Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesTo examine the use of endoscopy in the UK for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) and compare with published standards.To assess the organisation of endoscopy services for AUGIB in the UK.To examine the relationship between outcomes and out of hours (OOH) service provision.DesignMulti-centre cross sectional clinical audit.SettingAll UK hospitals accepting admissions with AUGIB.PatientsAll adults (≥16 yrs) presenting with AUGIB between 1st May and 30th June 2007.Data CollectionA custom designed web-based reporting tool was used to collect data on patient characteristics, comorbidity and haemodynamic status at presentation to calculate the Rockall score, use and timing of endoscopy, treatment including endoscopic, rebleeding and in-hospital mortality. A mailed questionnaire was used to collect data on facilities and service organisation.ResultsData on 6750 patients (median age 68 years) were analysed from 208 hospitals. 74% underwent inpatient endoscopy; of these 50% took place within 24 h of presentation, 82% during normal working hours and 3% between midnight and 8 am. Of patients deemed high-risk (pre-endoscopy Rockall score ≥5) only 55% were endoscoped within 24 h and 14% waited ≥72 h for endoscopy. Lesions with a high risk of rebleeding were present in 28% of patients of whom 74% received endoscopic therapy. Further bleeding was evident in 13% and mortality in those endoscoped was 7.4% (95% CI 6.7% to 8.1%). In 52% of hospitals a consultant led out of hours (OOH) endoscopy rota existed; in these hospitals 20% of first endoscopies were performed OOH compared with 13% in those with no OOH rota and endoscopic therapy was more likely to be administered (25% vs 21% in hospitals with no OOH rota). The risk adjusted mortality ratio was higher (1.21, p=0.10, (95%CI 0.96 to 1.51)) in hospitals without such rotas.ConclusionsThis audit has found continuing delays in performing endoscopy after AUGIB and underutilisation of standard endoscopic therapy particularly for variceal bleeding. In hospitals with a formal OOH endoscopy rota patients received earlier endoscopy, were more likely to receive endoscopic therapy and may have a lower mortality.

Objective To determine an effective diagnostic method of detecting all cases of coeliac disease in patients referred for gastroscopy without performing routine duodenal biopsy.Design An initial retrospective cohort of patients attending for gastroscopy was analysed to derive a clinical decision tool that could increase the detection of coeliac disease without performing routine duodenal biopsy. The tool incorporated serology (measuring antibodies to tissue transglutaminase) and stratifying patients according to their referral symptoms (patients were classified as having a “high risk” or “low risk” of coeliac disease). The decision tool was then tested on a second cohort of patients attending for gastroscopy. In the second cohort all patients had a routine duodenal biopsy and serology performed.Setting Teaching hospital in Sheffield.Participants 2000 consecutive adult patients referred for gastroscopy recruited prospectively.Main outcome measure Evaluation of a clinical decision tool using patients' referral symptoms, tissue transglutaminase antibody results, and duodenal biopsy results.Results No cases of coeliac disease were missed by the pre-endoscopy testing algorithm. The prevalence of coeliac disease in patients attending for endoscopy was 3.9% (77/2000, 95% confidence interval 3.1% to 4.8%). The prevalence in the high risk and low risk groups was 9.6% (71/739, 7.7% to 12.0%) and 0.5% (6/1261, 0.2% to 1.0%). The prevalence of coeliac disease in patients who were negative for tissue transglutaminase antibody was 0.4% (7/2000). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for a positive antibody result to diagnose coeliac disease was 90.9%, 90.9%, 28.6%, and 99.6%, respectively. Evaluation of the clinical decision tool gave a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 100%, 60.8%, 9.3%, and 100%, respectively.Conclusions Pre-endoscopy serological testing in combination with biopsy of high risk cases detected all cases of coeliac disease. The use of this decision tool may enable the endoscopist to target patients who need a duodenal biopsy.

The role of upper endoscopy (EGD) in obese patients prior to bariatric surgery is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield and cost of routine EGD before bariatric surgery. The medical records of consecutive obese patients who underwent EGD prior to bariatric surgery between May 2000 and September 2002 were reviewed. Two experienced endoscopists reviewed all EGD reports, and findings were divided into 4 groups based on predetermined criteria: group 0 (normal study), group 1 (abnormal findings that neither changed the surgical approach nor postponed surgery), group 2 (abnormal findings that changed the surgical approach or postponed surgery), and group 3 (results that were an absolute contraindication to surgery). Clinically important findings included lesions in groups 2 and 3. The cost of EGD (430.72 US dollars) was estimated using the endoscopist fee under Medicare reimbursement. During the 28-month study period, 195 patients were evaluated by EGD prior to bariatric surgery. One or more lesions were identified in 89.7% of patients, with 61.5% having a clinically important finding. The prevalence of endoscopic findings using the classification system above was as follows: group 0 (10.3%), group 1 (28.2%), group 2 (61.5%), and group 3 (0.0%). Overall, the most common lesions identified were hiatal hernia (40.0%), gastritis (28.7%), esophagitis (9.2%), gastric ulcer (3.6%), Barrett's esophagus (3.1%), and esophageal ulcer (3.1%). The cost of performing routine endoscopy on all patients prior to bariatric surgery was 699.92 US dollars per clinically important lesion detected. Routine upper endoscopy before bariatric surgery has a high diagnostic yield and has a low cost per clinically important lesion detected.

Objective: There is a lack of standard methods for determining the clinical priority of patients referred by general practitioners (GPs) for specialist outpatient consultations. We introduced a system of progressive involvement by general practitioners and specialists with 80 diagnostic procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate this new method of prioritization of patients suffering from significant gastroenterological disorders needing rapid access to diagnostic procedures. Methods: The study included 438 outpatients who were referred for and underwent a gastroscopy or colonoscopy. GPs used a ranking of waiting times for different levels of clinical priority, called 'homogeneous waiting groups'. Specialists also assigned a priority level for each patient as well as evaluating the appropriateness of the referral and the presence of significant endoscopic disorders. Agreement between GPs' and specialists' priority assessments was evaluated by the kappa statistic. Results: Most referrals (74.4%) were deemed low priority by GPs, with no maximum waiting time assigned. The level of agreement between GPs and specialists as regards patients' priorities was poor or moderate: for gastroscopy the kappa was 0.31 (weighted kappa 0.47) and for colonoscopy 0.44 (weighted kappa 0.46). There was an association between the proportion of significant disorders identified with endoscopy and the priority assigned to the referral (χ2 = 18.9, 1 df, p < 0.001). The overall proportion of referrals deemed inappropriate by specialists was 22.1%. Conclusions: There is value in liaison between GPs and specialists for achieving timely referrals and avoiding delayed diagnosis though higher levels of agreement need to be achieved.

Despite the lack of clear benefits of feeding via gastrostomy tube in dementia patients, its use has been increasing. The views of health professionals, patients and their carers differ widely about the perceived benefits, which makes decision-making difficult and stressful. The palliative care approach of facilitating better communication and end-of life care planning can help avoid inappropriate gastrostomy tube placements. A case of an elderly male with dementia and two malignancies is described, and the place of the palliative care approach is explored.

Problem: Rising demand and increasing waiting times for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (gastroscopy). Design: Quality improvement study with pre- and post-intervention data collection. Setting: Three endoscopy units in two hospital trusts (Singleton, Morriston and Baglan Hospitals endoscopy units), UK. Key measures for improvement: Number of gastroscopy requests from general practitioners (GPs) and hospital doctors; their adherence to dyspepsia referral guidelines and the referral-to-procedure interval for upper gastroscopy. Data collected for six months before and for five months after the intervention. Strategy for change: Referrals were assessed against the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the management of dyspepsia by two part-time GPs and feedback sent to clinicians where requests did not adhere to the referrals criteria Effects of change: Adherence to guideline criteria increased significantly among GPs after the intervention (from 55% to 75%). There was no similar effect for hospital doctors, although their adherence rate (70%) was at a higher level than that of GPs before the intervention. The number of gastroscopy referrals for dyspepsia declined after the intervention, particularly from hospital doctors where a drop of 31% was observed, from 26.6 to 18.4 referrals per week. With the inclusion of seasonal effects, an estimated drop of 3.2 referrals per week from general practice was not significant (p = 0.065) while an estimated drop of 10.0 referrals per week for hospital doctors was very significant (p<0.001). Lessons learnt: Referral assessment can be successfully introduced and shows promise as a way of improving the quality of referrals and reducing demand. Hospital clinicians are more resistant than GPs to referral assessment but nevertheless responded to the feedback by reducing their endoscopy gastroscopy requests. Most such referrals are generated in hospitals rather than in primary care: this finding has important implications for demand management.

Background In gastrectomies, especially subtotal gastrectomies and operations on the gastroesophageal junction, identifying the exact location of the tumor and establishing the appropriate resection line is very important. Accurate resection lines have a major impact on the preservation of organ function and curability. Preservation of as much as possible of the remaining stomach, including the fornix, may be an important surgical goal for maintaining an adequate postoperative quality of life. In adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction, the height of the esophageal dissection may affect reconstruction of the transhiatal approach. Methods We perform a new technique, near infrared ray-guided surgery, for the accurate localization of a tumor using the Firefly technology of the daVinci Xi system and intra-operative upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. We used this new technique for cases of upper gastric cancer or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. In this retrospective study, we examined to determine the extent (mm) of the tumor invasion of the esophagus, visualization of near infrared ray contained within endoscopic light, and distance from the proximal margin of the tumor to the surgical cut line on rapid histopathology and in the permanent preparation, including the operative videos and extracted specimens. Results We performed near infrared ray-guided surgery for 12 patients with gastric cancer or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction, and the near infrared ray was clearly seen as green light with Firefly mode in all the patients. Near infrared ray-guided surgery was useful for obtaining localization of the tumor. In addition, it was possible to resect organ with adequate margins from tumor. Rapid intraoperative histopathological examinations confirmed that the resected specimens had negative margins. None of the patients required additional resection. Conclusions We believe that because near infrared ray-guided surgery can provide an accurate resection line, it will be useful for the resection of upper gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. It will also provide patients with a good postoperative quality of life after surgery.

Background When pathological diagnosis following endoscopic resection (ER) for early gastric cancer (EGC) suggests probable lymph node metastasis, additional surgery with lymphadenectomy should be performed. The sentinel node (SN) concept has yet to be applied to tumors following ER. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of SN navigation surgery for such tumors. Methods Forty patients diagnosed with EGC lesions <4 cm in diameter underwent gastrectomy with SN mapping following ER. A technetium-99 m tin colloid solution and a dye were injected into the submucosal layer around the post-ER scar in all four abdominal quadrants. We then compared the SN distribution and metastases among the patients who underwent ER and controls ( n  = 192). Results SNs were identifiable in all patients, and the mean number of SNs per case was 4.9. The location of the SN basin was similar in the patients who underwent ER and the controls. One patient (3 %) whose primary tumor had invaded the submucosal layer had a metastatic SN. The median time from ER to surgery was 73 days. No postoperative recurrence was observed in any patient over a median follow-up of 1,023 days. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the SN basin is not greatly affected by ER. The SN concept could be suitable for tumors following ER, but conventional gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy involving the SN basin should be used at present.

ObjectivesThe integration of digital health technologies in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy presents opportunities to enhance patient experience, an important dimension of care quality. This systematic review aims to evaluate the impact of digital health interventions on patient satisfaction and experience in outpatient endoscopy settings.DesignA systematic review and narrative synthesis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Data sourcesPubMed/Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and Cochrane databases were searched through 9 March 2023.Eligibility criteriaStudies were eligible if they involved adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing outpatient colonoscopy or gastroscopy and in English. Interventions included any form of educational digital health technology aimed at enhancing healthcare delivery. Telehealth studies were not included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias, using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A mixed-method approach was employed for the narrative synthesis, focusing on the primary outcome of patient experience and satisfaction.ResultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria, all assessing patient satisfaction rather than experience. Five studies reported improved satisfaction associated with digital interventions, three showed no significant change, and one lacked statistical analysis. Interventions ranged from smartphone applications to online educational resources, and satisfaction measurement tools varied significantly. Overall, the evidence was characterised by heterogeneity and very low methodological quality.ConclusionDigital health interventions may have a positive impact on patient satisfaction in GI endoscopy, although evidence quality is very low and outcome measurement is inconsistent. Future research should focus on standardising measures of patient experience and satisfaction, ensuring robust study designs to inform the integration of digital health tools into endoscopy practice.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023428609.