Search

Although esophageal cancers invading the muscularis mucosa (pT1a-MM) or submucosa (pT1b-SM) after endoscopic resection (ER) are associated with a risk of lymph node metastasis, details of metastatic recurrence after additional treatment remain unknown. We aimed to identify the risk factors for metastatic recurrence and recurrence patterns in patients receiving additional treatment after ER for esophageal cancer. Between 2006 and 2017, patients with pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM esophageal cancer who underwent ER with additional treatment (esophagectomy, chemoradiotherapy [CRT], and radiation therapy) at 21 institutions in Japan were enrolled. We evaluated the risk factors for metastatic recurrence after ER with additional treatment. Subsequently, the rate and pattern (locoregional or distant) of metastatic recurrence were investigated for each additional treatment. Of the 220 patients who received additional treatment, 57, 125, and 38 underwent esophagectomy, CRT, and radiation therapy, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, lymphatic invasion was the sole risk factor for metastatic recurrence after additional treatment (hazard ratio, 3.50; P  = 0.029). Although the risk of metastatic recurrence with additional esophagectomy was similar to that with CRT (hazard ratio, 1.01; P  = 0.986), the rate of locoregional recurrence tended to be higher with additional esophagectomy (80.0% (4/5) vs. 36.4% (4/11)), leading to a better prognosis in patients with metastatic recurrence after additional esophagectomy than CRT (survival rate, 80.0% (4/5) vs. 9.1% (1/11)). Patients with lymphatic invasion have a high risk of metastatic recurrence after ER with additional treatment for pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM esophageal cancer. Additional esophagectomy may result in a better prognosis after metastatic recurrence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The endoscopic pressure study integrated system (EPSIS) represents an innovative approach for evaluating lower esophageal sphincter function by monitoring intragastric pressure using diagnostic gastroscopes. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and validity of employing ultrathin gastroscopes for EPSIS. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on a database of consecutive patients who underwent EPSIS using both ultrathin and regular gastroscopes between September 2021 and October 2023. The study compared EPSIS parameters between the two gastroscope types to evaluate the correlation of key metrics. Results: Thirty patients underwent EPSIS with both ultrathin and regular gastroscopes. Significant positive correlations were observed in the pressure waveform: maximum intragastric pressure (mmHg) (ρ = 0.82, P < 0.001) and intragastric pressure gradient (mmHg/s) (ρ = 0.80, P < 0.001) when comparing the two gastroscopes. Maximum intragastric pressure (15.5 [5.3–20.3] vs. 18.5 [3.4–21.6], P < 0.001) and pressure gradient (0.16 [0.013–0.41] vs. 0.24 [0.0039–1.13], P < 0.001), (median [range]) were significantly lower with ultrathin gastroscopes. Conclusions: This study establishes that EPSIS parameters obtained with an ultrathin gastroscope exhibit a significant correlation with those obtained using a regular gastroscope, with each EPSIS parameter consistently lower. These findings support the viability of EPSIS for ultrathin gastroscopy and highlight its potential as a diagnostic tool for assessing lower esophageal sphincter function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of minimally invasive endoscopic treatment has seen a continual progression, marked by significant advancements in treatment devices and the refinement of endoscopic techniques. While endoscopic resection has become the standard for treating superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms, a proactive approach becomes imperative when dealing with lesions that extend beyond the submucosal layer and deeper into the muscularis propria. The ongoing evolution of endoscopic closure techniques has facilitated the introduction of advanced procedures such as endoscopic muscularis dissection, endoscopic subserosal dissection, and endoscopic full‐thickness resection. This evolution is achieved by the commitment to improve the efficacy and precision in treating challenging lesions. Nevertheless, there is currently a lack of definitive guidelines or consensus regarding the specifics of deeper layer dissection. Drawing from prior research and clinical insights, this review discusses indications, techniques, clinical outcomes, and future perspectives of deeper layer dissection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increase in fluoroquinolone (FQ)-resistant Escherichia coli (EC) is a serious global problem. In addition, much of acute uncomplicated cystitis (AUC) cases are caused by EC. FQs have been selected for the treatment of cystitis in outpatients, and there is concern about treatment failure. It is therefore necessary to select appropriate antimicrobials to spare FQs. However, there are few reported effective antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) for outpatients. We aimed to establish the effective ASP for outpatients diagnosed with AUC caused by EC, to spare the use of FQs, and to explore optimal oral antimicrobials for AUC. The study subjects were outpatients treated for AUC caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-non-producing EC (non-ESBL-EC). Based on the antibiogram results, we recommended cefaclor (CCL) as the initial treatment for AUC, and educated clinical pharmacists who also worked together to advocate for CCL or cephalexin (CEX) prescriptions. FQ usages decreased, and cephalosporin (Ceph) prescriptions increased in all medical departments. The Ceph group (n = 114; CCL = 60, CEX = 54) in the non-FQ group had fewer treatment failures than the FQ group (n = 86) (12.3% vs. 31.4%). Cephs, including CCL and CEX, were effective treatments for AUC caused by non-ESBL-EC. Antimicrobial selection based on antibiogram results and the practice of an ASP in collaboration with clinical pharmacists were useful for optimizing antimicrobial therapy in outpatients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Killian‐Jamieson diverticulum (KJD) is a relatively uncommon variant of pharyngoesophageal diverticula, distinct from the more prevalent Zenker diverticulum. However, literature on endoscopic management of KJD remains limited. This study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic septotomy (POES) as a treatment approach for symptomatic KJD. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, we investigated the outcomes of nine consecutive patients who underwent POES for KJD between January 2019 and May 2023. Follow‐up data of at least 2 months post‐treatment were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was the technical success rate of POES. Secondary outcomes encompassed the clinical success rate, defined as symptomatic improvement 2 months after POES, and the incidence of adverse events. Results: All patients presented with dysphagia, with a median symptom duration of 6 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 3–12 months). The median diverticulum size was 32 mm (IQR: 24–42 mm). The median duration of the operation time was 66 min (IQR: 60–109). A 100% technical success rate was achieved, with complete closure of the defect in all cases. There were no adverse events related to this treatment. The median hospitalization duration was 5 days (IQR: 4–6), and the clinical success rate was 88.9%. Follow‐up barium esophagograms exhibited significant improvement in the flow of the barium for all patients. Conclusions: Despite the relatively limited case volume, our findings underscore that POES is a safe and efficacious approach for managing symptomatic KJD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Anti‐reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and anti‐reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) were developed as interventions for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)‐refractory/‐dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Although ARMS and ARMA are established treatments for PPI‐refractory GERD, reliance on natural healing for ulcer scar formation introduces uncertainty and bleeding risk. To address these issues, we introduced a novel approach called anti‐reflux mucoplasty (ARM‐P), which involves immediate closure of mucosal defects following mucosectomy. This pilot study aims to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of ARM‐P. Methods: A retrospective single‐center study was conducted using prospectively collected data from October 2022 to July 2023. Patients with PPI‐refractory/‐dependent GERD who underwent ARM‐P were included. The study evaluated technical success of ARM‐P, before and after ARM‐P GERD‐Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, GerdQ, and Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD scores, along with PPI discontinuation and endoscopic esophagogastric junction morphology. Results: A total of 20 patients with a median age of 61.5 years underwent the ARM‐P procedure. The procedure achieved 100% technical success without adverse events. After ARM‐P, 55.0% discontinued PPI usage and 15.0% reduced PPI dose by half. Median GERD‐Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire score improved from 21 to 6 (P = 0.0026), median GerdQ score improved from 9 to 7 (P = 0.0022), and median Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD score decreased from 16 to 7 (P = 0.0003). Median Hill's Classification significantly improved from grade III to grade I (P = 0.0001). Conclusions: This study presents the first pilot report of ARM‐P, demonstrating its procedural safety, technical feasibility, and short‐term efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The endoscopic pressure study integrated system (EPSIS) is a novel diagnostic tool used to evaluate lower esophageal sphincter (LES) function. EPSIS allows the measurement of intragastric pressure (IGP) during gastric insufflation through esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and records its pressure waveform. This study aimed to assess the usefulness and applicability of EPSIS as an adjunct diagnostic modality for achalasia. Methods: This case–control study was conducted using a database of patients who underwent EGD, barium swallow (BS), high‐resolution manometry (HRM), and EPSIS between January 2022 and December 2022. The achalasia (experimental) group (n = 35) consisted of patients with a definitive diagnosis of achalasia. The control group (n = 34) consisted of patients with no abnormalities in EGD, BS, or HRM and no abnormal acid reflux confirmed with 24‐h pH‐impedance monitoring. EPSIS findings were compared between the two groups and characterized by the waveform pattern (uphill or flat), maximum IGP (IGP‐Max), pressure difference, and the gradient of the waveform. Results: All patients in the achalasia group showed an uphill pattern, in contrast to 21 patients (61.8%) in the control group. IGP‐Max demonstrated the best diagnostic accuracy for achalasia, with a cut‐off value of 15.8 mmHg (100% sensitivity, 58.8% specificity, and area under the curve [AUC] 0.78). The pressure gradient also demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, with a cut‐off value of 0.40 mmHg/s (80% sensitivity, 61.8% specificity, and AUC 0.76). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that EPSIS can be applied as a diagnostic modality in patients with achalasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) administration was reported to be effective in preventing delayed bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), its effectiveness in esophageal ESD is still unknown. We assessed whether PPI or vonoprazan administration was effective in preventing posterior hemorrhage after esophageal ESD. This retrospective cohort study used the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database, and patients who underwent esophageal ESD between January 2012 and December 2020 were enrolled. The participants were divided into two groups: patients who were prescribed PPI or vonoprazan (PPI or vonoprazan group) and those who were not prescribed PPI (no acid suppression). Propensity score matching analysis was performed, and the delayed bleeding rate was compared between the groups. We analyzed 54,345 patients, of whom 8237 (15.16%) were in the no acid suppression group and 46,108 (84.84%) in the PPI or vonoprazan group (PPI: 34,380 and vonoprazan: 11,728). Delayed bleeding occurred in 1126 patients (2.07%). A total of 8237 pairs were created after matching. Delayed bleeding was not significantly different between the no acid suppression group and PPI or vonoprazan group, respectively (odds ratio: 1.20, 95% confidential interval: 0.93–1.54, P  = 0.227). A sub-analysis according to the dose of PPI or vonoprazan, tumor location, and prescription of antithrombotic or anticoagulant medications was performed, but no significant effects of PPI or vonoprazan administration were found. PPI or vonoprazan did not prevent delayed bleeding; thus, the prescription of PPI and vonoprazan after esophageal ESD may not be recommended for the prevention of delayed bleeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bacillus subtilis is a gram-positive, rod-shaped, spore-forming bacterium temporarily present in the human gastrointestinal tract (1). The presence of B. subtilis in clinical specimens indicates contamination, but rare cases of [...]