Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
1.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 98(3): 285-305.e38, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37498265

ABSTRACT

This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Treatment Outcome
2.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 98(3): 271-284, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37498266

ABSTRACT

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. It is accompanied by the document subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well- or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, we suggest surgical evaluation over endoscopic approaches.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective Studies
3.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 98(5): 685-693, 2023 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37307900

ABSTRACT

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the role of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures. In the endoscopic workup of these patients, we suggest the use of fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling in addition to brush cytology over brush cytology alone, especially for hilar strictures. We suggest the use of cholangioscopic and EUS-guided biopsy sampling especially for patients who undergo nondiagnostic sampling, cholangioscopic biopsy sampling for nondistal strictures and EUS-guided biopsy sampling distal strictures or those with suspected spread to surrounding lymph nodes and other structures.

4.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 98(5): 694-712.e8, 2023 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37307901

ABSTRACT

Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, whereas the accompanying article subtitled "Summary and Recommendations" contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.

5.
Gastrointest. endosc ; 98(5): 694-712, 20230610. tab
Article in English | BIGG - GRADE guidelines | ID: biblio-1524147

ABSTRACT

Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsy sampling, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, whereas the accompanying article subtitled "Summary and Recommendations" contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.


Subject(s)
Bile Duct Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Evidence-Based Medicine , Bile Duct Diseases/etiology , Biopsy , Endoscopy
6.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 98(4): 482-491, 2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37245720

ABSTRACT

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach to strategies to prevent endoscopy-related injury (ERI) in GI endoscopists. It is accompanied by the article subtitled "Methodology and Review of Evidence," which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline estimates the rates, sites, and predictors of ERI. Additionally, it addresses the role of ergonomics training, microbreaks and macrobreaks, monitor and table positions, antifatigue mats, and use of ancillary devices in decreasing the risk of ERI. We recommend formal ergonomics education and neutral posture during the performance of endoscopy, achieved through adjustable monitor and optimal procedure table position, to reduce the risk of ERI. We suggest taking microbreaks and scheduled macrobreaks and using antifatigue mats during procedures to prevent ERI. We suggest the use of ancillary devices in those with risk factors predisposing them to ERI.


Subject(s)
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Ergonomics , Humans , Posture , Risk Factors
8.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 97(4): 607-614, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36797162

ABSTRACT

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage biliary strictures in liver transplant recipients. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the role of ERCP versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and covered self-expandable metal stents (cSEMSs) versus multiple plastic stents for therapy of post-transplant strictures, use of MRCP for diagnosing post-transplant biliary strictures, and administration of antibiotics versus no antibiotics during ERCP. In patients with post-transplant biliary strictures, we suggest ERCP as the initial intervention and cSEMSs as the preferred stent for extrahepatic strictures. In patients with unclear diagnoses or intermediate probability of a stricture, we suggest MRCP as the diagnostic modality. We suggest that antibiotics should be administered during ERCP when biliary drainage cannot be ensured.


Subject(s)
Cholestasis , Liver Transplantation , Humans , United States , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Constriction, Pathologic/therapy , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Cholestasis/etiology , Cholestasis/surgery , Stents , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
9.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 97(4): 615-637.e11, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36792483

ABSTRACT

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage biliary strictures in liver transplant recipients. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the role of ERCP versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and covered self-expandable metal stents (cSEMSs) versus multiple plastic stents for therapy of strictures, use of MRCP for diagnosing post-transplant biliary strictures, and administration of antibiotics versus no antibiotics during ERCP. In patients with post-transplant biliary strictures, we suggest ERCP as the initial intervention and cSEMSs as the preferred stent. In patients with unclear diagnosis or intermediate probability of a stricture, we suggest MRCP as the diagnostic modality. We suggest that antibiotics should be administered during ERCP when biliary drainage cannot be assured.


Subject(s)
Cholestasis , Liver Transplantation , Humans , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Constriction, Pathologic/therapy , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/methods , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Cholestasis/etiology , Cholestasis/surgery , Stents , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
14.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 95(2): 207-215.e2, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34998575

ABSTRACT

Informed consent is the cornerstone of the ethical practice of procedures and treatments in medicine. The purpose of this document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee is to provide an update on best practice of the informed consent process and other issues around informed consent and shared decision-making for endoscopic procedures. The principles of informed consent are based on longstanding legal doctrine. Several new concepts and clinical trials addressing the best practice of informed consent will help guide practitioners of the burgeoning field of GI endoscopic procedures. After a literature review and an iterative discussion and voting process by the ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, this document was produced to update our guidance on informed consent for the practicing endoscopist. Because this document was designed by considering the laws and broad practice of endoscopy in the United States, legal requirements may differ by state and region, and it is the responsibility of the endoscopist, practice managers, and other healthcare organizations to be aware of local laws. Our recommendations are designed to improve the informed consent experience for both physicians and patients as they work together to diagnose and treat GI diseases with endoscopy.


Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Diseases , Informed Consent , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastrointestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Humans , United States
16.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 94(2): 207-221.e14, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34023065

ABSTRACT

Cholangitis is a GI emergency requiring prompt recognition and treatment. The purpose of this document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee is to provide an evidence-based approach for management of cholangitis. This document addresses the modality of drainage (endoscopic vs percutaneous), timing of intervention (<48 hours vs >48 hours), and extent of initial intervention (comprehensive therapy vs decompression alone). Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was used to formulate recommendations on these topics. The ASGE suggests endoscopic rather than percutaneous drainage and biliary decompression within 48 hours. Additionally, the panel suggests that sphincterotomy and stone removal be combined with drainage rather than decompression alone, unless patients are too unstable to tolerate more extensive endoscopic treatment.


Subject(s)
Cholangitis , Acute Disease , Cholangitis/therapy , Drainage , Emergencies , Humans , United States
17.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 94(2): 222-234.e22, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34023067

ABSTRACT

This clinical guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the management of patients with malignant hilar obstruction (MHO). This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses primary drainage modality (percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage [PTBD] vs endoscopic biliary drainage [EBD]), drainage strategy (unilateral vs bilateral), and stent selection (plastic stent [PS] vs self-expandable metal stent [SEMS]). Regarding drainage modality, in patients with MHO undergoing drainage before potential resection or transplantation, the panel suggests against routine use of PTBD as first-line therapy compared with EBD. In patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative drainage, the panel suggests PTBD or EBD. The final decision should be based on patient preferences, disease characteristics, and local expertise. Regarding drainage strategy, in patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative stent placement, the panel suggests placement of bilateral stents compared with a unilateral stent in the absence of liver atrophy. Finally, regarding type of stent, in patients with unresectable MHO undergoing palliative stent placement, the panel suggests placing SEMSs or PSs. However, in patients who have a short life expectancy and who place high value on avoiding repeated interventions, the panel suggests using SEMSs compared with PSs. If optimal drainage strategy has not been established, the panel suggests placing PSs. This document clearly outlines the process, analyses, and decision processes used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.


Subject(s)
Bile Duct Neoplasms , Cholestasis , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Cholestasis/etiology , Cholestasis/surgery , Drainage , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Humans , Palliative Care , Stents , Treatment Outcome , United States
18.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 93(2): 309-322.e4, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33168194

ABSTRACT

This American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the endoscopic management of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). We applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to address key clinical questions. These include the comparison of (1) surgical gastrojejunostomy to the placement of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) for malignant GOO, (2) covered versus uncovered SEMS for malignant GOO, and (3) endoscopic and surgical interventions for the management of benign GOO. Recommendations provided in this document were founded on the certainty of the evidence, balance of benefits and harms, considerations of patient and caregiver preferences, resource utilization, and cost-effectiveness.


Subject(s)
Gastric Outlet Obstruction , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Stomach Neoplasms , Gastric Outlet Obstruction/etiology , Gastric Outlet Obstruction/surgery , Humans , Palliative Care , Retrospective Studies , Stents , Stomach Neoplasms/complications , Treatment Outcome
19.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 91(4): 723-729.e17, 2020 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32033801

ABSTRACT

Efforts to increase patient safety and satisfaction, a critical concern for health providers, require periodic evaluation of all factors involved in the provision of GI endoscopy services. We aimed to develop guidelines on minimum staffing requirements and scope of practice of available staff for the safe and efficient performance of GI endoscopy. The recommendations in this guideline were based on a systematic review of published literature, results from a nationwide survey of endoscopy directors, along with the expert guidance of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee members, ASGE Practice Operation Committee members, and the ASGE Governing Board.


Subject(s)
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic , United States , Workforce
20.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 91(2): 228-235, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31791596

ABSTRACT

Colonic volvulus and acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO) are 2 causes of benign large-bowel obstruction. Colonic volvulus occurs most commonly in the sigmoid colon as a result of bowel twisting along its mesenteric axis. In contrast, the exact pathophysiology of ACPO is poorly understood, with the prevailing hypothesis being altered regulation of colonic function by the autonomic nervous system resulting in colonic distention in the absence of mechanical blockage. Prompt diagnosis and intervention leads to improved outcomes for both diagnoses. Endoscopy may play a role in the evaluation and management of both entities. The purpose of this document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's Standards of Practice Committee is to provide an update on the evaluation and endoscopic management of sigmoid volvulus and ACPO.


Subject(s)
Cholinesterase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction/therapy , Colonoscopy/methods , Conservative Treatment , Decompression, Surgical/methods , Intestinal Volvulus/therapy , Sigmoid Diseases/therapy , Acute Disease , Cecum/surgery , Colostomy/methods , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Humans , Neostigmine/therapeutic use , Societies, Medical , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...