Search

Background and Aims: Gastrointestinal manifestations in patients with COVID-19 are common but the role of endoscopy in this patient population remains unclear. We investigated the need for endoscopic procedures, their findings, and impact on patient care in a systematic and geographically diverse sample of patients hospitalized with COVID-19.Methods: As part of the North American Alliance for the Study of Digestive Manifestations of COVID-19, we identified consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at 36 medical centers in the USA and Canada. We performed a secondary analysis of patients who underwent endoscopy, collecting information on endoscopic indications, findings, interventions, staffing, procedure location, anesthesia utilization, and adverse events.Results: Data were collected on 1992 patients; 24 (1.2%) underwent 27 endoscopic procedures (18 upper endoscopies, 7 colonoscopies, 2 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies). The most common indications were: gastrointestinal bleeding (13) and enteral access (6). The most common findings were erosive or inflammatory changes. Ten patients underwent an endoscopic intervention for hemostatic therapy (2), enteral access (6), or biliary obstruction (2). Half of cases employed anesthesiology support; no sedation-related adverse events were reported. One-third of cases were performed in the intensive care setting and one quarter in the endoscopy unit.Conclusions: In this large, systematic, geographically diverse cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in North America, very few patients underwent endoscopy despite a high prevalence of gastrointestinal manifestations. Almost all endoscopic findings and interventions were thought related to critical illness rather than direct viral injury. This systematic assessment of endoscopic necessity and outcomes may help guide resource allocation in the event of ongoing and future surges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: Double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) allows both diagnosis and therapeutic maneuvers in the small bowel. Its use was pioneered in Europe and Asia but there remains a relative paucity of literature from North America. Our aim in this study was to determine diagnostic and therapeutic yield in a North American setting. Methods: A five-year retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing DBE at a single tertiary care North American hospital was performed. Results: Four-hundred fifty-seven procedures, 265 anterograde and 192 retrograde, were performed on 335 patients. The most common indications were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, small bowel obstruction, and suspected masses and mucosal abnormalities. Total enteroscopy was achieved in 19 of the 89 patients who had both anterograde and retrograde procedures. Overall diagnostic yield in the determination of cause of symptoms or previous imaging was 52%. The most common causes of obscure bleeding were small bowel ulcers (10%), vascular lesions (25%) and neoplasms (10%). The most common causes of small bowel obstruction were strictures, some of which underwent dilation. Other therapeutic interventions included polypectomy, retrieval of retained capsules, stent retrievals and percutaneous enteral jejunostomy tube placement. Overall complication rates were very low (0.6%) and included medication reaction (n=1), scope dysfunction (n=1) and perforation (n=1). Conclusions: DBE can be performed safely and with good diagnostic yield in a single referral center in North America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lower gastrointestinal (LGI) bleeding is generally less severe than upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding with spontaneous cessation of bleeding in 80% of cases and a mortality of 2-4%. However, unlike UGI bleeding, there is no consensual agreement about management. Once the patient has been stabilized, the main objective and greatest difficulty is to identify the location of bleeding in order to provide specific appropriate treatment. While upper endoscopy and colonoscopy remain the essential first-line examinations, the development and availability of angiography have made this an important imaging modality for cases of active bleeding; they allow diagnostic localization of bleeding and guide subsequent therapy, whether therapeutic embolization, interventional colonoscopy or, if other techniques fail or are unavailable, surgery directed at the precise site of bleeding. Furthermore, newly developed endoscopic techniques, particularly video capsule enteroscopy, now allow minimally invasive exploration of the small intestine; if this is positive, it will guide subsequent assisted enteroscopy or surgery. Other small bowel imaging techniques include enteroclysis by CT or magnetic resonance imaging. At the present time, exploratory surgery is no longer a first-line approach. In view of the lesser gravity of LGI bleeding, it is most reasonable to simply stabilize the patient initially for subsequent transfer to a specialized center, if minimally invasive techniques are not available at the local hospital. In all cases, the complexity and diversity of LGI bleeding require a multidisciplinary collaboration involving the gastroenterologist, radiologist, intensivist and surgeon to optimize diagnosis and treatment of the patient., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)