Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundAugmentation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) is the primary goal of both surgical and endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The feasibility, efficacy, safety, and reversibility of a newly developed endotherapy for GERD using intraluminal magnets referred to as a magnet closure device (MCD) were evaluated.MethodsThis study involved nine cadaveric and six survival pigs. The MCD consisted of a ring neodymium magnet attached to a 2–0 polypropylene suture and suture anchor. The MCD was deployed onto the esophageal wall at the region of the LES using an endoscopic suturing device. Two to three MCDs were placed on opposing walls to induce closure of the esophageal lumen. LES pressures were measured using high-resolution manometry at the index procedure (baseline and immediately post-MCD placement) and at survival endoscopy. Endoscopic removal of the devices was performed followed by necropsy at week 2.ResultsMCDs were successfully deployed in all cadaveric (n = 22) and survival animals (n = 12). In cadavers, 20/22 (91%) sutures were full-thickness with no adjacent organ injury. In survival animals, mean LES pressure increased from 8.4 mmHg (baseline) to 32.4 mmHg immediately post-procedure (p < 0.01). No clinically significant adverse events occurred. Repeat endoscopy at two weeks showed intact MCDs in 4/6 (67%) animals with significant increase in median LES pressure (n = 4, 24.0 mmHg versus 7.4 mmHg [baseline], p < 0.05). Endoscopic removal of MCDs was successfully achieved.ConclusionsEndoscopic augmentation of the LES using a new MCD was feasible, safe and reversible with significantly increased LES pressures recorded. Future studies are needed to enhance durability. These preliminary results on a reversible technique are promising and may represent an attractive alternative to endoluminal GERD therapy.

BackgroundEfficacy of an internal magnet traction device (MTD) for gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) by an expert endoscopist has been reported. We hypothesized that use of the MTD would enhance the performance of colorectal ESD in a non-expert endoscopist in ESD compared to the conventional technique. Primary aim of this study was to compare procedure times between conventional ESD (C-ESD) and MTD-assisted ESD (MTD-ESD) by expert and non-expert endoscopists in ESD. Secondary aims included rate of en bloc resection, iatrogenic injury, visualization score of the submucosal layer, and endoscopist satisfaction score.MethodsA total of 56 lesions were created in an ex vivo porcine colorectum. Two endoscopists completed C-ESD (n = 28) and MTD-ESD (n = 28). Lesions measured 3 cm in diameter and were located on either the anterior or posterior colorectal wall. The MTD consisted of a small neodymium magnet and nylon monofilament attached to a through-the-scope clip. The first MTD was deployed on the opposing colorectal wall of the target lesion and a second MTD was then deployed directly onto the distal margin of the lesion.ResultsTotal procedure time for MTD-ESD was significantly shorter than C-ESD for both expert (median: 15.8 vs. 19.3 min, p < 0.05) and non-expert (median: 21.3 vs. 33.9 min, p < 0.001) endoscopists. All lesions were resected en bloc. There was no iatrogenic muscularis propria injury in the MTD-ESD group. For both the expert and non-expert, scores for MTD-ESD were significantly higher for submucosal layer visualization (p < 0.05) and endoscopist satisfaction (p < 0.001) compared to C-ESD.ConclusionsUse of the MTD significantly reduced procedure time for both expert and non-expert endoscopists performing ESD. Improving the efficiency, safety, and satisfaction of ESD with such a device particularly for non-expert endoscopists is appealing and could potentially minimize the complexity and duration of the procedure allowing for more widespread use of the technique.

BackgroundOur previous studies have shown the diagnostic utility of a newly developed dual-focus endoscope with narrow-band imaging (DF-NBI) and simplified dyad criteria for detection of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). This clinical trial aimed to study the diagnostic efficacy of DF-NBI with dyad criteria for detecting SESCC compared to white light imaging (WLI).MethodsThis was a single-arm prospective comparative trial. We enrolled 170 consecutive high-risk patients for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Patients were initially examined with WLI by one independent endoscopist and then the other performed DF-NBI blinded to the WLI diagnosis to avoid a carry-over effect. Lesions showing proliferation and/or various shapes of intrapapillary capillary loops (IPCL) under DF-NBI (i.e., dyad criteria) were endoscopically diagnosed as SESCC including high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. The primary endpoint was sensitivity of WLI and DF-NBI for detecting SESCC. The secondary endpoints were the diagnostic performance (i.e., specificity and accuracy) and inter/intra-observer concordance of DF-NBI with dyad criteria.ResultsA total 77 SESCCs were detected. The sensitivity of DF-NBI for SESCC was significantly higher than that of WLI (91% vs. 51%, P < 0.001). The specificity and accuracy of WLI and DF-NBI using dyad criteria were 100% vs. 84%, and 86% vs. 86%, respectively. Various shapes and proliferation of IPCL showed the highest value in inter-observer and intra-observer agreements (κ = 0.77 and 0.82, respectively).ConclusionDF-NBI combined with dyad criteria may be a promising technique with a high sensitivity for diagnosis of SESCC and high inter/intra-observer agreement.

Celiac plexus neurolysis and block are considered safe but provide limited pain relief. Standard techniques target the region of the celiac plexus but do not attempt injections directly into celiac ganglia. The recent recognition that celiac ganglia can be visualized by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) now allows direct injection into celiac ganglia for neurolysis (CGN) and block (CGB). To determine the safety and initial efficacy (at 2-4 wk) of direct ganglia injection in patients with moderate to severe pain secondary to unresectable pancreatic carcinoma or chronic pancreatitis. An EUS database was reviewed to identify patients undergoing CGN and CGB. Data were retrieved from the medical records and phone follow-up. Thirty-three patients underwent 36 direct celiac ganglia injections for unresectable pancreatic cancer (CGN N = 17, CGB N = 1) or chronic pancreatitis (CGN N = 5, CGB N = 13) with bupivacaine (0.25%) and alcohol (99%) for CGN, or Depo-Medrol (80 mg/2 cc) for CGB. Cancer patients reported pain relief in 16/17 (94%) when alcohol was injected and 0/1 (00%) when steroid was injected. For chronic pancreatitis, 4/5 (80%) who received alcohol reported pain relief versus 5/13 (38%) receiving steroids. Thirteen (34%) patients experienced initial pain exacerbation, which correlated with improved therapeutic response (P < 0.05). Transient hypotension and diarrhea developed in 12 and 6 patients, respectively. Initial experience suggests that EUS-guided direct celiac ganglion block or neurolysis is safe. Alcohol injection into ganglia appears to be effective in both cancer and chronic pancreatitis. Prospective trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of this new approach.

ObjectiveIt is broadly accepted that the false positive (FP) rate for endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS FNA) is 0–1%. It was hypothesised that the FP and false suspicious (FS) rates for EUS FNA are greater than reported. A study was undertaken to establish the rate and root cause of discordant interpretation.DesignUsing a prospectively maintained endoscopic database, cytohistological discordant EUS FNA examinations from 30 July 1996 to 31 December 2008 were identified retrospectively.SettingTertiary referral centre.Main outcome measuresDiscordant FNA was defined by positive or suspicious FNA cytology in the absence of malignancy or neoplasm in the subsequent surgical pathology specimen, specifically in the absence of neoadjuvant therapy. Three cytopathologists conducted a blinded review of randomised discordant and matched specimens.ResultsFNA was performed in 5667/18 066 (31.4%) patients undergoing EUS, of whom 2547 had cytology results interpreted as ‘positive’ or ‘suspicious’ or ‘atypical’ for malignancy or neoplasm. Subsequent surgical resection without prior neoadjuvant therapy was performed in 377 patients with positive or suspicious cytology. The FP rate was 20/377 (5.3%) and increased to 27/377 (7.2%) when FS cases were included. The incidence of discordance was consistent over time (1996–2002: 10/118 (8.6%) vs 2003–2008: 17/259 (6.6%); p=0.5) and was higher in non-pancreatic FNA (15%) than pancreatic FNA (2.2%; p=0.0001). Two-thirds of the non-pancreatic FP cases involved sampling of perioesophageal or perirectal nodes in patients with luminal neoplasms or Barrett's oesophagus. Following pathological re-review, discordance was attributed to translocated cell contamination/sampling error (50%) or cytopathologist interpretive error (50%).ConclusionsThese findings refute the accepted paradigm that FP cytology rarely occurs with EUS FNA. Further investigation revealed that FP FNA developed secondary to endosonographer technique or initial cytological misinterpretation, and is particularly likely when perioesophageal or perirectal nodes are aspirated in the setting of a luminal neoplasm or Barrett's oesophagus. Further study is needed to determine the significance of these findings and potential impact on the performance of FNA and patient outcomes.

There are virtually no data concerning the risk of adverse events (AEs) following lower gastrointestinal (LGI) endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Our aim was to determine the incidence and factors associated with AEs following LGI EUS fine needle aspiration (FNA). We conducted a prospective cohort study at a tertiary referral center. Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent LGI EUS FNA between 1 January 2004 and 1 January 2012. We analyzed the 502 patients who had complete follow-up. AE severity was graded (1-5) utilizing Common Terminology Criteria or Visual Analog Scale. AEs were assessed during the procedures, in clinical follow-up, during phone interviews conducted at 7-14 days, and final clinical and/or phone interviews at 2-4 months. AEs developed in 103 (20.5%) patients and were classified as grade 1, 2, 3, or 4 in 34 (6.8%), 41 (8.2%), 23 (4.6%), and 5 (1.0%) patients, respectively. Bleeding and pain were the commonest AEs. No deaths occurred. On multivariate analysis, AEs were associated with prior pain (odds ratio (OR): 3.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.35-6.25), FNA from a site other than a lymph node (LN) or gut wall (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.10-4.70), and malignant FNA cytology (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 1.10-2.97); serious (grade 3-4) AEs were associated with prior pain (OR: 15.21, 95% CI: 5.04-45.85) and FNA from a site other than a LN or gut wall (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.15-9.20). LGI EUS FNA is associated with a high rate of serious grades 3-4 AEs. This may reflect the total number of associated interventions and the frequency of underlying pathology and symptoms.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine needle aspiration (FNA) can result in false-positive cytology and can also cause needle tract seeding. Our goal was to evaluate a potential cause, namely, the presence of malignant cells within gastrointestinal (GI) luminal fluid, either as a result of tumor sloughing from luminal cancers or secondary to FNA of extraluminal sites. During EUS, luminal fluid that is usually aspirated through the echoendoscope suction channel and discarded was instead submitted for cytological analysis among patients with cancer and benign disease. Pre- and post-FNA luminal fluid samples were collected to discern the role of FNA in inducing a positive cytology. When not performing FNA, one sample was collected for the entire examination. The final diagnosis was based on strict clinicopathological criteria and >or=2-year follow-up. This study was conducted in a tertiary referral center. We assessed the prevalence of luminal fluid-positive cytology among patients with luminal (e.g., esophageal), extraluminal (e.g., pancreatic), and benign disease. Among the 140 patients prospectively enrolled with sufficient sampling and follow-up, an examination of luminal fluid cytology showed positive results for malignancy in luminal and extraluminal cancer patients, 48 and 10%, respectively. This included 8 out of 23 esophageal, 4 of 5 gastric, and 9 of 15 rectal cancers. The positive luminal fluid cytology rate with luminal cancers was not affected by performing FNA. Post-FNA luminal fluid cytology was positive in 3 out of 26 with pancreatic cancers. Cytological examination of luminal fluid aspirates did not demonstrate malignant cells in any patient with nonmalignant disease. Malignant cells are commonly present in the GI luminal fluid of patients with luminal cancers and can also be found in patients with pancreatic cancer after EUS FNA. Further study is needed to determine the impact of these findings on cytological interpretation, staging, risk of needle tract seeding, and patient care and outcomes.

Background and Study Aims. The presence of an implantable electromechanical cardiac device (IED) has long been considered a relative contraindication to the performance of video capsule endoscopy (CE). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of CE in patients with IEDs. A secondary purpose was to determine whether IEDs have any impact on images captured by CE. Patients and Methods. A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a capsule endoscopy at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ, USA, or Rochester, MN, USA, (January 2002 to June 2010) was performed to identify CE studies done on patients with IEDs. One hundred and eighteen capsule studies performed in 108 patients with IEDs were identified and reviewed for demographic data, method of preparation, and study data. Results. The most common indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (77%), anemia (14%), abdominal pain (5%), celiac disease (2%), diarrhea (1%), and Crohn’s disease (1%). Postprocedure assessments did not reveal any detectable alteration on the function of the IED. One patient with an ICD had a 25-minute loss of capsule imaging due to recorder defect. Two patients with LVADs had interference with capsule image acquisition. Conclusions. CE did not interfere with IED function, including PM, ICD, and/or LVAD and thus appears safe. Additionally, PM and ICD do not appear to interfere with image acquisition but LVAD may interfere with capsule images and require that capsule leads be positioned as far away as possible from the IED to assure reliable image acquisition.

ObjectiveThe diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is challenging. Sonographic and cross-sectional imaging findings of AIP closely mimic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and techniques for tissue sampling of AIP are suboptimal. These limitations often result in delayed or failed diagnosis, which negatively impact patient management and outcomes. This study aimed to create an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-based convolutional neural network (CNN) model trained to differentiate AIP from PDAC, chronic pancreatitis (CP) and normal pancreas (NP), with sufficient performance to analyse EUS video in real time.DesignA database of still image and video data obtained from EUS examinations of cases of AIP, PDAC, CP and NP was used to develop a CNN. Occlusion heatmap analysis was used to identify sonographic features the CNN valued when differentiating AIP from PDAC.ResultsFrom 583 patients (146 AIP, 292 PDAC, 72 CP and 73 NP), a total of 1 174 461 unique EUS images were extracted. For video data, the CNN processed 955 EUS frames per second and was: 99% sensitive, 98% specific for distinguishing AIP from NP; 94% sensitive, 71% specific for distinguishing AIP from CP; 90% sensitive, 93% specific for distinguishing AIP from PDAC; and 90% sensitive, 85% specific for distinguishing AIP from all studied conditions (ie, PDAC, CP and NP).ConclusionThe developed EUS-CNN model accurately differentiated AIP from PDAC and benign pancreatic conditions, thereby offering the capability of earlier and more accurate diagnosis. Use of this model offers the potential for more timely and appropriate patient care and improved outcome.