Search

Abstract Ingestible electronics have the capacity to transform our ability to effectively diagnose and potentially treat a broad set of conditions. Current applications could be significantly enhanced by addressing poor electrode-tissue contact, lack of navigation, short dwell time, and limited battery life. Here we report the development of an ingestible, battery-free, and tissue-adhering robotic interface (IngRI) for non-invasive and chronic electrostimulation of the gut, which addresses challenges associated with contact, navigation, retention, and powering (C-N-R-P) faced by existing ingestibles. We show that near-field inductive coupling operating near 13.56 MHz was sufficient to power and modulate the IngRI to deliver therapeutically relevant electrostimulation, which can be further enhanced by a bio-inspired, hydrogel-enabled adhesive interface. In swine models, we demonstrated the electrical interaction of IngRI with the gastric mucosa by recording conductive signaling from the subcutaneous space. We further observed changes in plasma ghrelin levels, the “hunger hormone,” while IngRI was activated in vivo, demonstrating its clinical potential in regulating appetite and treating other endocrine conditions. The results of this study suggest that concepts inspired by soft and wireless skin-interfacing electronic devices can be applied to ingestible electronics with potential clinical applications for evaluating and treating gastrointestinal conditions.

Background/Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as an alternative option for biliary drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS. In this comprehensive meta-analysis, we aim to study the safety and efficacy of EUS-HGS in cases of failed conventional ERCP. Methods: Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of EUS-HGS. Using the random effect model, the pooled weight-adjusted event rate estimate for clinical outcomes in each group were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success rates. Secondary outcomes included overall adverse events (AEs), rates of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and rates or re-intervention. Results: Our analysis included 70 studies, with a total of 3527 patients. The pooled technical and clinical success rates for EUS-HGS were 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I 2 = 40%) and 98.1% ([95% CI, 97.5-98.7]; I 2 = 40%), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of AEs with EUS-HGS was 14.9% (95% CI, 12.7-17.1), with bile leakage being the most common (2.4% [95% CI, 1.7-3.2]). The pooled incidence of RBO was 15.8% [95% CI, 12.2-19.4], with a high success rate for re-intervention (97.5% [95% CI, 94.7-100]). Conclusions: Our analysis showed high technical and clinical success rates of EUS-HGS, making it a feasible and effective alternative to ERCP. The ongoing development of dedicated devices and techniques is expected to make EUS-HGS more accessible and safer for patients in need of biliary drainage.

Objectives: Colorectal canceris the third most common cancer worldwide, and kidney transplant patients have up to a 2.5-fold increased risk of colorectal cancer compared with the general population. Presently, colorectal cancer screening recommendations in kidney transplant candidates are the same as for the general population. We explored the literature on the prevalence of colonic polyps in patients with renal failure undergoing screening colonoscopy as part of kidney transplant evaluation., Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception through June 2023 to identify studies that explored the prevalence of colonic polyps in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing a screening colonoscopy as part of their pretransplant evaluation., Results: Of 937 patients, 371 had ≥1 polyp on their screening colonoscopy (39.6%; 95% CI, 29.3%-50.3%), 243 patients had ≥1 adenoma (25.9%; 95% CI, 14.3%- 39.6%), and 75 had ≥1 high-risk adenoma (8.7%; 95% CI, 6.9%-10.7%). Pooled analysis of the 2 studies comparing patients with end-stage renal disease versus matched control groups indicated higher pooled prevalence of adenomas in the end-stage renal disease group (33.4%) versus the control group (23.9%)., Conclusions: Our results suggest an average or increased prevalence of polyps and adenomatous polyps in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing colonoscopy during evaluation for kidney transplant. The pooled analysis of the studies comparing the end-stage renal disease population versus a matched control group indicates higher prevalence of adenomatous polyps in patients with end-stage renal disease. Multiple studies have shown that screening colonoscopy in this patient group is safe and does not delay kidney transplant evaluation or waitlistrates; hence, screening colonoscopy should be routinely considered.

Video 1Pancreatico-colonic fistula closure., Competing Interests: The authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication., (© 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Video 1Over-the-scope clip to the rescue: solution for duodenal perforation from migrated biliary stent., (© 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) is rising. Left-sided colorectal cancer (LCC) is associated with better survival compared to right-sided colon cancer (RCC) in metastatic disease. NCCN guidelines recommend the addition of EGFR inhibitors to KRAS/NRAS WT metastatic CRC originating from the left only. Whether laterality impacts survival in locoregional disease and EOCRC is of interest., Methods: 65,940 CRC cases from the National VA Cancer Cube Registry (2001-2015) were studied. EOCRC (2096 cases) was defined as CRC diagnosed at <50 years. Using ICD codes, RCC was defined from the cecum to the hepatic flexure (C18.0-C18.3), and LCC from the splenic flexure to the rectum (C18.5-18.7; C19 and C20)., Results: EOCRC is more likely to originate from the left side (66.65% LCC in EOCRC vs. 58.77% in CRC). Overall, LCC has better 5-year Overall Survival (OS) than RCC in stages I (61.67% vs. 58.01%) and III (46.1% vs. 42.1%) and better 1-year OS in stage IV (57.79% vs. 49.49%). Stage II RCC has better 5-year OS than LCC (53.39% vs. 49.28%). In EOCRC, there is no statistically significant difference between LCC and RCC in stages I-III. Stage IV EOCRC patients with LCC and RCC have a 1-year OS of 73.23% and 59.84%, respectively., Conclusion: In EOCRC, LCC is associated with better OS than RCC only stage IV. In the overall population, LCC is associated with better OS in all stages except stage II. The better prognosis of stage II RCC might be due to the high incidence of mismatch repair deficient tumors in this subpopulation., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Screening colonoscopy aims to interrupt the adenoma-carcinoma sequence by removing all precancerous adenomatous polyps. Adenomatous polyp detection rate (ADR) can vary between endoscopists as well as between race, age, and risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to compare ADR among academic gastroenterologists (A-GI), non-A-GI, and surgeons for endoscopies performed in the same endoscopic suite of a large medical center with a predominately African American (AA) population., Methods: All screening colonoscopies performed in 2014 for patients aged 62-76 years were identified using the electronic medical records data. Patients with average risk and high risk of CRC defined as having a 'personal history of polyps' or 'family history of CRC', and history of ulcerative colitis and Fecal Occult Blood Test/Fecal Immunochemical Test (FOBT/FIT) positivity were included. Patients with incomplete colonoscopy (defined as failing to achieve cecal intubation or poor preparation) and unrecovered tissue biopsy were excluded. ADR was calculated for three groups of endoscopists: A-GIs, non-A-GIs, and surgeons., Results: A total of 573 screening colonoscopies was analyzed. The endoscopists comprised five A-GIs, eight non-A-GIs, and six surgeons. The majority of patients were of AA decent (71%), female (54%) with an average age of 66 years. Patients classified as average risk comprised 79% of the population. Most of the colonoscopies were performed by A-GI (n=339), followed by non-A-GI (n=144), and surgeons (n=90). The ADR for A-GI was 50% as compared to 32% for non-A-GI (p<0.001) and 25% for surgeons (p<0.001). Also, A-GI were more likely to identify ≥3 adenomas during screening colonoscopies. Significant differences were observed (p<0.001) in the mean time of colonoscopy for A-GI (30 mins) non-A-G (14 mins), and surgeons (18 mins)., Conclusion: Significant variation in the ADR between endoscopists belonging to different specialties were observed. Although all appear to achieve acceptable ADR (ie at least 25 for men and 15 for women), academic gastroenterologists had better performance than non-academic GI and surgeons. This may be explained by a significantly longer average duration of procedures for the highest ADR group., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2019, Kundumadam et al.)