Search

This article, published in the journal Endoscopy, discusses a new technique called "topflight endoscopic submucosal dissection" (ESD) for the resection of gastric fundus tumors. The technique involves creating a tunnel from the distal esophagus and dissecting the fundus submucosa through the tunnel. The article describes two cases in which this technique was used successfully to resect fundus tumors. The patients were discharged the following day without any symptoms. The article suggests that this technique could be considered as an option for similar cases in the future. [Extracted from the article]

One of the main difficulties during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the mobilization of the partially resected lesion in order to improve access to the lesion edges and the dissection plane. In the current study, the feasibility and safety of a new "yo-yo technique" to facilitate ESD procedures were evaluated. A total of 17 consecutive patients with gastric lesionswere included. A standard hemoclip and snare were used to pull and push the lesion margins in order to increase the access to the lesion edges and to the submucosal space. All lesions were resected en bloc, without perforation or significant bleeding requiring blood transfusion, and all patients were discharged within 7 days. Resected specimens and lesions were 24-58mm (mean 36mm) and 18-45mm (mean 25mm) in size, respectively. The "yo-yo technique" is feasible, easy, and safe, and allows the lesion to be pulled and pushed during the ESD procedure. Further use of this technique may lead to the expansion of its indications to other gastrointestinal regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for Barrett's neoplasia recurrence after radiofrequency ablation (RFA)., Methods: Data from patients at 16 centers were collected for a multicenter retrospective study. Patients who underwent at least one RFA treatment for Barrett's esophagus and thereafter underwent further esophageal ESD for neoplasia recurrence were included., Results: Data from 56 patients who underwent salvage ESD between April 2014 and November 2022 were collected. Immediate complications included one muscular tear (1.8%) treated with stent (Agree classification: grade IIIa). Two transmural perforations (3.6%; treated with clips) and five muscular tears (8.9%; two treated with clips) had no clinical impact and were not considered as adverse events. Seven patients (12.5%) developed strictures (grade IIIa), which were treated with balloon dilation. Histological analysis showed 36 adenocarcinoma, 17 high grade dysplasia, and 3 low grade dysplasia. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 89.3% and 66.1%, respectively. Resections were curative in 33 patients (58.9%), and noncurative in 22 patients (39.3%), including 11 "local risk" (19.6%) and 11 "high risk" (19.6%) resections. At the end of follow-up with a median time of 14 (0-75) months after salvage ESD, and with further endoscopic treatment if necessary (RFA, argon plasma coagulation, endoscopic mucosal resection, ESD), neoplasia remission ratio was 37/53 (69.8%) and the median remission time was 13 (1-75) months., Conclusion: In expert hands, salvage ESD was a safe and effective treatment for recurrence of Barrett's neoplasia after RFA treatment., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

A 73-year-old male patient was referred to us with a long Barrett's esophagus (BE). He had a history of pulmonary embolism under anticoagulant therapy. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed a C8M9 BE with no macroscopic lesions. Random biopsies from the BE revealed multifocal high-grade dysplasia. The case was discussed in a multidisciplinary team conference and the decision for full resection of BE with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was made. Considering the large ESD resection and the high risk of stricture, we developed a novel preventive technique: the "steroid lifting method" for submucosal injection during ESD. Complete circumferential ESD with en bloc resection was performed using the "steroid lifting method", without adverse events. Oral liquids were initiated on day 1 and the patient was discharged on day 4. Oral prednisolone (30 mg per day) was started and tapered for a total of 6 weeks. The pathological examination confirmed multifocal high-grade dysplasia, with radical and curative resection. The patient had neither stricture, dysphagia nor recurrence of Barrett's mucosa at the 2, 6, 12, and 24-month follow-up. International guidelines recommend oral prednisolone and triamcinolone injection to prevent stricture formation in large ESD of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, there is no solid data on BE ESD. The risk factors for stricture formation and the optimal preventive management after large BE ESD is not known. The "steroid lifting method" might be an option in this context. Large prospective studies addressing stricture formation and preventive measures on BE ESD are necessary., Competing Interests: None., (© 2024 The Author(s). DEN Open published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Background: Few studies compared lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) and standard double pigtail plastic stents (PS) for the endoscopic drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). Albeit sometimes large, previously described cohorts display considerable heterogeneity and often pooled together data from several centers, involving multiple operators and techniques. Moreover, they often lack a control group for the comparison of outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare clinical efficacy and safety of PS versus LAMS for the endoscopic drainage of infected WON., Methods: Thirty patients were enrolled between 2011 and 2017. The present study is a single-center, 1:1 case-control study. We compared patients undergoing endoscopic drainages of infected WON through LAMS (cases) or PS (controls). The primary endpoint was the clinical efficacy (resolution of the WON/sepsis), the secondary endpoint was safety (procedure-related complications)., Results: Cases and controls were homogeneous in terms of etiology and clinical characteristics: 93% of cases and 86.7% of controls were clinically successfully treated, with no significant differences in rates of postoperative infections, bleedings, and stent migrations (respectively 13.3% vs. 21.4%; P=0.65; 13.3% vs. 0%; P=0.48; 13.3% vs. 7.1%; P=1.00). No difference was shown regarding the need for additional percutaneous or surgical treatments (33.3% vs. 13.3%; P=0.39). Cases, however, displayed a significantly prolonged mean hospital stay (90.2 days vs. 18.5 days; P<0.01) and a higher mean number of endoscopic procedures per patient (4.8 vs. 1.5; P<0.01)., Conclusions: PS might be not inferior to LAMS for the treatment WONs. Further prospective RCT is needed to compare clinical efficacy and safety in the two groups.

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

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence., Competing Interests: M. Barret has received consultancy fees from Medtronic (2019 to 2023) and Fujifilm (2023), consultancy and research funding from Pentax (2021 to 2022), and fees for training programs from Olympus (2022 to 2023). M. di Pietro has received consultancy fees from Medtronic (2018 to date); the Cytosponge was developed by his institution but he does not have a share in the patent. M. Dinis-Ribeiro has received consultancy fees from Medtronic (2021) and Roche (2022), and a research grant from Fujifilm (2021 to 2022); he is Co-Editor-in-Chief of Endoscopy. G. Fernández-Esparrach has received speaker’s fees from Medtronic (2023). R. Fitzgerald is a co-founder and shareholder (< 3 %) in Cyted Ltd, but is not an employee and does not receive funding or consultancy fees. She is a trustee of the charity Heartburn Cancer UK (HCUK) who have provided patient input and funded mobile units for delivery of heartburn check clinics as part of a research programme called DELTA; her research was funded by The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) who have licensed Cytosponge technology and assays to Medtronic in 2014. M. Jansen has received speaker’s fees from Medtronic (2018 to date). O. Pech has received speaker’s fees from Fujifilm (2012 to 2022), Boston Scientific (2012 to date), and Medtronic (2015 to date). R.E. Pouw has received speaker’s fees from Pentax Medical (2022, 2023) and consultancy fees from Medtronic and MicroTech Europe (both ongoing). M.C.W. Spaander has received research support from Lucid (Esocheck) (2020 to 2023) and Capsulomics (2022 to 2023). B.L.A.M. Weusten has received financial research support, and consultancy and lecture fees from Pentax Medical (2019 to date), and financial research support from Aqua Medical Inc. (2020 to 2022).R. Bisschops, F. Baldaque-Silva, E. Coron, M. Jovani, I. Marques-de-Sa, A. Rattan, W.K. Tan, K. Triantafyllou, E.P.D. Verheij, and P.A. Zellenrath declare that they have no conflict of interest., (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.

Video 1Resection of a gastric lesion using Topflight ESD., Competing Interests: The authors did not disclose any financial relationships., (© 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and study aims Overcoming logistical obstacles for the implementation of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) requires accurate prediction of procedure times. We aimed to evaluate existing and new prediction models for ESD duration. Patients and methods Records of all consecutive patients who underwent single, non-hybrid colorectal ESDs before 2020 at three Dutch centers were reviewed. The performance of an Eastern prediction model [GIE 2021;94(1):133-144] was assessed in the Dutch cohort. A prediction model for procedure duration was built using multivariable linear regression. The model's performance was validated using internal validation by bootstrap resampling, internal-external cross-validation and external validation in an independent Swedish ESD cohort. Results A total of 435 colorectal ESDs were analyzed (92% en bloc resections, mean duration 139 minutes, mean tumor size 39 mm). The performance of current unstandardized time scheduling practice was suboptimal (explained variance: R 2 =27%). We successfully validated the Eastern prediction model for colorectal ESD duration <60 minutes (c-statistic 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.77), but this model was limited due to dichotomization of the outcome and a relatively low frequency (14%) of ESDs completed <60 minutes in the Dutch centers. The model was more useful with a dichotomization cut-off of 120 minutes (c-statistic: 0.75; 88% and 17% of "easy" and "very difficult" ESDs completed <120 minutes, respectively). To predict ESD duration as continuous outcome, we developed and validated the six-variable cESD-TIME formula ( https://cesdtimeformula.shinyapps.io/calculator/ ; optimism-corrected R 2 =61%; R 2 =66% after recalibration of the slope). Conclusions We provided two useful tools for predicting colorectal ESD duration at Western centers. Further improvements and validations are encouraged with potential local adaptation to optimize time planning., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest J.J. Boonstra is a consultant for Boston Scientific. J.E. van Hooft is a consultant/lecturer for Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Abbvie and Medtronics, and received a research grant from Cook Medical. L.M.G. Moons is a consultant for Boston Scientific. All other authors declare no potential conflicts 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/).)

Introduction: Although abdominal pain is the most prevalent and disabling symptom in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), there are also patients who have painless CP., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with a diagnosis of CP. A total of 279 patients with definite CP with completed demographic and clinical data were included in the final analysis., Results: There were 75 (26.9%) patients with painless CP. These patients had a significantly higher mean age at diagnosis, 61.7 years, than the 52.5 years of patients with pain ( p  < 0.001). Painless and painful CP had similar rates of diabetes mellitus (DM) (28.4% vs. 31.6%) and pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) (50.0% vs. 52.3%). Painless CP had lower rates of alcoholic etiology, 36.0%, than the 52.5% in painful CP ( p  < 0.05). Patients older than 55 at the time of CP diagnosis were associated with painless CP with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 3.27 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.62-6.60]. Alcoholic etiologies were not associated with painless CP, aOR of 0.51 (95% CI: 0.25-0.91)., Conclusion: Patients with painless CP had a significantly higher mean age than patients with painful CP and increased aOR for those older than 55 at CP diagnosis. Painless and painful CP patients had similar rates of DM and PEI, confirming the necessity of routine follow up in all patients with CP.

BACKGROUND : During endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the normal mucosa is cut under constant optical control. We studied whether a positive horizontal resection margin after a complete en bloc ESD predicts local recurrence., Methods: In this European multicenter cohort study, patients with a complete en bloc colorectal ESD were selected from prospective registries. Cases were defined by a horizontal resection margin that was positive or indeterminate for dysplasia (HM1), whereas controls had a free resection margin (HM0). Low risk lesions with submucosal invasion (T1) and margins free of carcinoma were analyzed separately. The main outcome was local recurrence., Results: From 928 consecutive ESDs (2011-2020), 354 patients (40 % female; mean age 67 years, median follow-up 23.6 months), with 308 noninvasive lesions and 46 T1 lesions, were included. The recurrence rate for noninvasive lesions was 1/212 (0.5 %; 95 %CI 0.02 %-2.6 %) for HM0 vs. 2/96 (2.1 %; 95 %CI 0.57 %-7.3 %) for HM1. The recurrence rate for T1 lesions was 1/38 (2.6 %; 95 %CI 0.14 %-13.5 %) for HM0 vs. 2/8 (25 %; 95 %CI 7.2 %-59.1 %) for HM1., Conclusion: A positive horizontal resection margin after an en bloc ESD for noninvasive lesions is associated with a marginal nonsignificant increase in the local recurrence rate, equal to an ESD with clear horizontal margins. This could not be confirmed for T1 lesions., Competing Interests: L. Moons was consultant for Boston Scientific. J. Boonstra was consultant for Boston Scientific., (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/).)

A 35-year-old male with a history of recurrent pleuritic chest pain was referred for evaluation of a mediastinal mass detected on CT. MRI showed a 10.5 x 7 x 3 cm lesion in the posterior mediastinum. EUS revealed a multicystic lesion with thin septa and clear anechoic content that extended from the lower posterior mediastinum to the upper retroperitoneum. EUS-FNA was performed using a 22-gauge needle with aspiration of a serosanguineous fluid. Fluid analysis showed low values of amylase, triglycerides, CEA, and CA19-9. Cytology tests identified small mature lymphocytes without malignancy.

Background and Aim: gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps constitute only 0.1 % of all gastric polyps. They are usually amenable to resection by snare polypectomy. However, on rare occasions, these lesions may require resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection in the management of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps not amenable to resection with snare polypectomy., Methods: a retrospective observational study of all consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps between January 2011 and December 2020 was performed., Results: there were nine cases of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Most patients were female (7/9) with a mean age of 62.2 years. All gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps were described as solitary antral subepithelial lesions with a mean diameter of 16.7 mm, which appeared well-circumscribed and homogeneous lesions located at muscularis mucosa and submucosa without deeper invasion on endoscopic ultrasound. All lesions were successfully resected by en bloc and complete resection with free margins obtained in 8/9 specimens. Adverse events were reported in 2/9 cases including one intra-procedural bleeding successfully controlled with hemostatic clips and one aspiration pneumonia that evolved favorably. Mean follow-up duration was 33.7 months and no delayed complications or cases of recurrence were reported., Conclusions: endoscopic submucosal dissection appears safe and effective for the resection of gastric inflammatory fibroid polyps that present as large subepithelial lesions, if performed by experienced endoscopists after adequate characterization by endoscopic ultrasound, with high rates of technical success and low recurrence rates.

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

Video 1Endoscopic submucosal dissection of a duodenal subepithelial neuroendocrine tumor using internal traction with magnets., (© 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Paraduodenal pancreatitis (PDP) is a particular form of chronic pancreatitis (CP) occurring in and around the duodenal wall. Despite its low prevalence, this rare condition presents a significant challenge in clinical practice., Methods: We retrospectively analysed the electronic medical charts of all patients with a diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis and identified those with PDP, between January 1999 and December 2020., Results: There were 35 patients diagnosed with PDP (86% males and 14% females); median age of 56 ± 11 (range 38-80). Alcohol overconsumption was reported in 81% and smoking in 90% of patients. Abdominal pain was the leading symptom (71%), followed by weight loss, nausea and vomiting, jaundice, and diarrhoea. In 23 patients (66%), recurrent acute pancreatitis attacks were noted. Focal duodenal wall thickening was present in 34 patients (97%), cystic lesions in 80%, pancreatic duct dilatation in 54% and common bile duct dilatation in 46%. Endoscopic treatment was performed on nine patients (26%) and five patients (14%) underwent surgery. Complete symptom relief was reported in 12 patients (34%), partial symptom relief in three (9%), there was no improvement in five (14%), data were not available in three (9%) and 12 (34%) patients died before data analysis., Conclusions: PDP is a rare form of pancreatitis, most commonly occurring in the 5th or 6th decade of life, with a predominance in males and patients with a history of smoking and high alcohol consumption. Focal thickening and cystic lesions of the duodenal wall are the most common imaging findings, followed by pancreatic duct and common bile duct dilatation. A minority of patients requires surgery.

Background: Use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the diagnosis and treatment of subepithelial lesions (SELs) is limited in the West, and the best approach for these lesions is still debated. In this study we describe our experience regarding the usefulness, safety and outcomes of ESD for SELs., Method: We performed a retrospective analysis of ESD in the diagnosis and treatment of SELs between November 2010 and February 2021., Results: A total of 634 ESDs were reviewed. Fifty-five (9%) were performed in SELs, 6 in the esophagus, 34 in the stomach, and 15 in the rectum. ESD was technically successful in 53 lesions (96%). Most of them (82%) had previous endoscopic ultrasound evaluation, but only 20% had a histological diagnosis previous to the ESD. Neuroendocrine tumors, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and granular cell tumors accounted for 38% of the procedures, with a 100% rate of en bloc resection and 65% of R0 resection; the main criterion for non-curative resection was a deep positive margin, and none of the patients treated with complementary surgery had lesions on the gastrointestinal wall. Most of the procedures (62%) were performed in lesions with very low malignant potential, providing the definitive diagnosis of SELs where the previous diagnostic workup was inconclusive. We had a total of 2 delayed bleedings and 1 perforation, all treated endoscopically., Conclusion: Our real-life experience showed that ESD can be an effective and safe diagnostic tool for undetermined SELs, as well as an effective treatment for neoplastic SELs with malignant potential., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: None, (Copyright: © Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology.)

Introduction: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a disease that may mimic malignant pancreatic lesions both in terms of symptomatology and imaging appearance. The aim of the present study is to analyze experiences of surgery in patients with AIP in one of the largest European cohorts., Patients and Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study of patients diagnosed with AIP at the Department of Abdominal Diseases at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden, between January 2001 and October 2020., Results: There were 159 patients diagnosed with AIP, and among them, 35 (22.0%) patients had surgery: 20 (57.1%) males and 15 (42.9%) females; median age at surgery was 59 years (range 37-81). Median follow-up period after surgery was 50 months (range 1-235). AIP type 1 was diagnosed in 28 (80%) patients and AIP type 2 in 7 (20%) patients. Malignant and premalignant lesions were diagnosed in 8 (22.9%) patients for whom AIP was not the primary differential diagnosis, but in all cases, it was described as a simultaneous finding and recorded in retrospective analysis in histological reports of surgical specimens., Conclusions: Diagnosis of AIP is not always straightforward, and in some cases, it is not easy to differentiate it from the malignancy. Surgery is generally not indicated for AIP but might be considered in patients when suspicion of malignant/premalignant lesions cannot be excluded after complete diagnostic workup., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Video 1Patient with a history of gastric ectopic pancreas and epigastric pain. We illustrate the endoscopic submucosal dissection of the ectopic pancreas using a new traction device, the ProdiGi traction wire. Using this device, we were able to resect the lesion en bloc with no adverse events., (© 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

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.)., (Copyright © 2021 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)