Search

Endoscopy units are considered to be at an increased risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2. Our aim is to assess the correlation between pre-endoscopic screening with reverse-transcription-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) in asymptomatic individuals scheduled for elective endoscopy and the epidemiological data published by the local Health Administration.Observational retrospective study collecting the results of our screening strategy spanning June/2020-June/2021, the effective potential growth (EPG), an index measuring the outbreak risk, and the 7 and 14-day cumulative incidence (CI). Indication, delay and the findings of the endoscopic examinations were registered for RT-PCR positive patients.A total of 5808 tests were performed, yielding 125 positive results (2.15%). All positive tests occurred in weeks of high/very high risk (EPG100) with the highest monthly rate being 9.36%, recorded in January/2021. A significant correlation (rho=0.796; p0.001) between weekly positive rates and EPG was observed, and a significantly lower weekly number of positive tests was recorded when EPG100. Planning the screening strategy one week ahead according to EPG100 would have avoided up to 826 tests with only one positive result to account for. One hundred and thirteen individuals tested positive and 89 endoscopies were delayed. The most common findings were colon polyps, colorectal cancer and gastric metaplasia. Oncological diagnosis was delayed 50±3 days.No positive RT-PCR test were registered out of high-risk periods. Epidemiological administrative data in the preceding two weeks showed a significant correlation with screening results and could be useful to plan pre-endoscopic screening and avoid unnecessary tests.

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has demonstrated efficacy as submucosal injection before endoscopic mucosal resection or local injection after endoscopic submucosal dissection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions. Methods: The EndoPRP study was a prospective single-center study to analyze the efficacy of PRP shield after endoscopic mucosal resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesio with impossible clip closure, assessed by the incidence of delayed bleeding (DB) and delayed perforation, and percentage of mucosal restoration after 4 weeks (mucosal healing rate). Results: Shielding technique with PRP was performed in 4 patients, aged 52 to 80, with 4 lesions at rectum (mean size 53.7 +/- 20.6 mm, range 35 to 80 mm). DB occurred in 1 lesion (25% of all lesions), no required blood transfusion or endoscopic treatment. No postoperative delayed perforation occurred. Mucosal healing rate was of 78.6% after 4 weeks. Conclusions: PRP shield failed in prevent DB, probably due to migration and failure in the adherence in large wounds. Future comparative studies are needed to confirm these data.

Background and Aim A newly developed hydrogel, applied through the endoscope as an endoscopic shielding technique (EndoSTech), is aimed to prevent deep thermal injury and to accelerate the healing process of colonic induced ulcers after therapeutic endoscopy. Methods Lesions were performed in rats (n = 24) and pigs (n = 8). Rats were randomized to receive EndoSTech (eight rats each) with: saline (control), hyaluronic acid and product. In pigs, three ulcer sites were produced in each pig: endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)-ulcer with prior saline injection (A; EMR-saline), EMR-saline plus EndoSTech with product (B; EMR-saline-P), and EMR with prior injection of product plus EndoSTech-P (C; EMR-P-P). At the end of the 14-day study, the same lesions were performed again in healthy mucosa to assess acute injury. Animals were sacrificed after 7 (rats) and 14 (pigs) days. Ulcers were macroscopically and histopathologically evaluated. Thermal injury (necrosis) was assessed with a 1-4 scale. Results In rats, treatment with product improved mucosal healing comparing with saline and hyaluronic acid (70% vs 30.3% and 47.2%; P = 0.003), avoiding mortality (0% vs 50% and 25%; P = 0.038), and perforation (0% vs 100% and 33.3%; P = 0.02); respectively. In pigs, submucosal injection of product induced a marked trend towards a less deep thermal injury (C = 2.25-0.46 vs A and B = 2.75-0.46; P = 0.127). Mucosal healing rate was higher with product (B = 90.2-3.9%, C = 91.3-5.5% vs A = 73.1-12.6%; P = 0.002). Conclusions This new hydrogel demonstrates strong healing properties in preclinical models. In addition, submucosal injection of this product is able to avoid high thermal load of the gastrointestinal wall.

Background and Aim The study of electrical and rheological properties of solutions to carry out endoscopic resection procedures could determinate the best candidate. An ex vivo study with porcine stomachs was conducted to analyze electrical resistivity (R) and rheological properties (temperature, viscosity, height and lasting of the cushion) of different substances used in these techniques. Methods Tested solutions were: 0.9% saline (S), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), Gliceol (GC), hyaluronic acid 2% (HA), Pluronic-F127 20% (PL), saline with 10% glucose (GS), Gelaspan (GP), Covergel-BiBio (TB) and PRP with TB (PRP+TB). Measurements of electrical and rheological properties were done at 0, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min after submucosal injection. Results Solutions showed a wide variability of transepithelial R after submucosal injection. Substances able to maintain the highest R 60 min postinjection were TB (7 x 10(4) omega), HA (7 x 10(4) omega) and PL (7 x 10(4) omega). Protective solutions against deep thermal injury (T lower than 60 degrees C) were PL (47.6 degrees C), TB (55 degrees C) and HA (56.63 degrees C). Shortest time to carry out resections were observed with GC (17.66 ''), PRP (20.3 '') and GS (23.45 ''). Solutions with less cushion decrease (

AIM To prospectively evaluate the efficacy of submucosal injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on endoscopic resection of large sessile lesions. METHODS Eleven patients were submitted to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with prior injection of PRP, obtained at the time of endoscopy. Patients were followed during 1 mo. The incidence of adverse events (delayed bleeding or perforation) and the percentage of mucosal healing (MHR) after 4 wk were registered. RESULTS EMR was performed in 11 lesions (46.4 mm ± 4 mm, range 40-70 mm). Delayed bleeding or perforation was not observed in any patient. Mean ulcerated area at baseline was 22.7 cm2 ± 11.7 cm2 whereas at week 4 were 2.9 cm2 ± 1.5 cm2. Patients treated with PRP showed a very high MHR after 4 wk (87.5%). CONCLUSION PRP is an easy-to-obtain solution with proven and favourable biological activities that could be used in advanced endoscopic resection.

Background and Aim Getting ready for a colonoscopy is difficult and involves many steps. Information given to patients is very important for adherence to treatment. We created a novel smart phone application (SPA) aimed to increase bowel preparation quality and patient satisfaction. Methods We carried out a prospective, endoscopist-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. We enrolled 260 outpatient (58% female, age range 21–75 years) owners of a smartphone. Patients were allocated to two different protocols: instructions provided by SPA (SPA group; n = 108) or written instructions with visual aids (control group; n = 152). All procedures were carried out in the afternoon and patients received the same purgative regimen (2 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution plus ascorbic acid), in a full-dose same-day regimen. The study was designed to detect an improvement in quality of bowel preparation using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS) scale. Effect of protocol on patient satisfaction was assessed with a specific questionnaire at the time of colonoscopy. Results Proportion of patients who obtained successful bowel preparation for colonoscopy (HCS A or B) was significantly higher in the SPA group than in the control group (100% vs 96.1%, respectively; P = 0.037). Mean global HCS scores were similar in both groups. Patient-reported tolerability and overall experience with the prescribed bowel preparation were significantly higher for the SPA group than for the control group. Conclusion Successful cleansing and patient acceptability with the use of SPA were superior to written instructions in outpatients submitted for colonoscopy using 2 L PEG solution plus ascorbic acid.