Search

Exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR), with or without laparoscopic assistance, is an emergent natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery technique with promising safety and efficacy for the management of gastrointestinal submucosal tumors (SMTs) arising from the muscularis propria (MP), especially of the gastric wall. To date, evidence concerning duodenal exposed EFTR is lacking, mainly due to both the technical difficulty involved because of the special duodenal anatomy and concerns about safety and effectiveness of transmural wall defect closure. However, given the non-negligible morbidity and mortality associated with duodenal surgery, the recent availability of dedicated endoscopic tools for tissue-approximation capable to realize full-thickness defect closure could help in promoting the adoption of this endosurgical technique among referral centers. The aim of our study was to review the current evidence concerning exposed EFTR with or without laparoscopic assistance for the treatment of MP-arising duodenal SMTs.

Objective: To report a case of gastric epithelioid haemangioendothelioma, given its low incidence. Introduction: Epithelioid haemangioendothelioma is a vascular neoplasm composed of epithelioid or histiocytoid cells with endothelial characteristics. They have a very low incidence of approximately one per one million and are usually asymptomatic with a difficult preoperative diagnosis. Case Report: This study reports the case of a 58-year-old woman with a history of chronic anaemia. She underwent an elective upper endoscopy with evidence of an ulcerated submucosal lesion in the gastric antrum. The histological examination performed over the endoscopic biopsies showed the vascular characteristic of the tumor and endosonography confirmed the submucosal origin of the lesion. After resective surgery, the tumor showed the histological and immunohistochemical features of the epithelioid haemangioendothelioma. Conclusion: Surgery in the form of wide excision seems to be the treatment of choice for this rare neoplasm in the absence of histological markers of malignant potential.

Background and aims: Adequate bowel cleansing is critical to ensure quality and safety of a colonoscopy. A novel 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L-PEG+ASC) regimen was previously validated against low-volume regimens but was never compared with high-volume regimens. Methods: In a phase IV study, patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to receive split-dose 1L PEG+ASC or a split-dose 4-L PEG-based regimen (4L-PEG) in 5 Italian centers. Preparation was assessed with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) by local endoscopists and centralized reading, both blinded to the randomization arm. The primary endpoint was noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC in colon cleansing. Secondary endpoints were superiority of 1L-PEG+ASC, patient compliance, segmental colon cleansing, adenoma detection rate, tolerability, and safety. Results: Three hundred eighty-eight patients (median age, 59.8 years) were randomized between January 2019 and October 2019: 195 to 1L-PEG+ASC and 193 to 4L-PEG. Noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC was demonstrated for cleansing in both the entire colon (BBPS≥ 6: 97.9% vs 93%; relative risk [RR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.04; P superiority= .027) and in the right-sided colon segment (98.4% vs 96.0%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .99-1.02; P noninferiority= .013). Compliance was higher with 1L-PEG+ASC than with 4L-PEG (178/192 [92.7%] vs 154/190 patients [81.1%]; RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12), whereas no difference was found regarding safety (moderate/severe side effects: 20.8% vs 25.8%; P= .253). No difference in adenoma detection rate (38.8% vs 43.0%) was found. Conclusions: One-liter PEG+ASC showed noninferiority compared with 4L-PEG in achieving adequate colon cleansing and provided a higher patient compliance. No differences in tolerability and safety were detected. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03742232.).

Background and Aims: The benefit of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound–guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has never been evaluated in a randomized study. This trial aimed to test the hypothesis that in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB without ROSE was not inferior to that of EUS-FNB with ROSE. Methods: A noninferiority study (noninferiority margin, 5%) was conducted at 14 centers in 8 countries. Patients with SPLs requiring tissue sampling were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo EUS-FNB with or without ROSE using new-generation FNB needles. The touch-imprint cytology technique was used to perform ROSE. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy, and secondary endpoints were safety, tissue core procurement, specimen quality, and sampling procedural time. Results: Eight hundred patients were randomized over an 18-month period, and 771 were analyzed (385 with ROSE and 386 without). Comparable diagnostic accuracies were obtained in both arms (96.4% with ROSE and 97.4% without ROSE, P = .396). Noninferiority of EUS-FNB without ROSE was confirmed with an absolute risk difference of 1.0% (1-sided 90% confidence interval, –1.1% to 3.1%; noninferiority P < .001). Safety and sample quality of histologic specimens were similar in both groups. A significantly higher tissue core rate was obtained by EUS-FNB without ROSE (70.7% vs. 78.0%, P = .021), with a significantly shorter mean sampling procedural time (17.9 ± 8.8 vs 11.7 ± 6.0 minutes, P < .0001). Conclusions: EUS-FNB demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy in evaluating SPLs independently on execution of ROSE. When new-generation FNB needles are used, ROSE should not be routinely recommended. (ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT03322592.)

Background and study aims Exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection (Eo-EFTR) without laparoscopic assistance is a minimally invasive natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) technique that has shown promising efficacy and safety in resection of gastric submucosal tumors (G-SMTs) arising from muscularis propria (MP). However, data on the efficacy and safety of gastric Eo-EFTR mostly come from relatively small retrospective studies and concern regarding its use still exists. The aim of our systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of gastric Eo-EFTR without laparoscopic assistance. Methods A detailed MEDLINE and EMBASE search was performed for papers published from January 1998 to November 2019 and reporting on gastric Eo-EFTR without laparoscopic assistance. The search strategy used the terms “endoscopic full thickness resection” and “gastric” or “stomach”. The primary outcomes were complete resection and surgical conversion rates. The secondary outcomes were overall major adverse events, delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, peritonitis, abdominal abscess and/or abdominal infection and successful Eo-EFTR. Results Fifteen Asian studies were included in our final review, providing data on 750 Eo-EFTR-treated G-SMTs. The per-lesion rate of complete resection and surgical conversion were 98.8 %\0.8 %, respectively. The per-lesion rate of major adverse events, delayed bleeding, delayed perforation and peritonitis, abdominal abscess and/or abdominal infection was 1.6 %\0.5 %\0.1 %\0.9 %, respectively. The per-lesion rate of successful Eo-EFTR (i. e. complete tumor resection and effective endoscopic defect closure) was 98.3 %. Conclusions Eo-EFTR without laparoscopic assistance appears to be highly effective and safe NOTES for removing deep G-SMTs, particularly those arising from MP layer.

Background Since endoscopists performing procedures in the endoscopy suite can change their position by turning their back, side or front toward the X-ray source, this study aimed to establish whether dosimeter position affects the correct evaluation of an endoscopist’s personal radiation exposure during X-ray-guided procedures. Materials and methods Between January and February 2018, two dosimeters specularly placed outside the lead apron (anterior one on the chest and posterior one on the back) measured endoscopists’ personal dose equivalent (Hp) during 62 X-ray-guided procedures on adult and pediatric patients. Procedures were divided into three groups considering the position taken by the endoscopist with respect to the radiation source. For each group, the difference between mean Hp from the anterior and posterior dosimeters was calculated. Results A statistically significant difference in mean Hp was recorded for the endoscopists’ frontal and back positions (P = 0.014, and P Conclusions The position of personal dosimeters affects the correct evaluation of endoscopists’ radiation exposure during X-ray-guided procedures when frontal and back positions were recorded. To correctly evaluate radiation doses, the whole-body dosimeter should be worn according to the position of the endoscopist with respect to the radiation source; otherwise, it results in an incorrect personal dose evaluation, which may lead to substantial underestimation of staff exposure.

A 77-year-old man underwent duodeno-cephalo-pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction for pancreatic head cancer. After two years developed recurrent cholangitis with obstructive jaundice. In suspicion of obstruction of biliary tree, a percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) was attempted. Contrast dye injected troughs the catheter shower an intestinal stenosis about 10 centimeters above the bilio-enteric anastomosis. Following PET-CT scan showed no cancer recurrence. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.