases by using endoclips, in 87.8% (n = 58; 95% CI, 78%-95%) by using the over-the-scope-clip, and in 100% (n = 2) by using a metal stent., Limitations: Low methodological quality of included studies., Conclusion: This systematic review suggests that endoscopic perforation closure is a safe and effective alternative for surgical intervention in selected cases; however, the overall methodological quality was low. Prospective, true consecutive studies are needed to define the definitive role of endoscopic closure of perforations., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is considered the most important quality indicator for colonoscopy and varies widely among colonoscopists. It is unknown whether the ADR of gastroenterology consultants can already be predicted during their colonoscopy training., Objective: To evaluate the ADR of fellows in gastroenterology and evaluate whether this predicts their ADR as gastroenterology consultants., Design: Retrospective observational study., Setting: Academic and regional centers., Patients: Symptomatic patients undergoing colonoscopy., Main Outcome Measurements: The variance in ADR among 7 gastroenterology fellows during their training (between May 2004 and March 2012) and of the same fellows after they registered as consultants (between October 2011 and April 2014) was evaluated. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to compare the highest detector (endoscopist with highest ADR) with the individual fellows and to evaluate whether an ADR of 20% or higher during the training was predictive of a high ADR as a consultant., Results: During training, ADRs ranged from 14% to 36% (P < .001). Compared with the highest detector, the OR for detecting an adenoma ranged from 0.64 (95% CI, 0.40-1.03) to 0.29 (95% CI, 0.17-0.48). After registration, ADR ranged from 19.8% to 40.2% (P = .066). Compared with the highest detector during consultancy, the OR ranged from 0.64 (95% CI, 0.34-1.21) to 0.26 (95% CI, 0.13-0.52). Only 2 fellows significantly improved their ADR after completing their training. An ADR lower than 20% during training was associated with a lower ADR as a consultant (OR 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.87)., Limitations: Retrospective study., Conclusions: Variance in ADR is already present during the endoscopy training of gastroenterology fellows. Most fellows do not improve their ADR after completing their training. These findings suggest that the ADR can be predicted during colonoscopy training, and we suggest that feedback and benchmarking should be implemented early during training of fellows in an effort to improve ADR in future daily practice as a consultant., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Detection of hepatic metastases during EUS is an important component of tumor staging., Objective: To describe our experience with EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of solid hepatic masses and derive and validate criteria to help distinguish between benign and malignant hepatic masses., Design: Retrospective study, survey., Setting: Single, tertiary-care referral center., Patients: Medical records were reviewed for all patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses over a 12-year period., Interventions: EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses., Main Outcome Measurements: Masses were deemed benign or malignant according to predetermined criteria. EUS images from 200 patients were used to create derivation and validation cohorts of 100 cases each, matched by cytopathologic diagnosis. Ten expert endosonographers blindly rated 15 initial endosonographic features of each of the 100 images in the derivation cohort. These data were used to derive an EUS scoring system that was then validated by using the validation cohort by the expert endosonographer with the highest diagnostic accuracy., Results: A total of 332 patients underwent EUS-FNA of a hepatic mass. Interobserver agreement regarding the initial endosonographic features among the expert endosonographers was fair to moderate, with a mean diagnostic accuracy of 73% (standard deviation 5.6). A scoring system incorporating 7 EUS features was developed to distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses by using the derivation cohort with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.92; when applied to the validation cohort, performance was similar (AUC 0.86). The combined positive predictive value of both cohorts was 88%., Limitations: Single center, retrospective, only one expert endosonographer deriving and validating the EUS criteria., Conclusion: An EUS scoring system was developed that helps distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses. Further study is required to determine the impact of these EUS criteria among endosonographers of all experience., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is characterized by the presence of multiple serrated polyps spread throughout the colon. Patients with SPS are considered to be at risk of colorectal cancer and are advised to undergo endoscopic surveillance. Narrow-band imaging (NBI) may improve the detection of polyps during these surveillance colonoscopies., Objective: To compare polyp miss rates between NBI and high-resolution white-light endoscopy (HR-WLE)., Design: Multicenter, randomized, crossover study., Setting: Four tertiary referral institutions., Patients: A total of 52 patients with SPS undergoing surveillance colonoscopy., Intervention: All patients underwent back-to-back colonoscopies with HR-WLE and NBI in a randomized order., Main Outcome Measurements: Polyp miss rates of HR-WLE and NBI., Results: In the HR-WLE group, 116 polyps were detected during the first inspection. A second inspection with NBI added 47 polyps, resulting in an overall polyp miss rate of 29% with HR-WLE (95% confidence interval, 22-36). In the NBI group, a total of 128 polyps were detected during the first inspection. Subsequent inspection with HR-WLE added 32 polyps, resulting in an overall polyp miss rate of NBI of 20% (95% confidence interval, 15-27). Comparison of the overall polyp miss rates of HR-WLE and NBI showed no significant difference (P = .065)., Limitations: Small sample size; second inspection was performed by the same endoscopist., Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that NBI does not reduce polyp miss rates in patients with SPS compared with HR-WLE. Further multinational studies with larger numbers of patients are warranted to verify these results. (, Clinical Trial Registration Number: NTR2497.)., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative rescue method in patients with failed ERCP. Opportunities for teaching and training are limited because of a low case volume at most centers., Objective: To evaluate a stereolithography/3-dimensional (3D) printing bile duct prototype for teaching and training in EUS-BD., Design: Prospective observational feasibility study., Setting: Tertiary referral center., Subjects: Twenty endosonographers attending an interventional EUS workshop., Intervention: A prototype of a dilated biliary system was prepared by computer-aided design and 3D printing. The study participants performed guidewire manipulation and EUS-BD procedures (antegrade procedure and/or choledochoduodenostomy) on the prototype. Participants were scored with the device on a scale of 1 to 5 via a questionnaire. Participants' success rate for various steps of the EUS-BD procedure was noted., Main Outcome Measurements: Subjective and objective evaluation of the prototype regarding its overall applicability, quality of radiographic and EUS images, and 4 steps of EUS-BD procedure (needle puncture, guidewire manipulation, tract dilation, stent placement)., Results: Fifteen participants returned the questionnaire, and 10 completed all 4 steps of EUS-BD. The median score for overall utility was 4, whereas that for EUS and US views was 5. Participants with experience in performing more than 20 EUS-BD procedures scored the prototype significantly lower for stent placement (P = .013) and equivalent for needle puncture, tract dilation, and wire manipulation. The success rate of various steps was 100% for needle puncture and tract dilation, 82.35% for wire manipulation, and 80% for stent placement. The mean overall procedure time was 18 minutes., Limitations: Small number of participants., Conclusion: The 3D printing bile duct prototype appears suitable for teaching of and training in the various steps of EUS-BD. Further studies are required to elucidate its role., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endoscopic volume reduction of the stomach may provide a minimally invasive alternative for surgical procedures in the treatment of obesity., Objective: To assess safety and preliminary effectiveness in the first human application of a novel endoscopic stapling technique., Design: Prospective, observational, phase 1 study., Setting: Two university hospitals in The Netherlands., Patients: Patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 40 to 45 kg/m(2) or 30 to 39.9 kg/m(2) with obesity-related comorbidity., Interventions: Gastric volume reduction with an endoscopic stapler., Main Outcome Measurements: Primary outcome measure was the prevalence of serious or mild adverse events. Reduction of excess body weight after 12 months was assessed as a secondary outcome measure for effectiveness of the procedure., Results: Seventeen patients with a median BMI of 40.2 kg/m(2) (interquartile range [IQR] 37.6-42.8) underwent an endoscopic stapling procedure. Median procedure time was 123 minutes (IQR 95-129). No serious adverse events occurred. Adverse events were gastric pain (n = 7, range 1-3 days), sore throat (n = 4, 2-3 days), diarrhea (n = 4, 2-15 days), nausea (n = 3, 2-4 days), constipation (n = 4, 3-14 days), and vomiting (n = 3, 1-4 days). All adverse events were mild and resolved with conservative treatment within 15 days after surgery. The median percentage excess weight loss in the first year was 34.9% (IQR 17.8-46.6)., Limitations: Limited number of patients., Conclusion: This first human application of this endoscopic stapler demonstrates that the procedure is technically feasible and safe. One hundred sixty plications were created in 17 patients without significant problems. Weight loss after 1 year is promising, but long-term follow-up and randomized, controlled studies should evaluate whether this procedure is an effective and durable minimally invasive endoscopic treatment for obesity. (, Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT01429194.)., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are the leading MEN1-related cause of death., Objective: To evaluate EUS and (11)C-5-hydroxytryptophan positron emission tomography ((11)C-5-HTP PET), compared with the recommended screening techniques in MEN1 patients for early detection of pNETs., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: Tertiary-care university medical center., Patients: This study involved 41 patients with a proven MEN1 mutation or with one MEN1 manifestation and a mutation carrier as a first-degree family member, with recent screening by abdominal CT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS)., Interventions: EUS by using a linear Pentax echoendoscope and Hitachi EUB-525 and (11)C-5-HTP PET., Main Outcome Measurements: Patient-based and lesion-based positivity for pNET was calculated for all imaging techniques. The McNemar test was used to compare the yield of the 4 imaging techniques., Results: In 35 of 41 patients, 107 pancreatic lesions were detected in total. EUS detected 101 pancreatic lesions in 34 patients, (11)C-5-HTP PET detected 35 lesions in 19 patients, and CT/MRI + SRS detected 32 lesions in 18 patients (P < .001). (11)C-5-HTP PET performed similarly to CT/MRI + SRS and better compared with SRS only (13 lesions in 12 patients), both at a patient-based and lesion-based level (P < .05)., Limitations: Single-center study., Conclusion: EUS is superior to CT/MRI + SRS for pancreatic lesion detection in patients with MEN1. In this setting, (11)C-5-HTP PET is not useful. We recommend EUS as the first-choice pancreas imaging technique in patients with MEN1. (, Clinical Trial Registration Number: NTR1668.)., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement., Objective: To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting., Design: A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011., Setting: Multicenter review., Patients: All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement., Intervention: Colorectal stent placement., Main Outcome Measurements: The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab., Results: A total of 4086 patients underwent colorectal stent placement; perforation occurred in 207. Meta-analysis revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4%. Of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type had a higher perforation rate (>10%). A lower perforation rate (<5%) was found for the Hanarostent and the Niti-S covered stent. Stenting benign strictures was associated with a significantly increased perforation rate of 18.4% compared with 7.5% for malignant strictures. Dilation did not increase the risk of perforation: 8.5% versus 8.5% without dilation. The subgroup of post-stent placement dilation had a significantly increased perforation risk of 20.4%. With a perforation rate of 12.5%, bevacizumab-based therapy was identified as a risk factor for perforation, whereas the risk for chemotherapy without bevacizumab was 7.0% and not increased compared with the group without concomitant therapies during stent therapy (9.0%)., Limitations: Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis., Conclusions: The perforation rate of colonic stenting is 7.4%. Stent design, benign etiology, and bevacizumab were identified as risk factors for perforation. Intraprocedural stricture dilation and concomitant chemotherapy were not associated with an increased risk of perforation., (Copyright © 2014 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pneumatic dilation and laparoscopic Heller myotomy improve parameters of esophageal function such as lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, esophageal emptying, and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) distensibility., Objective: To evaluate the effect of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) on esophagogastric function., Design: Prospective trial., Setting: Endoscopy department at a university hospital., Patients: All consecutive patients aged >17 years with achalasia and an Eckardt score of ≥3., Intervention: Before and 3 months after POEM, 10 consecutive patients underwent esophageal manometry, timed barium esophagograms, and EndoFLIP as well as an EGD., Main Outcome Measurements: Eckardt symptom score, LES resting pressure, centimeters of barium stasis, EGJ distensibility, and reflux esophagitis., Results: Compared with scores before POEM, patient symptom scores were significantly reduced (1, interquartile range [IQR 0-1] vs 8 [IQR 4-8]; P = .005). LES pressure decreased significantly (6.0 mm Hg [IQR 2.6-7.4] vs 19.0 mm Hg [IQR 13.0-28.0]; P = .008). Esophageal emptying increased significantly, and a 5-minute barium column measured 2.3 cm (IQR 0-3.2 cm) versus 10.1 cm (IQR 5.7-10.8 cm; P = .005). EGJ distensibility increased significantly (6.7 mm(2)/mm Hg [IQR 3.8-16.6] vs 1.0 mm(2)/mm Hg [IQR 0.4-2.3]; P = .02) at 50 mL. In 6 of 10 patients, reflux esophagitis was seen. Of these patients, 3 reported reflux symptoms., Limitations: Small number of patients, short-term follow-up., Conclusion: POEM improves esophagogastric function and suggests favorable long-term results based on Eckardt score, esophageal manometry, esophageal emptying, and EGJ distensibility. Long-term follow-up of larger series will determine whether the high rate of reflux esophagitis affects the clinical application of POEM., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSAs/Ps) are premalignant lesions susceptible to being easily overlooked by endoscopists. A detailed description of the endoscopic appearance of SSAs/Ps might help endoscopists to recognize these lesions to improve the effectiveness of colonoscopy., Objective: To identify various endoscopic features of SSAs/Ps using high-resolution white-light endoscopy (HR-WLE) and narrow-band imaging (NBI)., Design: Retrospective image evaluation study., Setting: Single tertiary referral center., Patients: Forty-5 patients with serrated polyposis syndrome undergoing surveillance colonoscopies., Intervention: HR-WLE and NBI images of 150 polyps (50 SSAs/Ps, 50 hyperplastic polyps [HPs], and 50 adenomas) were systematically assessed by 5 experts using various endoscopic descriptors., Main Outcome Measurements: The prevalence of specific endoscopic features observed in SSAs/Ps versus HPs., Results: Multivariate analysis demonstrated that indistinct borders (OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.57-6.15) and a cloud-like surface (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.21-5.78) were associated with SSA/P histology on HR-WLE. On NBI, a cloud-like surface (OR, 4.91; 95% CI, 2.42-9.97), indistinct borders (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.14-4.96), irregular shape (OR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.59-6.29), and dark spots inside the crypts (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.02-4.11) were found to be endoscopic predictors of SSA/P histology. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NBI for differentiating serrated polyps containing either none or all 4 endoscopic SSA/P features were, respectively, 89%, 96%, and 93%., Limitations: Retrospective, image evaluation analysis., Conclusions: The current study demonstrates that SSAs/Ps possess several specific endoscopic features compared with HPs. Recognition of these characteristics might assist endoscopists in the differentiation of these lesions and could possibly facilitate endoscopic detection of these rather subtle lesions., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Insufficient detection of proximal serrated polyps (PSP) might explain the occurrence of a proportion of interval carcinomas in colonoscopy surveillance programs., Objective: To compare PSP detection among endoscopists and to identify patient-related and endoscopist-related factors associated with PSP detection., Design: Prospective study in unselected patients., Setting: Colonoscopy screening program for colorectal cancer at two academic medical centers., Patients: Asymptomatic consecutive screening participants (aged 50-75 years)., Intervention: Colonoscopies were performed by 5 experienced endoscopists. All detected polyps were removed. Multiple colonoscopy quality indicators were prospectively recorded., Main Outcome Measurements: We compared PSP detection among endoscopists by calculating odds ratios (OR) with logistic regression analysis. Logistic regression also was used to identify patient features and colonoscopy factors associated with PSP detection., Results: A total of 1354 patients underwent a complete screening colonoscopy: 1635 polyps were detected, of which 707 (43%) were adenomas and 685 (42%) were serrated polyps, including 215 PSPs. In 167 patients (12%) 1 or more PSPs were detected. The PSP detection rate differed significantly among endoscopists, ranging from 6% to 22% (P < .001). Longer withdrawal time (OR 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.16) was significantly associated with better PSP detection, whereas patient age, sex, and quality of bowel preparation were not., Limitations: Limited number of highly experienced endoscopists., Conclusion: The PSP detection rate differs among endoscopists. Longer withdrawal times are associated with better PSP detection, but patient features are not. (, Clinical Trial Registration Number: NTR1888.)., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Spigelman classification stratifies cancer risk in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients with duodenal adenomatosis. High-resolution endoscopy (HRE) and narrow-band imaging (NBI) may identify lesions at high risk., Objective: To compare HRE and NBI for the detection of duodenal and gastric polyps and to characterize duodenal adenomas harboring advanced histology with HRE and NBI., Design: Prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study. Retrospective image evaluation study., Setting: Tertiary-care center., Patients: Thirty-seven FAP patients undergoing surveillance upper endoscopies., Intervention: HRE endoscopy was followed by NBI. The number of gastric polyps and Spigelman staging were compared. Duodenal polyp images were systematically reviewed in a learning and validation phase., Main Outcome Measurements: Number of gastric and duodenal polyps detected by HRE and NBI and prevalence of specific endoscopic features in duodenal adenomas with advanced histology., Results: NBI did not identify additional gastric polyps but detected more duodenal adenomas in 16 examinations, resulting in upgrades of the Spigelman stage in 2 cases (4.4%). Pictures of 168 duodenal adenomas (44% advanced histology) were assessed. In the learning phase, 3 endoscopic features were associated with advanced histology: white color, enlarged villi, and size ≥1 cm. Only size ≥1 cm was confirmed in the validation phase (odds ratio 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-7.4)., Limitations: Nonrandomized study, scant number of high-grade dysplasia adenomas., Conclusion: Inspection with NBI did not lead to a clinically relevant upgrade in the Spigelman classification and did not improve the detection of gastric polyps in comparison with HRE. The only endoscopic feature that predicted advanced histology of a duodenal adenoma was size ≥1 cm., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Temporary placement of self-expandable stents has been increasingly used for the management of benign esophageal diseases., Objective: To evaluate the safety of endoscopic removal of esophageal self-expandable stents placed for the treatment of benign esophageal diseases., Design: Multicenter retrospective study., Setting: Six tertiary care centers in the United States and Europe., Patients: A total of 214 patients with benign esophageal diseases undergoing endoscopic stent removal., Intervention: Endoscopic stent removal., Main Outcome Measurements: Endoscopic techniques for stent removal, time to stent removal, and adverse events related to stent removal., Results: A total of 214 patients underwent a total of 329 stent extractions. Stents were mainly placed for refractory strictures (49.2%) and fistulae (49.8%). Of the removed stents, 52% were fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs), 28.6% were partially covered self-expandable metal stents (PCSEMSs), and 19.5% were self-expandable plastic stents. A total of 35 (10.6%) procedure-related adverse events were reported, including 7 (2.1%) major adverse events. Multivariate analysis revealed that use of PCSEMSs (P < .001) was a risk factor for adverse events during stent removal. Favorable factors for successful stent removal were FCSEMSs (P ≤ .012) and stent migration (P = .010). No significant associations were found for stent indwelling time (P = .145) and stent embedding (P = .194)., Limitations: Retrospective analysis, only tertiary care centers., Conclusions: With an acceptable major adverse event rate of 2.1%, esophageal stent removal in the setting of benign disease was found to be a safe and feasible procedure. FCSEMSs were more successfully removed than self-expandable plastic stents and PCSEMSs. Adverse events caused by stent removal were not time dependent., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For the palliative treatment of dysphagia, esophageal stent placement provides immediate improvement, whereas brachytherapy offers better long-term relief., Objective: To evaluate safety and efficacy of concurrent brachytherapy and biodegradable stent placement., Design: Prospective, single-arm study., Setting: Two tertiary-care referral centers., Patients: Nineteen consecutive patients with significant dysphagia resulting from unresectable esophageal cancer, with a life expectancy of more than 3 months., Intervention: Single-dose brachytherapy (12 Gy) on day 1 followed by biodegradable stent placement on day 2., Main Outcome Measurements: Intervention-related major complications (determined by an expert panel) and dysphagia., Results: Nineteen patients (13 men, median age 66 years [interquartile range (IQR) 59-71] years) were included; 7 patients (37%) also received palliative chemotherapy. After inclusion of 19 patients, the study was ended prematurely because the safety threshold was exceeded. In total, 28 major complications occurred in 17 patients (89%). In 9 patients (47%), major complications were determined intervention-related (severe retrosternal pain with or without vomiting [n = 6], hematemesis [n = 1], recurrent dysphagia [n = 2]. Dysphagia scores decreased significantly from a median of 3 (IQR 3-4) to a median of 1 (IQR 0-3) after 1 month (P < .001). Despite adequate luminal patency in 17 patients (89%), normal diet could not be tolerated in 7 patients (37%) because of retrosternal pain and vomiting., Limitations: Lack of routine endoscopy or contrast esophagram to evaluate recurrent dysphagia during follow-up., Conclusion: Despite restoration of luminal patency, a combined treatment of brachytherapy and biodegradable stent placement cannot be recommended for the palliative treatment of esophageal cancer because of an unacceptably high intervention-related major complication rate., (Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The endoscope-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (eCLE) system allows in vivo imaging of colorectal epithelium. Little is known about the learning curve for accurate interpretation of confocal images acquired with eCLE., Objective: To determine the learning curve of eCLE, its diagnostic accuracy, and the intra- and interobserver agreement for the differentiation of colorectal lesions., Design: Post hoc assessment of selected eCLE images., Setting: Academic centers., Patients: This study involved colonoscopic images from 47 patients., Main Outcome Measurements: Learning curve of eCLE, accuracy, and intraobserver and interobserver agreement., Methods: Three endoscopists received a short introduction to eCLE before evaluating 90 images. Observers assessed all eCLE images by using the Mainz classification. After each set of 30 images, the accuracy of each observer was assessed. The same procedure was repeated 6 months later by using the same set of images., Limitations: Post hoc assessment., Results: There were no significant changes between the first set of 30 images and the 2 consecutive sets (P = .08 and P = .180, respectively). The overall accuracy was 85.6%, 95.6%, and 92.2% for each observer. The κ values of the intraobserver agreement were 0.68, 0.84, and 0.77 for each observer. The κ value for interobserver agreement was 0.73 during the first and 0.72 during the second assessment., Conclusions: Accurate post hoc interpretation of eCLE confocal images can be learned quickly. High diagnostic accuracy was achieved by all 3 observers during the initial stage of the assessment, which remained high thereafter. Intra- and interobserver agreement was substantial for all 3 observers. Future studies should focus on the real-time assessment of eCLE images., (Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Residual neoplasia after EMR of colorectal lesions is common. There is a critical need for imaging methods to accurately diagnose residual disease and to guide retreatment in real time., Objective: The aim was to estimate and compare the accuracy of virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) and probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) for detection of residual neoplastic tissue at the site of prior EMR., Design: Prospective, blind, pilot comparison of advanced endoscopic imaging (VCE and pCLE) by using matching histology as reference standard., Setting: Three tertiary-care referral hospitals., Patients: This study involved 92 participants who underwent follow-up colonoscopies for the evaluation of prior EMR sites within 1 year., Intervention: The EMR scars were assessed during follow-up high-resolution colonoscopy by using VCE (narrow-band imaging/Fujinon Intelligent Color Enhancement [FICE]), and pCLE. Confocal videos of EMR scars were interpreted in real time and were also stored and reviewed offline, blinded to histopathology and endoscopic appearance. Tissue confirmation by biopsies or polypectomy/repeat EMR was performed in all cases., Main Outcome Measurements: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for VCE and pCLE alone and in combination against histopathology as the standard reference standard., Results: Among 129 EMR scars, residual neoplasia was confirmed by histology in 29 sites (22%). For VCE, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were 72%, 77%, 49%, 91%, and 77%, respectively, and were 97%, 77%, 55%, 99%, and 81% for pCLE (P = .045 for sensitivity). When only EMR scars for which VCE and pCLE agreed on the diagnosis were analyzed (95/129 scars), the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of pCLE and VCE were 90%, 100%, 87%, 67%, and 100%, respectively., Limitations: Small sample size, lack of power, involvement of highly experienced pCLE experts., Conclusion: Confocal endomicroscopy significantly increases the sensitivity for detecting residual neoplasia after colorectal EMR compared with endoscopy alone. When confocal endomicroscopy is used in combination with VCE, the accuracy is extremely high, and sensitivity approaches that of histopathology. Together, they may reduce the need for histologic examination and allow a highly accurate on-table decision to treat again or not, thus avoiding unnecessary repeat procedures. (, Clinical Trial Registration Number: 00874263.)., (Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) is commonly performed with oblique-viewing echoendoscopes. However, accessing the PFC under an oblique angle can make drainage difficult. These difficulties might be overcome by using a forward-viewing echoendoscope., Objective: To compare endoscopic PFC drainage with an oblique-viewing versus a forward-viewing echoendoscope with emphasis on ease of endoscopic drainage., Design: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial., Setting: Four tertiary-care referral centers., Patients: This study involved 58 patients with PFCs., Intervention: Patients with PFCs (≥ 6 cm) in whom drainage was indicated were randomized to receive EUS-guided drainage with a forward-viewing echoendoscope or an oblique-viewing echoendoscope. In cases of failed drainage, patients were crossed over to the other study arm., Main Outcome Measurements: Ease of EUS-guided drainage measured by procedure time. Secondary endpoints included technical success, EUS endoscope preference, clinical success, and adverse events., Results: Fifty-eight consecutive patients underwent randomization, of whom 52 were available for primary endpoint analysis. All 26 EUS-guided procedures done with the oblique-viewing echoendoscope and 24 of the 26 procedures done with the forward-viewing echoendoscope were technically successful. Mean (± standard deviation) procedure time was 24:55 ± 9:58 minutes in the forward-viewing echoendoscope group and 27:04 ± 9:58 minutes in the oblique-viewing echoendoscope group (P = .44). Median overall procedure ease was graded as equal (easy) in both groups. Drainage-related adverse events occurred in 2 patients (8%) in the forward-viewing echoendoscope group versus none in the oblique-viewing echoendoscope group (P = .56). Overall clinical success was achieved in 82% of patients (95% confidence interval, 69%-91%)., Limitations: Derived main outcome parameter and highly specialized endoscopists in tertiary-care referral centers., Conclusion: This multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing the performance of oblique-viewing echoendoscopes and forward-viewing echoendoscopes in draining PFCs did not show a difference in ease of EUS-guided drainage or procedure safety and efficacy between the forward-viewing echoendoscope and the oblique-viewing echoendoscope. Clinical success was achieved in 82% of patients., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) represents a noninvasive technology that allows visualization of the colon without requiring sedation and air insufflation. A second-generation colon capsule endoscopy system (PillCam Colon 2) (CCE-2) was developed to increase sensitivity for colorectal polyp detection compared with the first-generation system., Objective: To assess the feasibility, accuracy, and safety of CCE-2 in a head-to-head comparison with colonoscopy., Design and Setting: Prospective, multicenter trial including 8 European sites., Patients: This study involved 117 patients (mean age 60 years). Data from 109 patients were analyzed., Intervention: CCE-2 was prospectively compared with conventional colonoscopy as the criterion standard for the detection of colorectal polyps that are ≥6 mm or masses in a cohort of patients at average or increased risk of colorectal neoplasia. Colonoscopy was independently performed within 10 hours after capsule ingestion or on the next day., Main Outcome Measurements: CCE-2 sensitivity and specificity for detecting patients with polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm were assessed. Capsule-positive but colonoscopy-negative cases were counted as false positive. Capsule excretion rate, level of bowel preparation, and rate of adverse events also were assessed., Results: Per-patient CCE-2 sensitivity for polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm was 84% and 88%, with specificities of 64% and 95%, respectively. All 3 invasive carcinomas were detected by CCE-2. The capsule excretion rate was 88% within 10 hours. Overall colon cleanliness for CCE-2 was adequate in 81% of patients., Limitations: Not unblinding the CCE-2 results at colonoscopy; heterogenous patient population; nonconsecutive patients., Conclusion: In this European, multicenter study, CCE-2 appeared to have a high sensitivity for the detection of clinically relevant polypoid lesions, and it might be considered an adequate tool for colorectal imaging., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective for eradicating Barrett's esophagus (BE) and BE-associated early neoplasia. Most RFA studies have limited the baseline length of BE (<10 cm), and therefore little is known about RFA for longer BE., Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of RFA with or without prior endoscopic resection (ER) for BE ≥ 10 cm containing neoplasia., Design: Prospective trial., Setting: Two tertiary-care centers., Patients: This study involved consecutive patients with BE ≥ 10 cm with early neoplasia., Intervention: Focal ER for visible abnormalities, followed by a maximum of 2 circumferential and 3 focal RFA procedures every 2 to 3 months until complete remission., Main Outcome Measurements: Complete remission, defined as endoscopic resolution of BE and no intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) or neoplasia (CR-neoplasia) in biopsy specimens., Results: Of the 26 patients included, 18 underwent ER for visible abnormalities before RFA. The ER specimens showed early cancer in 11, high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) in 6, and low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) in 1. The worst residual histology, before RFA and after any ER, was HGIN in 16 patients and LGIN in 10 patients. CR-neoplasia and CR-IM were achieved in 83% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%-95%) and 79% (95% CI, 58%-93%), respectively. None of the patients had fatal or severe complications and 15% (95% CI, 4%-35%) had moderate complications. During a mean (± standard deviation) follow-up of 29 (± 9.1) months, no neoplasia recurred., Limitations: Tertiary-care center, short follow-up., Conclusion: ER for visible abnormalities, followed by RFA of residual BE is a safe and effective treatment for BE ≥ 10 cm containing neoplasia, with a low chance of recurrence of neoplasia or BE during follow-up., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: EUS is often used for locoregional staging of early esophageal neoplasia. However, its value compared with that of endoscopic examination and diagnostic endoscopic resection (ER) may be questioned because diagnostic ER allows histological assessment of submucosal invasion and other risk factors for lymph node metastasis, eg, poor differentiation/lymphovascular invasion., Objective: To evaluate how often patients were excluded from endoscopic treatment of esophageal neoplasia based on EUS findings., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Tertiary care institution., Patients: Patients with early esophageal neoplasia., Interventions: EUS, diagnostic ER., Main Outcome Measurements: Number of patients excluded from endoscopic treatment based on EUS results., Results: A total of 131 patients were included (98 men, 33 women; age 66 ± 13 years). In 105 of 131 patients (80%), EUS findings were unremarkable. In 25 of 105 patients (24%), diagnostic ER showed submucosal invasion (n = 17), deep resection margins positive for cancer (n = 2, confirmed at surgery), or poor differentiation/lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). In 26 of 131 patients (20%), EUS findings raised the suspicion of submucosal invasion and/or lymph node metastasis. In the 14 of 26 patients (54%) with abnormal EUS findings, endoscopy results were unremarkable. Diagnostic ER showed submucosal invasion in 7 of 14 (50%) patients, whereas no lymph node metastasis risk factors were found in 7 of 14 patients (50%), who subsequently underwent curative endoscopic treatment. In 12 of 26 patients (46%) with abnormal EUS, endoscopy also raised doubts on whether curative endoscopic treatment could be achieved. After diagnostic ER, no risk factors for lymph node metastasis were found in 3 of 12 patients (25%)., Limitation: Retrospective study., Conclusions: This study shows that EUS has virtually no clinical impact on the workup of early esophageal neoplasia and strengthens the role of diagnostic ER as a final diagnostic step., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)