Outcomes of cold snare piecemeal EMR for nonampullary small-bowel adenomas larger than 1 cm: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nonampullary small-bowel adenomas ≥10 mm are typically resected using cautery-based polypectomy, which is associated with significant adverse events. Studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of piecemeal cold snare EMR for removing large colon polyps. Our aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of cold snare EMR for removal of large adenomas in the small bowel. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent lift and piecemeal cold snare EMR of small-bowel adenomas ≥1 cm between January 2014 and March 2019 was conducted at a tertiary care medical center. Polyp characteristics at the time of index and surveillance endoscopy were collected. Primary outcomes were residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) seen on surveillance endoscopy, polyp eradication rate, and number of endoscopic procedures required for eradication. Adverse events including immediate and delayed bleeding, perforation, stricture, pancreatitis, and postpolypectomy syndrome were assessed. RESULTS: Of 43 patients who underwent piecemeal cold snare EMR, 39 had follow-up endoscopy. Polyps ranged in size from 10 to 70 mm (mean, 26.5 mm). RRA was found in 18 patients (46%), with increased polyp size correlating with higher recurrence (P < .001). Polyp eradication was observed in 35 patients (89%), requiring a median of 2 (range, 1-6) endoscopic procedures. Only 1 patient (2.3%) had immediate postprocedural bleeding. No cases of perforation or postpolypectomy syndrome were seen. CONCLUSIONS: Piecemeal cold snare EMR may be a feasible, safe, and efficacious technique for small-bowel polyps >10 mm. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to assess how outcomes compare with traditional cautery-based polypectomy.

How Do We Manage Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia? A Survey of Clinical Practice Trends for Gastrointestinal Endoscopists in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is an accepted pathologic precursor to gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). While surveillance of GIM in Europe and Asia is common, only limited recommendations related to endoscopic surveillance of GIM exist in the United States. AIM: To understand the clinical practice patterns of US gastroenterologists in the management and endoscopic surveillance of GIM. METHODS: A 23 item survey was developed to explore endoscopists' opinions regarding the surveillance of GIM and knowledge of current guidelines. Eight clinical vignettes were developed to address specific clinical scenarios where endoscopic surveillance of GIM might be considered. RESULTS: There were 227 respondents, with 60 % working primarily in the private sector and 40 % in academic medicine. While 68 % of the respondents refer to major society guidelines for guidance in patient management, almost 78 % of endoscopist responders believe that there are no specific US guidelines pertaining to surveillance of GIM. Only two-thirds of respondents believe that based on current data, patients at increased risk of GAC should be a part of an endoscopic surveillance program, while 15 % believe all patients with GIM should receive endoscopic surveillance. Respondents use a wide range of biopsy techniques and surveillance intervals for patients with GIM, with no consistent pattern of practice identified. CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in the knowledge and practice patterns of US endoscopists related to surveillance of gastric intestinal metaplasia. In the absence of detailed US GI society guidelines, many endoscopists perform surveillance endoscopy on patients with GIM using variable biopsy techniques and surveillance intervals.

Endoscopic options for treatment of dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus.

Recent advances in the endoscopic treatment of dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) have allowed endoscopists to provide effective and durable eradication therapies. This review summarizes the available endoscopic eradication techniques for dysplasia in patients with BE including endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, photodynamic therapy, argon plasma coagulation, radiofrequency ablation and cryotherapy.

Glass Microparticulate Ingestion: An Unusual and Difficult-to-Diagnose Cause of Chronic Abdominal Pain.

In the absence of overt structural abnormalities, the diagnostic approach to chronic abdominal pain can be challenging. Occupational particulate inhalation causing injury to an organ other than the lung is rare. We report a case of inadvertent glass microparticulate ingestion causing chronic abdominal pain with altered local and systemic inflammatory responses.

The prevalence and diagnostic utility of endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic findings such as esophageal rings, strictures, narrow-caliber esophagus, linear furrows, white plaques, and pallor or decreased vasculature might indicate the presence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine the prevalence and diagnostic utility of endoscopic features of EoE. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and gastrointestinal meeting abstracts were searched to identify studies that included more than 10 patients with EoE and reported endoscopic findings. Pooled prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated using random- and mixed-effects models. RESULTS: The search yielded 100 articles and abstracts on 4678 patients with EoE and 2742 without (controls). In subjects with EoE, the overall pooled prevalence was as follows: esophageal rings, 44%; strictures, 21%; narrow-caliber esophagus, 9%; linear furrows, 48%; white plaques, 27%; and pallor/decreased vasculature, 41%. Substantial heterogeneity existed among studies. Results from endoscopy examinations were normal in 17% of patients, but this number decreased to 7% when the analysis was limited to prospective studies (P < .05). Overall levels of sensitivity were modest, ranging from 15% to 48%, whereas levels of specificity were greater, ranging from 90% to 95%. Positive predictive values ranged from 51% to 73% and negative predictive values ranged from 74% to 84%. CONCLUSIONS: There is heterogeneity among studies in the reported prevalence of endoscopic findings in patients with EoE, but in prospective studies at least 1 abnormality was detected by endoscopy in 93% of patients. The operating characteristics of endoscopic findings alone are inadequate for diagnosis of EoE. Esophageal biopsy specimens should be obtained from all patients with clinical features of EoE, regardless of the endoscopic appearance of the esophagus.