Pyloric Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Measurements Are Dependent on Balloon Position

Background/Aims@#The functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) device has been used to assess pyloric dysfunction in patients with gastroparesis. We aim to investigate whether varying FLIP catheter positions affect pyloric FLIP measurements. @*Methods@#Patients undergoing endoscopy for chronic unexplained nausea and vomiting (CUNV) or gastroparesis were prospectively enrolled. FLIP balloon was adjusted for 3 positions within the pylorus: (1) proximal position, 75% of FLIP balloon in the duodenum and 25% in the antrum; (2) middle position, 50% in the duodenum and 50% in the antrum; and (3) distal position, 25% in the duodenum and 75% in the antrum. Pylorus cross-sectional area (CSA), intra-bag pressure (P), and distensibility indices (DI) were measured for 30, 40, and 50-mL balloon volumes. Fluoroscopic images were obtained to confirm FLIP balloon geometry. Data was analyzed separately using FLIP Analytic and customized MATLAB software. @*Results@#Twenty-two patients with CUNV (n = 4) and gastroparesis (n = 18) were enrolled. Pressures were significantly higher in the proximal position compared to the middle and distal positions. CSA measurements were significantly higher at the proximal and middle positions for 30-mL and 40-mL volume compared to the distal position values. DI values were significantly lower at the proximal positions for 40-mL and 50-mL distensions when compared to the middle and distal positions. Fluoroscopic images confirmed increased balloon bending when placed mostly in the duodenum. @*Conclusions@#FLIP balloon position within the pylorus directly affects balloon geometry which significantly affects P, CSA, and DI measurements. Standardized pyloric FLIP protocols and balloon design adjustments are needed for the continued application of this technology to the pylorus.

Endoscopic versus surgical management for colonic volvulus hospitalizations in the United States

Background/Aims@#Colonic volvulus (CV), a common cause of bowel obstruction, often requires intervention. We aimed to identify hospitalization trends and CV outcomes in the United States. @*Methods@#We used the National Inpatient Sample to identify all adult CV hospitalizations in the United States from 2007 to 2017. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and inpatient outcomes were highlighted. Outcomes of endoscopic and surgical management were compared. @*Results@#From 2007 to 2017, there were 220,666 CV hospitalizations. CV-related hospitalizations increased from 17,888 in 2007 to 21,715 in 2017 (p=0.001). However, inpatient mortality decreased from 7.6% in 2007 to 6.2% in 2017 (p<0.001). Of all CV-related hospitalizations, 13,745 underwent endoscopic intervention, and 77,157 underwent surgery. Although the endoscopic cohort had patients with a higher Charlson comorbidity index, we noted lower inpatient mortality (6.1% vs. 7.0%, p<0.001), mean length of stay (8.3 vs. 11.8 days, p<0.001), and mean total healthcare charge ($68,126 vs. $106,703, p<0.001) compared to the surgical cohort. Male sex, increased Charlson comorbidity index scores, acute kidney injury, and malnutrition were associated with higher odds of inpatient mortality in patients with CV who underwent endoscopic management. @*Conclusions@#Endoscopic intervention has lower inpatient mortality and is an excellent alternative to surgery for appropriately selected CV hospitalizations.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsies: Is the Future Here Yet?

No abstract available.

Prospective Assessment of the Performance of a New Fine Needle Biopsy Device for EUS-Guided Sampling of Solid Lesions

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) remains the most common EUS-guided tissue acquisition technique. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of a new Franseen tip fine needle biopsy (FNB) device for EUSguided sampling of solid lesions and compare it with the historical FNA technique. METHODS: Acquire® 22 G FNB needle (Boston Scientific Co., Natick, MA, USA) was used for solid tumor sampling (Study group). Tissue was collected for rapid on-site evaluation, and touch and crush preparations were made. Historical EUS-FNA samples obtained using Expect® 22 G FNA needle (Boston Scientific Co.) were used as controls (Control group). All specimens were independently evaluated by two cytopathologists blinded to the formal cytopathological diagnosis. RESULTS: Mean cell block histology scores were significantly higher (p=0.046) in the FNB group (51 samples) despite a significantly lower (p < 0.001) mean number of passes compared to the FNA group (50 specimens). The overall diagnostic yields for the FNB vs. FNA groups were 96% vs. 88%. The degree of tumor differentiation was adequately assessed in all cell block qualifying lesions in the FNB group. Two patients developed post-FNB abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: The new Franseen tip FNB device provides histologically superior and cytologically comparable specimens to those obtained by FNA, but with fewer passes.

Rescue Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Trucut Biopsy Following Suboptimal EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for Mediastinal Lesions

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (TCB) are sensitive techniques for diagnosing mediastinal lesions, but it is unclear how either one or both should be used to obtain a pathologic diagnosis. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether EUS-TCB impacts the diagnosis of mediastinal lesions after the initial on-site review of EUS-FNA specimen suggests a suboptimal result. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive patients with mediastinal lesions who underwent EUS-TCB during the same procedure if the initial EUS-FNA demonstrated an inadequate FNA sample or suggested that histopathology was required for diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracies between procedures were compared as the main outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (14 men; median age, 56 years; range, 19 to 82 years) underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB to evaluate a mediastinal lymphadenopathy or mass (n=17), to determine the cancer stage (n=3) or to exclude tumor recurrence or metastasis (n=7). The overall diagnostic accuracies of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB were 78% and 67%, respectively (p=0.375). The combined diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA plus EUS-TCB was 82%. In six patients with nondiagnostic EUS-FNA, EUS-TCB provided a final diagnosis in one patient (17%). CONCLUSIONS: In the current series of patients with mediastinal masses or adenopathy, the administration of EUS-TCB following suboptimal results for the on-site cytology review did not increase the diagnostic yield.