Search

Background:  Computer-aided detection (CADe) has been developed to improve detection during colonoscopy. After initial reports of high efficacy, there has been an increasing recognition of variability in the effectiveness of CADe systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate a CADe system in a varied colonoscopy population., Methods:  A multicenter, randomized trial was conducted at seven hospitals (both university and non-university) in Europe and Canada. Participants referred for diagnostic, non-immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) screening, or surveillance colonoscopy were randomized (1:1) to undergo CADe-assisted or conventional colonoscopy by experienced endoscopists. Participants with insufficient bowel preparation were excluded from the analysis. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes included adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) per colonoscopy., Results:  581 participants were enrolled, of whom 497 were included in the final analysis: 250 in the CADe arm and 247 in the conventional colonoscopy arm. The indication was surveillance in 202/497 colonoscopies (40.6 %), diagnostic in 199/497 (40.0 %), and non-iFOBT screening in 96/497 (19.3 %). Overall, ADR (38.4 % vs. 37.7 %; P  = 0.43) and APC (0.66 vs. 0.66; P  = 0.97) were similar between CADe and conventional colonoscopy. SSLs per colonoscopy was increased (0.30 vs. 0.19; P  = 0.049) in the CADe arm vs. the conventional colonoscopy arm., Conclusions:  In this study conducted by experienced endoscopists, CADe did not result in a statistically significant increase in ADR. However, the ADR of our control group substantially surpassed our sample size assumptions, increasing the risk of an underpowered trial., Competing Interests: T. Rath has received speaker fees from Olympus Medical, PENTAX Medical, Mauna Kea Technologies, Medtronic, Takeda, Galapagos, Falk, Janssen, AbbVie, Repha, Medical Tribune, and Lilly. C. Spada has received consultancy fees from Medtronic and AnX Robotics, and speaker fees from Olympus, PENTAX Medical, and Norgine. N. Forbes is a consultant for Boston Scientific Corp. and PENTAX Medical, and has received speaker fees and research funding from PENTAX Medical. G. Vanbiervliet has received consultancy fees from Boston Scientific Corp. and Ambu A/S, and lecture and conference fees from Fujifilm Medical, Norgine, Tillots, and PENTAX Medical. P.J. Belletrutti has received speaker fees from Pendopharm and consultancy fees from Vantage Endoscopy. P. Siersema has received research support from The E-Nose company, Lucid Diagnostics, Micro Tech, Magentiq Eye Ltd., Norgine, and Endo Tools Therapeutics, and consultancy fees from Magentiq Eye Ltd. M. Maas, E. Soons, S. Kashin, P. Cesaro, A. Eickhoff and D. Salvi declare that they have no conflict of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).)

Digestive endoscopy is a highly dynamic medical discipline, with the recent adoption of new endoscopic procedures. However, comprehensive guidelines on the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in these new procedures have been lacking for many years. The Guidelines Commission of the French Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SFED) convened in 2023 to establish guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis in digestive endoscopy for all digestive endoscopic procedures, based on literature data up to September 1, 2023. This article summarizes these new guidelines and describes the literature review that fed into them., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Competing interests in relation to the guidelines: None declared. Other competing interests: David Karsenti, MD: Consultant for Olympus, Covidien and Norgine; support for attending meetings from Alfasigma, Cook and Fujifilm. Rodica Gincul, MD: Consultant for Olympus; honoraria for lectures from Olympus; support for attending meetings from Celtrion, AbbVie. Arthur Belle, MD: Consultant for Boston Scientific; support for attending meeting from Mayoli. Geoffroy Vanbiervliet, MD-PhD: Consultant for Bostin Scientific and Ambu; honoraria for lectures, presentations and speeches from Pentax, Fujifilm, Tillots, and Norgine. Olivier Gronier, MD: Support for attending meetings from Dr Falk., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Competing Interests: G. Vanbiervliet is a consultant FujiFilm and Ambu and has received lecture and training fees from Pentax Inc., FujiFilm Inc., Tillots, Norgine and Takeda.

Background: Missed lesions are common during standard colonoscopy and are correlated with post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Contrast-enhanced technologies have recently been developed to improve polyp detection. We aimed to evaluate the impact of linked color imaging (LCI) on the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy., Methods: This national, multicenter, tandem, randomized trial compared the outcomes of colonoscopy with white-light imaging (WLI) versus LCI for polyp detection in the right colon. Two consecutive examinations of the right colon (upstream of the hepatic flexure) were made with WLI and LCI by the same operator. First-pass examination by WLI or LCI was randomized 1:1 after cecal intubation. According to statistical calculations, 10 endoscopy units had to include approximately 700 patients. The primary outcome was proximal adenoma miss rate. Secondary outcomes were the proximal miss rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL), advanced adenomas, and polyps., Results: 764 patients were included from 1 January 2020 to 22 December 2022, and 686 patients were randomized (345 WLI first vs. 341 LCI first). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographics and indications. The proximal adenoma miss rate was not significantly higher in the WLI-first group (36.7%) vs. the LCI-first group (31.8%) (estimated mean absolute difference: 4.9% [95%CI -5.2% to 15.0%], P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in miss rates for SSLs, advanced adenomas, and polyps in the proximal colon., Conclusions: In contrast to previous data, this study does not support the benefit of LCI to the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy., Competing Interests: David Karsenti, MD: consultant for Olympus, Coviden, and Norgine; support for attending meetings from Alfasigma, Cook, and Fujifilm. Guillaume Perrod, MD-PhD: consultant for Fujifilm. Lucille Quénéhervé, MD, PhD: support for attending meetings from Vifor Pharma. Edouard Chabrun, MD-PhD: honoraria for lectures and presentations from Norgine. Gabriel Rahmi, MD-PhD: consultant for Fujifilm, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; support for attending meetings from Provepharm. Geoffroy Vanbiervliet, MD-PhD: consultant for Boston Scientific and Ambu; honoraria for lectures, presentations, and speeches from Pentax, Fujifilm, Tillots, and Norgine. Maryan Cavicchi, MD-PhD: consultant for Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, and MSD; honoraria for lectures, presentations, and speeches from MSD France, Amgen, Galapagos, Takeda, Pfizer, Mylan, and Tillots; support for attending meetings from Ferring, Takeda, and MSD; board for Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Lilly, and Pfizer; receipt of equipment and materials from Celtrion and Biosynex. Xavier Dray, MD-PhD: co-founder and shareholder of Augmented Endoscopy; consultant for Norgine and Provepharm; honoraria for lectures, presentations, and speeches from Alfasigma, Bouchara Recordati, Medtronic, Norgine, and Sandoz; honoraria for live endoscopy from Fujifilm. B. Perrot, S. Koch, G. Velut, and M. Moreno-Garcia declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) is an alternative to duodenal stenting and surgical GJ (SGGJ) in malignant gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO). European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines restricted EUS-GJ for MGOO only, because of misdeployment. The aim was to evaluate its outcomes focusing on benign indications., Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted from 2016 to 2023 in a tertiary center. Patients included had malignant or benign GOO indicated for EUS-GJ. Techniques were the direct approach until August 2021, and the wire endoscopic simplified technique (WEST) afterwards. The main objective was to compare outcomes in benign vs. MGOO. Secondary end-points were technical success, adverse events rates, and describing the evolution of techniques and indications., Results: In all, 87 patients were included, 46 men, mean age 66 ± 16.2 years. Indications were malignant in 60.1% and benign in 39.1%. The EUS-GJ technique was direct in 33 patients (37.9%) and WEST in 54 (62.1%). No difference was found in terms of technical, clinical, or adverse events rates. The initial technical success rate was 88.5%. The final technical and clinical success rates were 96.6% and 94.25%, respectively. In the last year, benign exceeded malignant indications (70.4% vs. 29.6%, P < 0.05). Seven misdeployments occurred, six being addressed with the rescue technique. The misdeployment rate was significantly decreased using the WEST approach compared to the direct one: 3.7% vs. 18% (P < 0.05). The severe postoperative adverse events rate was 2.3%., Conclusion: This study demonstrated similar outcomes of EUS-GJ between benign and MGOO, with a decreasing misdeployment rate (<4%) applying WEST. This represents an additional step towards recommending EUS-GJ in benign indications., (© 2024 The Author(s). Digestive Endoscopy published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Background and Aims: EUS-guided placement of fiducial markers in patients with esophageal or rectal cancer who have been referred for radiation therapy lacks data regarding its feasibility and safety. The aim of this study was to assess the success rate of EUS-guided fiducial marker placement in these indications., Methods: This prospective multicenter study enrolled patients with rectal or esophageal tumors who were treated between March 2017 and June 2021. The primary endpoint was the success of fiducial marker placement under EUS guidance utilizing the preloaded 22-gauge EchoTip Ultra Fiducial Needle (Cook Medical, Limerick, Ireland), defined by the ability to release fiducials at least at the proximal and distal ends of the tumor. Secondary endpoints were the adverse events, length of procedure, and fiducial markers remaining throughout radiation therapy., Results: A total of 33 patients were included in this study, with a mean age of 64.2 ± 11.3 years; 66.7% were male. Twenty patients had rectal adenocarcinoma, and 13 had esophageal malignancies. The success rate of fiducial marker placement was 93.9%. Markers could only be released at the proximal end of the tumor in 2 cases. The average procedure time (±SD) was 12.5 ± 4.8 minutes. The number of fiducial markers placed for each patient was 3.8 ± .5. No adverse events were reported. At the end of radiotherapy, markers were still visible on imaging in all patients., Conclusions: This prospective multicenter study highlights the safety and high success of the placement of fiducial markers under EUS guidance for rectal and esophageal tumors, with no adverse events and with a short procedure time. Fiducial markers remained in place over time during radiation therapy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03057288.)., Competing Interests: Disclosure The following authors disclosed financial relationships: U. Chaput: financial support for Case Report Form editing, monitoring and clinical study insurance from Cook Medical. M. Camus: consultant for Cook Medical. D. Karsenti: consultant for Olympus, Covidien, Norgine, and AlfaSigma; support from FujiFilm for attending meetings. E. Coron: consultant for Creo Medical, FujiFilm, Mayoly Spindler, and Provepharm. S. Koch: consultant for Pentax, Creo Medical, and Olympus. G. Vanbiervlet: paid speaker for Takeda, Tillots, Fujifilm, Pentax, and Norgine. M. Pioche: endoscopy training from Cook Medical, Boston Scientific, Olympus, and Norgine. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The adoption of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still limited in the West. A recent randomized trial showed that ESD is more effective and only slightly riskier than piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection; reproducibility outside expert centers was questioned. We evaluated the results according to the annual case volume in a multicentric prospective cohort., Methods: Between September 2019 and September 2022, colorectal ESD was consecutively performed at 13 participating centers classified as low volume (LV), middle volume (MV), and high volume (HV). The main procedural outcomes were assessed. Multivariate and propensity score matching analyses were performed., Results: Three thousand seven hundred seventy ESDs were included. HV centers treated larger and more often colonic lesions than MV and LV centers. En bloc , R0, and curative resection rates were 95.2%, 87.4%, and 83.2%, respectively, and were higher at HV than at MV and LV centers. HV centers also achieved a faster dissection speed. Delayed bleeding and surgery for complications rates were 5.4% and 0.8%, respectively, without significant differences. The perforation rate (overall: 9%) was higher at MV than at LV and HV centers. Lesion characteristics, but not volume center, were independently associated with both R1 resection and perforation. However, after propensity score matching, R0 rates were significantly higher at HV than at LV centers, and perforation rates were significantly higher at MV than at HV centers., Discussion: Colorectal ESD can be successfully implemented in the West, even in nonexpert centers. However, difficult lesions must still be referred to experts., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Purpose: Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is mainly due to advanced malignant disease. GOO can be treated by surgical gastroenterostomy (SGE), endoscopic enteral stenting (EES), or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) to improve the quality of life., Methods: Between 2009 and 2022, patients undergoing SGE or EUS-GE for GOO were included at three centers. Technical and clinical success rates, post-procedure adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day all-cause mortality, and recurrence of GOO were retrospectively analyzed and compared between SGE and EUS-GE. Predictive factors for technical and clinical failure after SGE and EUS-GE were identified., Results: Of the 97 patients included, 56 (57.7%) had an EUS-GE and 41 (42.3%) had an SGE for GOO, with 62 (63.9%) GOO due to malignancy and 35 (36.1%) to benign disease. The median follow-up time was 13,4 months (range 1 days-106 months), with no difference between the two groups (p = 0.962). Technical (p = 0.133) and clinical (p = 0.229) success rates, severe morbidity (p = 0.708), 30-day all-cause mortality (p = 0.277) and GOO recurrence (p = 1) were similar. EUS-GE had shorter median procedure duration (p < 0.001), lower post-procedure ileus rate (p < 0.001), and shorter median LOS (p < 0.001) than SGE. In univariate analysis, no risk factors for technical or clinical failure in SGE were identified and abdominal pain reported before the procedure was a risk factor for technical failure in the EUS-GE group. No risk factor for clinical failure was identified for EUS-GE. In the subgroup of GOO due to benign disease, SGE was associated with better technical success (p = 0.035) with no difference in clinical success rate compared to EUS-GE (p = 1)., Conclusion: EUS-GE provides similar long-lasting symptom relief as SGE for GOO whether for benign or malignant disease. SGE may still be indicated in centers with limited experience with EUS-GE or may be reserved for patients in whom endoscopic technique fails., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background and study aims Optical diagnosis poses challenges to implementation of "resect and discard" strategies. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and performance of a new commercially available system for colorectal polyps. Patients and methods Nine expert endoscopists in three centers performed colonoscopies using artificial intelligence-equipped colonoscopes (CAD EYE, Fujifilm). Histology and predictions were compared, with hyperplastic polyps and sessile serrated lesions grouped for analysis. Results Overall, 253 polyps in 119 patients were documented (n=152 adenomas, n=78 hyperplastic polyps, n=23 sessile serrated lesions). CAD EYE detected polyps before endoscopists in 81 of 253 cases (32%). The mean polyp size was 5.5 mm (SD 0.6 mm). Polyp morphology was Paris Ip (4 %), Is (28 %), IIa (60 %), and IIb (8 %). CAD EYE achieved a sensitivity of 80%, specificity of 83%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 96%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 72%. Expert endoscopists had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 83%, PPV of 96%, and NPV of 72%. Diagnostic accuracy was similar between CAD EYE (81%) and endoscopists (86%). However, sensitivity was greater with endoscopists as compared with CAD EYE ( P <0.05). CAD EYE classified sessile serrated lesions as hyperplasia in 22 of 23 cases, and endoscopists correctly classified 16 of 23 cases. Conclusions The CAD EYE system shows promise for detecting and characterizing colorectal polyps. Larger studies are needed, however, to confirm these findings., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background: Gastric staple line leak treatment after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) remains challenging. Regenerative medicine is gaining place in the accelerated treatment of damaged tissues. This study presents the first series of gastric leak treatment after LSG using endoscopic intragastric administration of combined autologous mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP)., Methods: MSC-PRP harvesting and endoscopic administration techniques are described in detail. Data were prospectively gathered and analyzed. Primary endpoints were morbidity/mortality rates and fistula closure time., Results: Twelve patients (9 women, 3 men) were included. Median age was 41.5 years, median weight 105.5 kg and median BMI 38.9 kg/m 2 . Median time to gastric staple line leak detection was 10 days post-LSG. Median time between re-laparoscopy and MSC-PRP administration was 5 days. MSC-PRP endoscopic administration was successfully performed and tolerated by all patients, with median procedure duration of 27 min and minimal blood loss. Four postoperative complications were noted: two patients with increased tibial pain at tibial puncture site, one with tibial hematoma, and one with epigastric pain/dysphagia. Median length of hospital stay was 1 day. Gastric leak healing occurred after a median of 14 days, only two patients requiring a second MSC-PRP endoscopic injection. Median follow-up was 19 months, all patients being in good health at last contact., Conclusion: Endoscopic administration of combined autologous MSC-PRP seems to be a good option for treatment of gastric leaks after sleeve gastrectomy. It is a challenging procedure that should be performed in specialized bariatric centers by expert bariatric surgeons and endoscopists after meticulous patient selection., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

INTRODUCTION : Residual colorectal neoplasia (RCN) after previous endoscopic mucosal resection is a frequent challenge. Different management techniques are feasible including endoscopic full-thickness resection using the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) system and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of these two techniques for the treatment of such lesions. METHODS : All consecutive patients with RCN treated either using the FTRD or by ESD were retrospectively included in this multicenter study. The primary outcome was the R0 resection rate, defined as an en bloc resection with histologically tumor-free lateral and deep margins. RESULTS : 275 patients (median age 70 years; 160 men) who underwent 177 ESD and 98 FTRD procedures for RCN were included. R0 resection was achieved in 83.3 % and 77.6 % for ESD and FTRD, respectively ( P  = 0.25). Lesions treated by ESD were however larger than those treated by FTRD ( P  < 0.001). The R0 rates for lesions of 20-30 mm were 83.9 % and 57.1 % in the ESD and FTRD groups, respectively, and for lesions of 30-40 mm were 93.6 % and 33.3 %, respectively. On multivariable analysis, ESD procedures were associated with statistically higher en bloc and R0 resection rates after adjustment for lesion size ( P  = 0.02 and P  < 0.001, respectively). The adverse event rate was higher in the ESD group (16.3 % vs. 5.1 %), mostly owing to intraoperative perforations. CONCLUSION:  ESD is effective in achieving R0 resection for RCN whatever the size and location of the lesions. When residual lesions are smaller than 20 mm, the FTRD is an effective alternative., Competing Interests: C. Yzet has received consultancy and lecture fees from Abbvie, Takeda, Jansen, Amgen, and Galapagos. Y. Le Baleur has provided training sessions for Ovesco Endoscopy AG. J. Jacques has provided ESD training sessions for Olympus, Fuji, Erbe, Pentax, and Lumendi and has received lecture fees from Abbvie, Janssen, and Norgine. M. Barret is on the boards of Norgine and Ambu, and has received research grants from Pentax. M. Shaefer has provided training sessions for Boston Scientific, and has received congress invitations from Olympus, Cook, Cousin Medical, Boston Scientific, Pentax, Abbvie, MSD, Amgen, and Norgine. S. Leblanc has received consulting and lecture fees from Norgine, Olympus, Alfasigma, and Ovesco. J. Rivory has provided training sessions in endoscopy and endoscopic resection for Olympus, and Cook Medical.E. Coron had a speaker's and consultancy agreement with Fujifilm. G. Vanbiervliet has provided consultancy for Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Fujifilm Inc., and Ambu, and has provided expert lectures/medical training for Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Mayloy Spindler, Pentax Inc., Fujifilm Inc., and Tillotts. M. Pioche has provided training sessions in endoscopy and endoscopic resection for Olympus, Cook Medical, Boston Scientific, and Pentax Medical, and in endoscopic characterization with Norgine and Provepharm; he received an invitation to UEGW from AlfaSigma; he holds a patent with his institution, Hospices civils de Lyon, for the IPEFIX device.J. Albouys, P. Mandengue, E. Abou Ali, J.-B. Chevaux, V. Lepillez, J. Privat, T. Degand, T. Wallenhorst, U. Chaput, A. Berger, K. Aziz, G. Rahmi, E. Kull, L. Caillo, S. Koch, and F. Subtil declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background and study aims The costs of reusable endoscope reprocessing have been evaluated, yet external validity of the findings remains challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the costs of purchase, maintenance, microbiological control, and reprocessing of a reusable duodenoscope per endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in France. Study findings exclude the costs of infection, downtime due to breakdown, reprocessing single-use material disposal, and device disposal, all of which should also be considered. Materials and methods The study encompassed both observational and theoretical approaches. Observational data were collected in four hospitals, from December 2019 to December 2020, with an ad hoc survey, based on 2016 and 2018 national guidelines for duodenoscope reprocessing. Costs were modeled, using the same guidelines, assuming a mean workload of 223 ERCP/duodenoscope/year. Results The mean observed cost of purchase, maintenance, microbiological control, reprocessing (human resources and consumables), and overhead (additional 35%) with a reusable duodenoscope was €80.23 (standard deviation €3.77) per ERCP. The corresponding mean theoretical cost was €182.71 for manual reprocessing without endoscope drying cabinet (EDC), €191.36 for manual reprocessing with EDC, €235.25 for automated endoscope reprocessing (AER) without EDC, and €253.62 for AER with EDC. Conclusions Because procedures, equipment, volume activity, number of duodenoscopes, human resources, and internal work organizations are hospital-dependent, observed costs varied between hospitals. Theoretical costs were higher than observed costs, showing that the theoretical approach is not sufficient. Hypotheses to explain the difference between the two approaches include failing to measure some costs in the survey and challenges in guideline implementation., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest DT declares a leadership role in EURO-PHARMAT (president and treasurer) and that the institution received funding from Boston Scientific. FD and IDZ declare having received consulting fees from Boston Scientific. JH declares having received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Mylan. BN declares having received training sessions funded by Boston Scientific. FP declares having participated in advisory boards and having received consulting fees from Boston Scientific. GV declares a leadership role as Lead of the research committee of French endoscopic digestive society and having received consulting fees from Ambu, Boston Scientific, Fujifilm, Pentax and Tillotts. TP declares having received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Olympus, Norgine and Ipsen, as well as payment or honoraria for educational event from Ipsen. ELD, VM and CP declare no conflicts of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background: Liver cirrhosis and esophageal cancer share several risk factors, such as alcohol intake and excess weight. Endoscopic resection is the gold standard treatment for superficial tumors. Portal hypertension and coagulopathy may increase the bleeding risk in these patients. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia in patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension., Methods: This retrospective multicenter international study included consecutive patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension who underwent endoscopic resection in the esophagus from January 2005 to March 2021., Results: 134 lesions in 112 patients were treated, including by endoscopic submucosal dissection in 101 cases (75 %). Most lesions (128/134, 96 %) were in patients with liver cirrhosis, with esophageal varices in 71 procedures. To prevent bleeding, 7 patients received a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, 8 underwent endoscopic band ligation (EBL) before resection, 15 received vasoactive drugs, 8 received platelet transfusion, and 9 underwent EBL during the resection procedure. Rates of complete macroscopic resection, en bloc resection, and curative resection were 92 %, 86 %, and 63 %, respectively. Adverse events included 3 perforations, 8 delayed bleedings, 8 sepsis, 6 cirrhosis decompensations within 30 days, and 22 esophageal strictures; none required surgery. In univariate analysis, cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection was associated with delayed bleeding ( P  = 0.01)., Conclusions: In patients with liver cirrhosis or portal hypertension, endoscopic resection of early esophageal neoplasia appeared to be effective and should be considered in expert centers with choice of resection technique, following European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to avoid undertreatment., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND : The diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma in patients with a biliary stricture without mass syndrome can be obtained by biliary brushing with a sensitivity of ~50 %. We performed a multicenter randomized crossover trial comparing the aggressive Infinity brush with the standard RX Cytology Brush. The aims were to compare sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma diagnosis and cellularity obtained. METHODS : Biliary brushing was performed consecutively with each brush, in a randomized order. Cytological material was studied with blinding to the brush type used and order. The primary end point was sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma diagnosis; the secondary end point was the abundance of cellularity obtained with each brush, with cellularity quantified in order to determine if one brush strongly outperformed the other. RESULTS : 51 patients were included. Final diagnoses were cholangiocarcinoma (n = 43; 84 %), benign (n = 7; 14 %), and indeterminate (n = 1; 2 %). Sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma was 79 % (34 /43) for the Infinity brush versus 67 % (29/43) for the RX Cytology Brush ( P  = 0.10). Cellularity was rich in 31/51 cases (61 %) with the Infinity brush and in 10/51 cases (20 %) with the RX Cytology Brush ( P  < 0.001). In terms of quantification of cellularity, the Infinity brush strongly outperformed the RX Cytology Brush in 28/51 cases (55 %), while the RX Cytology Brush strongly outperformed the Infinity brush in 4/51 cases (8 %; P  < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS : This randomized crossover trial showed that the Infinity brush is not significantly more effective than the RX Cytology Brush for biliary stenosis without mass syndrome in terms of sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma diagnosis, but does offer a significantly higher abundance of cellularity., Competing Interests: D. Karsenti has received consulting fees from Olympus. J. Privat has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific. S. Leblanc has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Olympus, and is on the advisory board of Alfasigma and Norgine. J. Levy has received consulting fees from Ambu. M. Schaefer has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, lecture fees from Ferring, Alfasigma and Duomed Endoscopy, and is on the advisory board of Abbvie. G. Vanbiervliet has received consulting fees from Ambu, Boston Scientific, Cook and Fujifilm, and lecture fees from Tillots Inc. Fujifilm, Boston Scientific and Pentax. G. Rahmi has received consulting fees from Medtronic and Fujifilm, and lecture fees from Boston Scientific and Pentax. E. Perez-Cuadrado Robles has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific. T. Wallenhorst has received consulting fees from Fujifilm and Olympus.The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) has been described as a potentially curative option for solid and cystic pancreatic neoplasms. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pancreatic EUS-RFA in a large study population., Methods: A retrospective study retrieving all consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic EUS-RFA during 2019 and 2020 in France was conducted. Indication, procedural characteristics, early and late adverse events (AEs), and clinical outcomes were recorded. Risk factors for AEs and factors related to complete tumor ablation were assessed on univariate and multivariate analyses., Results: One hundred patients (54% men, 64.8 ± 17.6 years old) affected by 104 neoplasms were included. Sixty-four neoplasms were neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), 23 were metastases, and 10 were intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms with mural nodules. No procedure-related mortality was observed, and 22 AEs were reported. Proximity of pancreatic neoplasms (≤1 mm) to the main pancreatic duct was the only independent risk factor for AEs (odds ratio [OR), 4.10; 95% confidence interval [CI), 1.02-15.22; P = .04). Fifty-nine patients (60.2%) achieved a complete tumor response, 31 (31.6%) a partial response, and 9 (9.2%) achieved no response. On multivariate analysis, NENs (OR, 7.95; 95% CI, 1.66-51.79; P < .001) and neoplasm size <20 mm (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 2.17-14.29; P < .001) were independently related to complete tumor ablation., Conclusions: The results of this large study confirm an overall acceptable safety profile for pancreatic EUS-RFA. Close proximity (≤1 mm) to the main pancreatic duct represents an independent risk factor for AEs. Good clinical outcomes in terms of tumor ablation were observed, especially for small NENs., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: The prevalence and the role of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) remain unclear, as the literature provides heterogeneous information on the subject. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of SIBO in IBS and to assess the correlation between methane and hydrogen levels measured during breath tests and the severity of IBS., Method: Two-hundred and forty-seven patients with IBS were prospectively included. A glucose breath test (GBT) measured H 2 and CH 4 production to diagnose SIBO. A test was positive when H 2 values exceeded 12 ppm in the first 90 min and/or when a CH 4 value exceeded 10 ppm at any time. IBS severity (IBS-SSS), quality of life (GIQLI), and anxiety and depression (HAD) were assessed to investigate the correlation with H 2 and CH 4 production., Results: The prevalence of SIBO in IBS was 36.4% (9.7% with H 2 , 26.7% with CH 4 ). CH 4 levels were significantly higher in the predominantly constipated patients ( P  = 0.00), while H 2 levels were significantly higher within the diarrheal phenotype ( P  = 0.01). IBS severity was not correlated with either H 2 levels ( r  = 0.02; P  = 0.84) or CH 4 levels ( r  = 0.05; P  = 0.64). H 2 production was inversely correlated with the quality of life ( r  = -0.24; P  = 0.03) and significantly correlated with the HAD scale ( r  = 0.22; P  = 0.03). The pain and discomfort experienced during GBT was not correlated with methane levels ( r  = -0.09, P  = 0.40), hydrogen levels ( r  = -0.01, P  = 0.93), or sum of both ( r  = 0.06, P  = 0.58), but significantly associated with IBS severity ( r  = 0.50, P  <0.00)., Conclusion: SIBO has a high prevalence in IBS but does not increase its severity. Individual susceptibility to pain may have a greater influence on the severity of IBS., (© 2023 The Authors. JGH Open published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background and Aims: No recommendation regarding antibiotic prophylaxis and preparation modalities are available for patients with esophageal motor disorders who benefit from Per-Oral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM). The aim of our study was to evaluate their impact on the POEM's safety., Patients and Methods: This study was a comparative and multicentric retrospective analysis of a database prospectively collected. Patients over 18 years old with esophageal motor disorders confirmed by prior manometry, who underwent POEM were included. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of adverse events, as classified by Cotton, based on whether or not antibiotic prophylaxis was administered., Results: A total of 226 patients (median age 52.9 ± 19.12 years [18-105], 116 women [51.3%]) were included. The indication for POEM was mainly type 2 achalasia ( n  = 135, 60.3%). Antibiotic prophylaxis was administered to 170 patients (75.2%) during 3.93 ± 3.46 days [1-21]. The overall adverse events rate was 9.3% ( n  = 21). Antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with the occurrence of adverse events ( p  = .003), but had no impact on their severity ( p  = .238). Antibiotic prophylaxis didn't influence the effectiveness of POEM (1 [0-4] vs 1 [0-9], p  = .231). The use of a liquid diet in the 48 h prior to the procedure was significantly associated with a lower adverse events rate (3.1% vs 6.19%, p  = .0002)., Conclusion: The antibiotic prophylaxis during POEM does not prevent adverse events, had no impact on their severity and the efficacy of the procedure. A liquid diet before the procedure should be systematically proposed.

Background: Gastric per oral endoscopic esophageal myotomy (G-POEM) is a promising procedure to treat refractory gastroparesis. The safety profile of G-POEM is an important topic because gastroparesis is a functional pathology, with a procedure whose effectiveness is between 50 and 65% depending on the studies., Objectives: We present this retrospective multicenter study, with the aim of establishing a safety profile, focusing on serious adverse events (AEs)., Design: This was a multicenter observational cohort study conducted in five French expert centers., Methods: All patients who underwent G-POEM for refractory gastroparesis between 2015 and 2021 were included for analysis. AEs were classified into per endoscopic, early postoperative, and late postoperative, up to 1 month. Their severity was assessed using Dindo-Clavien and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy classification. The primary objective was to evaluate the rate of G-POEM severe AEs. Secondary objectives were to document other postoperative AEs, and to identify predictive factors., Results: In all, 217 patients were included: 81 men and 136 women, mean age 52 ± 17 years. The average procedural time was 44 ± 14 min (12-78). The average hospital stay was 3.7 ± 2.3 days. The AEs rate classified as Clavien-Dindo ⩾3 was 0.4% (one delayed bleeding requiring blood transfusion and endoscopic management). There were no deaths or patients admitted to intensive care unit. The rates of mucosotomy and capnoperitoneum were 3.7 and 1.8%, respectively, without clinical consequences. Most patients (81.5%) did not experience any AE. Three cases of dumping syndrome occurred, quickly managed by dietary measures., Conclusion: Our study confirms the safety of G-POEM with less than 0.5% of serious AEs, medically managed. This outcome makes this a procedure to have a good benefit-risk ratio., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2022.)

Background: Little is known about small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) outcomes in patients with surgically altered anatomy., Aims: To assess the feasibility and diagnostic yield of orally ingested SBCE to investigate obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) in patients with surgically altered gastric anatomy, compared to native gastric anatomy., Methods: 207 patients with OGIB were selected from an open, multicenter, retrospective cohort (SAGA study) and match-paired according to age, gender and bleeding type (overt/occult) to 207 control patients from a randomized controlled trial (PREPINTEST). Primary outcomes were the diagnostic yield (P1 or P2 findings), completion rate, adverse events rate, and small bowel transit time (SBTT)., Results: The diagnostic yield was not statistically different between groups (44.9% in SAGA vs 42.5% in control patients). Inflammatory/ulcerated lesions were significantly more frequent in patients with SAGA (43.0% vs 29.3%). The median SBTT was significantly longer in the SAGA group than in control patients (283 vs 206 minutes), with a significantly lower completion rate (82.6% vs 89.9%); Adverse events were scarce (0.5% vs 0.0%)., Conclusion: Patients with surgically altered gastric anatomy should benefit from SBCE investigation for OGIB as much as non-operated patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The following authors disclosed financial relationships: X. Dray: Speaker for MSD, Pfizer, Medtronic, Bouchara Recordati, Fujifilm, Alfasigma, and Norgine; consultant for Alfasigma, Norgine, and Pentax; co-founder of and shareholder in Augmented Endoscopy; training and travel support from Ankon. G. Rahmi: personal fees from Fujifilm, Medtronic, and from Boston Scientific for an educational event. A. Koulaouzidis: Co-founder of AJM Medicaps; co-director of iCERV Ltd; travel support from Jinshan and Norgine; research support from ESGE/Given Imaging Ltd and IntroMedic/SynMed; F. Cholet: personal fees from Medtronic France for an educational event; All other authors disclosed no financial relationships. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To provide guidelines for the management of the intensive care patient with severe acute pancreatitis., Design: A consensus committee of 22 experts was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the beginning of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline construction process was conducted independently of any industrial funding (i.e. pharmaceutical, medical devices). The authors were required to follow the rules of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised., Methods: The most recent SFAR and SNFGE guidelines on the management of the patient with severe pancreatitis were published in 2001. The literature now is sufficient for an update. The committee studied 14 questions within 3 fields. Each question was formulated in a PICO (Patients Intervention Comparison Outcome) format and the relevant evidence profiles were produced. The literature review and recommendations were made according to the GRADE® methodology., Results: The experts' synthesis work and their application of the GRADE® method resulted in 24 recommendations. Among the formalised recommendations, 8 have high levels of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 12 have moderate levels of evidence (GRADE 2+/-). For 4 recommendations, the GRADE method could not be applied, resulting in expert opinions. Four questions did not find any response in the literature. After one round of scoring, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations., Conclusions: There was strong agreement among experts for 24 recommendations to improve practices for the management of intensive care patients with severe acute pancreatitis., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Objectives: A single-use duodenoscope (SUD) has been recently developed to overcome issues with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related cross-infections. The aim was to evaluate SUD safety and performance in a prospective multi-centre study., Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing ERCP in six French centers were prospectively enrolled. All procedures were performed with the SUD; in case of ERCP failure, operators switched to a reusable duodenoscope. Study outcomes were the successful completion of the procedure with SUD, safety and operators' satisfaction based on a VAS 0-10 and on 22 qualitative items. The study protocol was approved by French authorities and registered (ID-RCB: 2020-A00346-33). External companies collected the database and performed statistical analysis., Results: Sixty patients (34 females, median age 65.5 years old) were enrolled. Main indications were bile duct stones (41.7%) and malignant biliary obstruction (26.7%). Most ERCP were considered ASGE grade 2 (58.3%) or 3 (35.0%). Fifty-seven (95.0%) procedures were completed using the SUD. Failures were unrelated to SUD (one duodenal stricture, one ampullary infiltration, and one tight biliary stricture) and could not be completed with reusable duodenoscopes. Median operators' satisfaction was 9 (7-9). Qualitative assessments were considered clinically satisfactory in a median of 100% of items and comparable to a reusable duodenoscope in 97.9% of items. Three patients (5%) reported an adverse event. None was SUD-related., Conclusions: The use of a SUD allows ERCP to be performed with an optimal successful rate. Our data show that SUD could be used for several ERCP indications and levels of complexity., (© 2021 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Background: One of the most feared and life-threatening complications after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is staple line leak, with an incidence between 1 and 4%. Stable patients may be managed conservatively, with antibiotics, percutaneous drainage and endoscopy-based treatment. We propose mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and platelet rich plasma (PRP) therapy as an innovative technique to treat leak after SG., Material and Methods: Bone marrow MSCs is obtained by centrifugation of tibial puncture specimen. A peripheral whole blood sample is retrieved from the patient and centrifuged to obtain PRP. During endoscopy, the first 10 mL are injected in 4quadrants (equal volume) in the submucosae around the internal orifice. The second 10 mL are injected in the wall of the fistula tract., Results: The immediate course following the endoscopy was uneventful in both reported cases. The leaks healed in 30 and 42 D, respectively. Oral nutrition was progressively started during the third WK and fourth WK following the injection for both patients. No adverse event was noted during the follow-up period., Conclusion: The management of fistulas post SG is controversial and actual available treatments present a relatively prolonged healing time. MSC administration retains a high potential value in the treatment of these fistulas. Further studies and wider clinical trials are mandatory to determine the impact of MSC administration., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors report no proprietary or commercial interest in any product mentioned or concept discussed in this article. No grants or funding were received., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Objective: The detection of lesions during small bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE) depends on the cleanliness of the intestine. Quality reporting and comparison of different preparation methods require reliable scores. Three scores known as quantitative index (QI), qualitative evaluation (QE), and overall adequacy assessment (OAA), have been proposed to assess SB cleanliness, and are sometimes used in clinical practice and in clinical trials. However, none of these scores has received any external validation. The aim of our study was to re-assess the reproducibility of these three specific scores., Methods: One-hundred-and-fifty-five complete third-generation SB-CE video recordings were extracted from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (PREPINTEST) which evaluated three modalities of SB preparation for CE. Three experts independently read the 155 SB-CE video recordings twice, in a random order, over 48 -h periods at 6-week intervals, using the QI, QE and OAA scores. Cohen's linearly weighted kappa coefficients were calculated to assess intra-observer and inter-observer agreements., Results: Intra-observer reproducibility was fair to moderate, with kappa coefficients between 0.37 and 0.46 for QI, 0.41 and 0.51 for QE, 0.41 and 0.50 for OAA. Inter-observer reproducibility was fair to substantial according to kappa coefficients between experts varying from 0.40 to 0.64, 0.29 to 0.65, and 0.52 to 0.71, for QI, QE and OAA, respectively., Conclusions: QI, QE and OAA scores, currently used for evaluation of the quality of the preparation of SB-CE, are not sufficiently reproducible. Other scores or methods are therefore needed for SB-CE cleanliness assessment., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations., Competing Interests: Dr Radaelli has received speaker fees from Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Pfizer and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Alikhan has received fees from Alexion, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Daiichi, Pfizer and Portola. Dr Lester has received speaker fees from Sanofi Aventis and Leo Pharma, speaker fees and advisory board fees from Bayer, Daichii Sankyo, Pfizer, and Boehringer Ingelheim, and support to attend a scientific meeting from Boehringer Ingelheim. Prof Van- Hooft has received departmental research grant support from Cook Medical and Abbott, lecture fees from Medtronics and Cook Medical, and consultancy fees from Boston Scientific and Olympus. None of the remaining authors have competing interests to declare., (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, British Society of Gastroenterology, the Author(s) or their employer(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme and BMJ Publishing Group Ltd under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).)

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FR has received speaker fees from Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Pfizer and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Alikhan has received fees from Alexion, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Daiichi, Pfizer and Portola. WL has received speaker fees from Sanofi Aventis and Leo Pharma, speaker fees and advisory board fees from Bayer, Daichii Sankyo, Pfizer and Boehringer Ingelheim, and support to attend a scientific meeting from Boehringer Ingelheim. JEV-H has received departmental research grant support from Cook Medical and Abbott, lecture fees from Medtronics and Cook Medical, and consultancy fees from Boston Scientific and Olympus., (© 2021 European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, British Society of Gastroenterology, the Author(s) or their employer(s).)

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) with worrisome features or high-risk stigmata (WF/HRS) has been evaluated in few series with short-term outcomes. This study's primary endpoint was to assess the long-term efficacy of EUS-RFA in patients with NETs or pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) over at least 3 years. Patients and methods  Twelve patients had 14 NETs with a mean 13.4-mm size (10-20) and 17 patients had a cystic tumor (16 IPMN, 1 MCA) with a 29.1-mm mean size (9-60 were included. They were treated with EUS-guided RFA, evaluated prospectively at 1 year, and followed annually for at least 3 years. Results  The mean duration of follow-up was 42.9 months (36-53). Four patients died during follow-up (17-42 months) from unrelated diseases. At 1-year follow-up, and 85.7 % complete disappearance was seen in 12 patients with 14 NETs. At the end of follow-up (45.6 months), complete disappearance of tumors was seen in 85.7 % of cases. One case of late liver metastasis occurred in a patient with initial failure of EUS-RFA. At 1-year follow-up, a significant response was seen in 70.5 % of 15 patients with PCNs. At the end of the follow-up, there was a significant response in 66.6 % with no mural nodules. Two cases of distant pancreatic adenocarcinoma unrelated to IPMN occurred. Conclusions  EUS-RFA results for pancreatic NETs or PCNs appear to be stable during 42 months of follow-up., Competing Interests: Competing interests Dr. Barthet received a research grant from Boston scientific (endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis). Dr. Napoleon is a consultant for Boston Scientific., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Introduction: The aims of this retrospective multicenter study were to assess the technical success and adverse events of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures in children in French and Belgian centers., Methods: All children aged 1 day to 17 years who underwent ERCP between January 2008 and March 2019 in 15 tertiary care hospitals were retrospectively included., Results: 271 children underwent 470 ERCP procedures. Clinical long-term follow-up was available for 72 % of our patients (340/470 procedures). The median age at intervention was 10.9 years. ERCP was therapeutic in 90 % (423/470) and diagnostic in cases of neonatal cholestasis in 10 % of the patients. The most common biliary indication was choledocholithiasis; the most common pancreatic indication was chronic pancreatitis. Biliary cannulation was successful in 92 % of cases (270/294); pancreatic cannulation in 96 % of cases (169/176); and planned therapeutic procedures in 92 % of cases (388/423). The overall complication rate was 19 % (65/340). The most common complication was post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in 12 % of cases (40/340) and sepsis in 5 % (18/340). On univariate analyses, pancreatic stent removal was protective against PEP (odds ratio [OR] 0.1, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.01 - 0.75; P  = 0.03), and sepsis was associated with history of liver transplantation (OR 7.27, 95 %CI 1.7 - 31.05; P  = 0.01). Five patients had post-ERCP hemorrhage and two had intestinal perforation. All complications were managed with supportive medical care. There was no procedure-related mortality., Conclusion: Our cohort demonstrates that ERCP can be performed safely with high success rates in many pancreaticobiliary diseases of children. The rate of adverse events was similar to that in previous reports., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany.)

Objective: Due to an annual progression rate of Barrett's oesophagus (BO) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) between 9% and 13% per year endoscopic ablation therapy is preferred to surveillance. Since this recommendation is based on only one randomised trial, we aimed at checking these results by another multicentre randomised trial with a similar design., Design: A prospective randomised study was performed in 14 centres comparing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (maximum of 4 sessions) to annual endoscopic surveillance, including patients with a confirmed diagnosis of BO with LGD. Primary outcome was the prevalence of LGD at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of LGD at 1 year, the complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) at 3 years, the rate of neoplastic progression at 3 years and the treatment-related morbidity., Results: 125 patients were initially included, of whom 82 with confirmed LGD (76 men, mean age 62.3 years) were finally randomised, 40 patients in the RFA and 42 in the surveillance group. At 3 years, CE-IM rates were 35% vs 0% in the RFA and surveillance groups, respectively (p<0.001). At the same time, the prevalence LGD was 34.3% (95% CI 18.6 to 50.0) in the RFA group vs 58.1% (95% CI 40.7 to 75.4) in the surveillance group (OR=0.38 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.02), p=0.05). Neoplastic progression was found in 12.5% (RFA) vs 26.2% (surveillance; p=0.15). The complication rate was maximal after the first RFA treatment (16.9%)., Conclusion: RFA modestly reduced the prevalence of LGD as well as progression risk at 3 years. The risk-benefit balance of endoscopic ablation therapy should therefore be carefully weighted against surveillance in patients with BO with confirmed LGD., Trial Registration Number: NCT01360541., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MBa: Norgine (consulting), Medtronic (teaching), 3D Matrix (research grant). MP: Norgine (consulting), 3D matrix (consulting), Boston Scientific (consulting), Cook Medical (training). ECo: AbbVie (teaching), Fujifilm (consulting), Mayoly-Spindler (teaching), Medtronic (consulting), Norgine (consulting). CB: Boston Scientific (consulting), Recordati (teaching), Norgine (teaching). FZ: Medtronic (research grant), Reckitt Benckiser (consulting)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Data on the long-term outcomes of gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) for refractory gastroparesis are lacking. We report the results of a large multicenter long-term follow-up study of G-POEM for refractory gastroparesis., Methods: This was a retrospective multicenter study of all G-POEM operations performed in seven expert French centers for refractory gastroparesis with at least 1 year of follow-up. The primary endpoint was the 1-year clinical success rate, defined as at least a 1-point improvement in the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI)., Results: 76 patients were included (60.5 % women; age 56 years). The median symptom duration was 48 months. The median gastric retention at 4 hours (H4) before G-POEM was 45 % (interquartile range [IQR] 29 % - 67 %). The median GCSI before G-POEM was 3.6 (IQR 2.8 - 4.0). Clinical success was achieved in 65.8 % of the patients at 1 year, with a median rate of reduction in the GCSI score of 41 %. In logistic regression analysis, only a high preoperative GCSI satiety subscale score was predictive of clinical success (odds ratio [OR] 3.41, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01 - 11.54; P  = 0.048), while a high rate of gastric retention at H4 was significantly associated with clinical failure (OR 0.97, 95 %CI 0.95 - 1.00; P  = 0.03)., Conclusions: The results confirm the efficacy of G-POEM for the treatment of refractory gastroparesis, as evidenced by a 65.8 % clinical success rate at 1 year. Although G-POEM is promising, prospective sham-controlled trials are urgently needed to confirm its efficacy and identify the patient populations who will benefit most from this procedure., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

1: ESGE recommends that all duodenal adenomas should be considered for endoscopic resection as progression to invasive carcinoma is highly likely.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends performance of a colonoscopy, if that has not yet been done, in cases of duodenal adenoma.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends the use of the cap-assisted method when the location of the minor and/or major papilla and their relationship to a duodenal adenoma is not clearly established during forward-viewing endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends the routine use of a side-viewing endoscope when a laterally spreading adenoma with extension to the minor and/or major papilla is suspected.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests cold snare polypectomy for small (< 6 mm in size) nonmalignant duodenal adenomas.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the first-line endoscopic resection technique for nonmalignant large nonampullary duodenal adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for duodenal adenomas is an effective resection technique only in expert hands.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends using techniques that minimize adverse events such as immediate or delayed bleeding or perforation. These may include piecemeal resection, defect closure techniques, noncontact hemostasis, and other emerging techniques, and these should be considered on a case-by-case basis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends endoscopic surveillance 3 months after the index treatment. In cases of no recurrence, a further follow-up endoscopy should be done 1 year later. Thereafter, surveillance intervals should be adapted to the lesion site, en bloc resection status, and initial histological result. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence., Competing Interests: M. Arvanitakis has received lecture fees from Olympus. T. Beyna provides consultancy to and gives lectures for Boston Scientific and Cook Medical (ongoing). J.E. van Hooft’s department has received research grants from Cook Medical (from 2014 to 2019) and Abbott (from 2014 to 2017); she has received lecture fees from Medtronics (from 2014 to 2015, 2019) and Cook Medical (from 2019); and she has received consultancy fees from Boston Scientific (from 2014 to 2017). G. Vanbiervliet has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific and Cook Medical (both from 2019 to present). U. Arnelo, M. Barthet, O. Busch, P. Deprez, A. Larghi, G. Manes, A. Moss, K. Nalankilli, B. Napoleon, M. Nayar, E. Pérez-Cuadrado-Robles, L. Kunovsky, S. Seewald, and M. Strijker, declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

1: ESGE recommends against diagnostic/therapeutic papillectomy when adenoma is not proven.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasound and abdominal magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for staging of ampullary tumors.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends endoscopic papillectomy in patients with ampullary adenoma without intraductal extension, because of good results regarding outcome (technical and clinical success, morbidity, and recurrence).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends en bloc resection of ampullary adenomas up to 20-30 mm in diameter to achieve R0 resection, for optimizing the complete resection rate, providing optimal histopathology, and reduction of the recurrence rate after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests considering surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas when endoscopic resection is not feasible for technical reasons (e. g. diverticulum, size > 4 cm), and in the case of intraductal involvement (of > 20 mm). Surveillance thereafter is still mandatory.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends direct snare resection without submucosal injection for endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends long-term monitoring of patients after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy, based on duodenoscopy with biopsies of the scar and of any abnormal area, within the first 3 months, at 6 and 12 months, and thereafter yearly for at least 5 years.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence., Competing Interests: M. Arvanitakis has received lecture fees from Olympus. T. Beyna provides consultancy to and gives lectures for Boston Scientific and Cook Medical (ongoing). J.E. van Hooft’s department has received research grants from Cook Medical (from 2014 to 2019) and Abbott (from 2014 to 2017); she has received lecture fees from Medtronics (from 2014 to 2015, 2019) and Cook Medical (from 2019); she has received consultancy fees from Boston Scientific (from 2014 to 2017). G. Vanbiervliet has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific and Cook Medical (both from 2019 to present). A. Aelvoet, U. Arnelo, M. Barthet, O. Busch, P. Deprez, A. Larghi, G. Manes, A. Moss, B. Napoleon, M. Nayar,E. Pérez-Cuadrado-Robles, L. Kunovsky, S. Seewald, and M. Strijker, declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) allows an easy access to peripancreatic fluid collections (PPFCs) and the possibility of performing direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new 20-mm LAMS in the management of PPFCs. This novel stent represents the largest diameter LAMS available on the market to date., Methods: This is an international, multicenter retrospective study involving 20 centers. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided PPFC drainage using a 20-mm LAMS were included. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success. Secondary outcomes were rate and the severity of adverse events., Results: A total 105 patients underwent PPFC drainage using the new 20-mm LAMS and 106 LAMS were placed. Technical success was 100% (106/106). 7/105 patients died due to causes not related to the stent. Clinical success was achieved in 92/98 patients (93.9%). Significant adverse events occurred in 8/98 patients (8.16%): 4 cases (4.08%) of bleeding, 3 cases (3.06%) of suprainfection, 1 case of gastric outlet obstruction., Conclusions: This multicenter study demonstrated acceptable rates of technical and clinical success using a new 20-mm LAMS for PPFC, including walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). The results of our study suggest that a new 20-mm LAMS is non-inferior in terms of safety, efficacy, and adverse events as compared to smaller diameter LAMS in the management of PPFCs, including pancreatic psuedocysts (PP) and WOPN. Randomized controlled studies will be needed to determine the ideal size of LAMS need to achieve the greatest clinical benefit with the minimized risk exposure for this high-risk patient population.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has majorly affected medical activity around the world. We sought to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy activity in France., Methods: We performed a web-based survey, including 35 questions on the responders and their endoscopic practice, from 23 March to 27 March 2020, sent to the 3300 French gastroenterologists practicing endoscopy., Results: 694 GI endoscopists (21 %) provided analyzable data; of these, 29.4 % (204/694) were involved in the management of COVID-19 patients outside the endoscopy department. During the study period, 98.7 % (685/694) of endoscopists had had to cancel procedures. There were 89 gastroenterologists (12.8 %) who reported symptoms compatible with COVID-19 infection, and a positive PCR test was recorded in 12/197 (6.1 %) vs. 3/497 (0.6 %) endoscopists in the high vs. low prevalence areas, respectively ( P  < 0.001)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a major reduction in the volume of GI endoscopies performed in France in March 2020. The prolonged limited access to GI endoscopy could lead to a delay in the management of patients with GI cancers., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Montpellier bariatric team has recently proposed some technical alternatives to decrease the rate of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after bariatric surgery and also to offer patients an alternative in case of contraindication to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP): the Nissen-Sleeve (N-Sleeve)., Objectives: We present here the results from a cohort of patients that underwent an operation with this newly designed anti-reflux bariatric procedure N-Sleeve: Nissen valve added to a standard SG., Methods: Data from a prospective, observational, and monocentric cohort. All consecutive patients presenting to the bariatric surgery department for a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy between 2016 and 2018 with GERD were included in the study. The fundus was stapled with a margin from the valve, and the valve was created with tissue at a distance from the greater curvature so as to avoid a double layer stapling of the stomach., Results: A total of 70 patients were included in the study. Ninety percent of the cohort presented with a hiatal hernia at the time of surgery. No mortality was observed during the follow-up period. Concerning GERD, 76% of all patients had preoperative esophageal syndromes, whereas 21% were asymptomatic with associated esophagitis. Grade A-C esophagitis was present in 99% of the cohort, but no Barrett's esophagus was present. Fifty-six (80%) patients used PPIs regularly. At 1 year of follow-up, one patient was still symptomatic., Conclusions: Comparative trials remain necessary between N-Sleeve and standard bariatric procedures to refine the specific indications of each of them and determine the eventual role of the N-Sleeve.

Celiac disease is an immune-mediated enteropathy associated with malabsorptive syndrome and fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies. Celiac disease affects 1% of individuals but is largely underdiagnosed, as its multifaceted clinical presentations create challenging diagnostic scenarios. With the rise of the obesity epidemic, doctors are increasingly seeing celiac disease patients with overweight or obesity, which raises the question of bariatric surgery. However, few studies so far have investigated bariatric surgery in this patient population. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on celiac disease, its nutritional consequences and complications, and we discuss the possible impact of bariatric surgery on weight loss, nutritional deficiencies, response to gluten-free diet, and long-term post-operative complications. We also review the effect of bariatric surgery on the incidence of celiac disease.

Background: Gastric hyperplastic polyps (GHPs) have a risk of neoplastic transformation reaching 5 %. Current endoscopic resection techniques appear suboptimal with a high risk of local recurrence. This study assessed the outcomes of endoscopic resection for GHPs and identified risk factors for recurrence and neoplastic transformation., Methods: This retrospective, multicenter, European study included adult patients with at least one GHP ≥ 10 mm who underwent endoscopic resection and at least one follow-up endoscopy. Patients with recurrent GHPs or hereditary gastric polyposis were excluded. All data were retrieved from the endoscopy, pathology, and hospitalization reports., Results: From June 2007 to August 2018, 145 GHPs in 108 patients were included. Recurrence after endoscopic resection was 51.0 % (74 /145) in 55 patients. R0 resection or en bloc resection did not impact the risk of polyp recurrence. In multivariate analysis, cirrhosis was the only risk factor for recurrence (odds ratio [OR] 4.82, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.33 - 17.46; P  = 0.02). Overall, 15 GHPs (10.4 %) showed neoplastic transformation, with size > 25 mm (OR 10.24, 95 %CI 2.71 - 38.69; P  < 0.001) and presence of intestinal metaplasia (OR 5.93, 95 %CI 1.56 - 22.47; P  = 0.01) being associated with an increased risk of neoplastic transformation in multivariate analysis., Conclusions: Results confirmed the risk of recurrence and neoplastic transformation of large GHPs. The risk of neoplastic change was significantly increased for lesions > 25 mm, with a risk of high grade dysplasia appearing in polyps ≥ 50 mm. The risk of recurrence was high, particularly in cirrhosis patients, and long-term follow-up is recommended in such patients., Competing Interests: Dr. Pioche has provided training funded by Olympus, Norgine, and Cook. Dr. Vanbiervliet is a consultant for Boston Scientific Corp. and Cook Medical. Dr. Albéniz has participated in practical courses or talks with Olympus, Boston, Norgine, and Casen-Recordati, and has received a grant from “La Caixa/Caja Navarra” Foundation. Dr. Marín-Gabriel has provided training funded by Olympus Iberia, SimMedica, Norgine Iberia, Casen Recordati, and Cook, and has received research funding from Cook. Dr. Giovannini is a consultant for Cook Medical and Pentax Medical. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background and Aim: The diagnosis and therapeutic management of large single pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) represent major issues for clinicians and essentially rely on endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) findings. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) has high diagnostic performance for PCLs. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of nCLE on the therapeutic management of patients with single PCLs., Methods: Retrospective and comparative study. Five independent pancreatic disease experts from tertiary hospitals independently reviewed data from a prospective database of 206 patients with single PCL, larger than 2 cm and who underwent EUS-FNA and nCLE. Two evaluations were performed. The first one included the sequential review of clinical information, EUS report and FNA results. The second one included the same data + nCLE report. Participants had to propose a therapeutic management for each case., Results: The addition of nCLE to EUS-FNA led to significant changes in therapeutic management for 28% of the patients (p < 0.001). nCLE significantly increased the interobserver agreement of 0.28 (p < 0.0001), from 0.36 (CI 95% 0.33-0.49) to 0.64 (CI 95% 0.61-0.67). nCLE improved the rates of full agreement among the five experts of 24% (p < 0.0001), from 30 to 54%. With nCLE, the surveillance rate of benign SCAs fell by 35%, from 40 (28/70) to 5% (4/76)., Conclusion: The addition of nCLE to EUS-FNA significantly improves reliability of PCL diagnosis and could impact the therapeutic management of patients with single PCLs. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01563133.

The following recommendations should only be applied after a thorough diagnostic evaluation including a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan. 1 : ESGE recommends colonic stenting to be reserved for patients with clinical symptoms and radiological signs of malignant large-bowel obstruction, without signs of perforation. ESGE does not recommend prophylactic stent placement.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends stenting as a bridge to surgery to be discussed, within a shared decision-making process, as a treatment option in patients with potentially curable left-sided obstructing colon cancer as an alternative to emergency resection.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3 : ESGE recommends colonic stenting as the preferred treatment for palliation of malignant colonic obstruction.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 4 : ESGE suggests consideration of colonic stenting for malignant obstruction of the proximal colon either as a bridge to surgery or in a palliative setting.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 : ESGE suggests a time interval of approximately 2 weeks until resection when colonic stenting is performed as a bridge to elective surgery in patients with curable left-sided colon cancer.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends that colonic stenting should be performed or directly supervised by an operator who can demonstrate competence in both colonoscopy and fluoroscopic techniques and who performs colonic stenting on a regular basis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 : ESGE suggests that a decompressing stoma as a bridge to elective surgery is a valid option if the patient is not a candidate for colonic stenting or when stenting expertise is not available.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence., Competing Interests: S. Meisner provides consultancy for Olympus Europa (from April 2019, ongoing). G. Vanbliervliet has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific (2016 to present) and Cook Medical (2019 to present). J.E. van Hooft has received lecture fees from Medtronics (from 2014 to 2015 and 2019) and Cook Medical (2019) and consultancy fees from Boston Scientific (2014 – 2017); her department has received research grants from Cook Medical (2014 – 2019) and Abbott (2014 – 2017). D. Arnold, A. Arezzo R. Beets-Tan, S. Everett, M. Götz, E.E. van Halsema, J. Hill, G. Manes, E. Rodrigues-Pinto, C. Sabbagh, P.J. Tanis, J. Vandervoort and J.V. Veld have no competing interests., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background and study aims  Capsule endoscopy (CE) is the preferred method for small bowel (SB) exploration. With a mean number of 50,000 SB frames per video, SBCE reading is time-consuming and tedious (30 to 60 minutes per video). We describe a large, multicenter database named CAD-CAP (Computer-Assisted Diagnosis for CAPsule Endoscopy, CAD-CAP). This database aims to serve the development of CAD tools for CE reading. Materials and methods  Twelve French endoscopy centers were involved. All available third-generation SB-CE videos (Pillcam, Medtronic) were retrospectively selected from these centers and deidentified. Any pathological frame was extracted and included in the database. Manual segmentation of findings within these frames was performed by two pre-med students trained and supervised by an expert reader. All frames were then classified by type and clinical relevance by a panel of three expert readers. An automated extraction process was also developed to create a dataset of normal, proofread, control images from normal, complete, SB-CE videos. Results  Four-thousand-one-hundred-and-seventy-four SB-CE were included. Of them, 1,480 videos (35 %) containing at least one pathological finding were selected. Findings from 5,184 frames (with their short video sequences) were extracted and delimited: 718 frames with fresh blood, 3,097 frames with vascular lesions, and 1,369 frames with inflammatory and ulcerative lesions. Twenty-thousand normal frames were extracted from 206 SB-CE normal videos. CAD-CAP has already been used for development of automated tools for angiectasia detection and also for two international challenges on medical computerized analysis., Competing Interests: Competing interests Dr. Saurin is a consultant for Capsovision, Medtronic, and Intromedic. Dr. Rahmi is a consultant for Medtronic. Dr. Leenhardt is cofounder and shareholder of Augmented Endoscopy, and has given lectures for Abbvie. Dr. Dray is cofounder and shareholder of Augmented Endoscopy and has acted as a consultant for Alfasigma, Bouchara Recordati, Boston Scientific, Fujifilm, Medtronic, and Pentax. Dr. Huvelin is a consultant for Medtronic.

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.)

Prophylaxis: 1:  ESGE recommends routine rectal administration of 100 mg of diclofenac or indomethacin immediately before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in all patients without contraindications to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2:  ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic stenting in selected patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis (inadvertent guidewire insertion/opacification of the pancreatic duct, double-guidewire cannulation).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3:  ESGE suggests against routine endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy before the insertion of a single plastic stent or an uncovered/partially covered self-expandable metal stent for relief of biliary obstruction.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4:  ESGE recommends against the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5:  ESGE suggests antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP in the case of anticipated incomplete biliary drainage, for severely immunocompromised patients, and when performing cholangioscopy.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6:  ESGE suggests tests of coagulation are not routinely required prior to ERCP for patients who are not on anticoagulants and not jaundiced.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence., Treatment: 7:  ESGE suggests against salvage pancreatic stenting in patients with post-ERCP pancreatitis.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8:  ESGE suggests temporary placement of a biliary fully covered self-expandable metal stent for post-sphincterotomy bleeding refractory to standard hemostatic modalities.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 9:  ESGE suggests to evaluate patients with post-ERCP cholangitis by abdominal ultrasonography or computed tomography (CT) scan and, in the absence of improvement with conservative therapy, to consider repeat ERCP. A bile sample should be collected for microbiological examination during repeat ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence., Competing Interests: T. Beyna receives consultancy fees from Olympus, Boston Scientific, and Cook (ongoing), and lecture fees from Olympus, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic (ongoing). M. Dinis-Ribeiro receives a fee as Co-Editor-in-Chief of Endoscopy journal. I. Hritz has provided consultancy and training for Olympus (2017 to present), and consultancy for Pentax Medical (2018). I. Papanikolaou has provided consultancy for Boston Scientific (25 April and 21 March, 2018). A. Tringali provided consultancy for Boston Scientific (3 April 2019); he has received publication fees from UpToDate. J.E. van Hooft has received lecture fees from Medtronics (2014 – 2015) and consultancy fees from Boston Scientific (2014 – 2017); her department has received research grants from Cook Medical (2014 – 2018) and Abbott (2014 – 2017). G. Vanbiervliet has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific (2016 to present) and Cook Medical (2019 to present). L. Aabakken, C. Kapral, J.M. Dumonceau, S. Lakhtakia, A. Mariani, G. Paspatis, F. Radaelli, and A. Veitch have no competing interests., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Objectives: The results of only a few endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) have been published, and the safety of the procedure has never been investigated. Our study compared the recurrence rate in patients with and without preoperative EUS-FNA., Methods: This European multicenter registry-based study was conducted in 22 digestive units, and retrospectively included all patients who underwent complete resection of a pancreatic SPN from 2000 to 2018. Patients with and without initial EUS-FNA were compared, and postsurgery recurrence and the associated risk factors were evaluated., Results: A complete resection of a pancreatic SPN was performed in 149 patients (133 women, 89%), with a mean age of 34 (standard deviation, 14) years. There were no significant differences between the with (78 patients) and without (71 patients) EUS-FNA groups, except for age and tumor size and location.Preoperative EUS-FNA allowed pancreatic SPN diagnosis in 63/78 cases (81%). After a mean follow-up of 43 (standard deviation, 36) months, recurrence was noted in 4 patients (2.7%). Preoperative EUS-FNA was not correlated with recurrence, but an older age (P = 0.005) was significant., Conclusions: Preoperative EUS-FNA does not affect pancreatic SPN recurrence. In this series, old age was significantly correlated with recurrence.

Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) with worrisome features are surgically managed. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has recently been developed. The safety of EUS-RFA was the primary end point of this study, its efficacy the secondary end point., Methods: This was a prospective multicenter study that was planned to include 30 patients with a 1-year follow-up with either a NET < 2 cm or a pancreatic cystic neoplasm (PCN), either a branch duct IPMN with worrisome features or a mucinous cystadenoma (MCA). EUS-RFA was performed with an 18G RFA cooling needle., Results: 12 patients had 14 NETs (mean size 13.1 mm, range 10 - 20 mm); 17 patients had cystic tumors (16 IPMNs, 1 MCA; mean size 28 mm, range 9 - 60 mm). Overall three adverse events occurred (10 %), two of these in the first two patients (one pancreatitis, one small-bowel perforation). After these initial patients, modifications in the protocol resulted in a decrease in complications (3.5 %), with one patient having a pancreatic ductal stenosis. Among the 14 NETs, at 1-year follow-up 12 had completely disappeared (86 % tumor resolution), with three patients having a delayed response. Among the 17 PCNs, at 12 months, there were 11 complete disappearances and one diameter that decreased by > 50 % (significant response rate 71 %). All 12 mural nodules showed complete resolution., Conclusions: EUS-RFA of pancreatic NETs or PCNs is safe with a 10 % complication rate, which can be decreased by improved prophylaxis for the procedure., Competing Interests: Marc Barthet received a research grant from Boston Scientific (Endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis). Bertrand Napoleon is a consultant for Boston Scientific. All other authors have no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to declare., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background: The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to compare a flexible 19 G needle with nitinol shaft (19 G Flex) with a standard 22 G needle for transduodenal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling of pancreatic head tumors., Methods: Patients with pancreatic head tumors requiring tissue diagnosis were randomized into two arms: puncture with either a 19 G Flex needle or a 22 G needle. The primary end point was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary end points were ergonomic scores, sample cytohistological quality, and complications. A 6-month follow-up was performed., Results: 125 patients were randomized and 122 were analyzed: 59 patients in the 19 G Flex arm and 63 patients in the 22 G arm. The final diagnosis was malignancy in 111 patients and benign condition in 11. In intention-to-treat analysis, the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of the 19 G Flex and 22 G needles was 69.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 56.1 % - 80.8 %) vs. 87.3 % (95 %CI 76.5 % - 94.4 %), respectively ( P  = 0.02). In per-protocol analysis excluding eight technical failures in the 19 G Flex group, the diagnostic accuracy of the 19 G Flex and 22 G needles was not statistically different: 80.4 % (95 %CI 66.9 % - 90.2 %) vs. 87.3 % (95 %CI 76.5 % - 94.4 %; P  = 0.12). Technical success was higher in the 22 G arm than in the 19 G Flex arm: 100 % (95 %CI 94.3 % - 100 %) vs. 86.4 % (95 %CI 75.0 % - 94.0 %), respectively ( P  = 0.003). Transduodenal EUS-guided sampling was more difficult with the 19 G Flex (odds ratio 0.68, 95 %CI 0.47 - 0.97). CONCLUSION : The 19 G Flex needle was inferior to a standard 22 G needle in diagnosing pancreatic head cancer and more difficult to use in the transduodenal approach., Competing Interests: None, (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)