Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update.

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Inter-observer variability of experts and trainees for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis: Comparison of linked color imaging, blue laser imaging, and white light imaging.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of reflux esophagitis according to the Los Angeles classification minimal change (LA-M) has a low inter-observer agreement. We aimed to investigate whether the inter-observer agreement of reflux esophagitis was better when expert endoscopists read the endoscopic images, or when the linked color imaging (LCI) or blue laser imaging (BLI)-bright mode was used. In addition, whether the inclusion of LA-M in the definition of reflux esophagitis affected the consistency of the diagnosis was investigated. METHODS: During upper endoscopy, endoscopic images of the gastroesophageal junction were taken using white light imaging (WLI), BLI-bright, and LCI modes. Four expert endoscopists and four trainees reviewed the images to diagnose reflux esophagitis according to the modified LA classification. RESULTS: The kappa values for the inter-observer variability for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis were poor to fair among the experts (κ = â€Š0.22, 0.17, and 0.27 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI, respectively) and poor among the trainees (κ = â€Š0.18, 0.08, and 0.14 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI). The inter-observer variabilities for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis excluding LA-M were fair to moderate (κ = â€Š0.42, 0.35, and 0.42 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI) among the expert endoscopists and moderate among the trainees (κ = 0.48, 0.43, and 0.51 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI). CONCLUSIONS: The inter-observer agreement for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis was very low for both the expert endoscopists and the trainees, even using BLI-bright or LCI mode. However, when reflux esophagitis LA-M was excluded from the diagnosis of esophagitis, the degree of inter-observer agreement increased.

Validation of the Expanded Baveno-VI Criteria for Screening Gastroscopy in Asian Patients with Compensated Advanced Chronic Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND: The expanded Baveno-VI criteria may further reduce the need for screening gastroscopy compared to Baveno-VI criteria. AIM: We sought to validate the performance of these criteria in a cohort of compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) patients with predominantly hepatitis B infection. METHODS: Consecutive cACLD patients from 2006 to 2012 with paired liver stiffness measurements and screening gastroscopy within 1 year were included. The expanded Baveno-VI criteria were applied to evaluate the sensitivity (SS), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the presence of high-risk varices (HRV). RESULTS: Among 165 cACLD patients included, 17 (10.3%) had HRV. The commonest etiology of cACLD was chronic hepatitis B (36.4%) followed by NAFLD (20.0%). Application of expanded Baveno-VI criteria avoided more screening gastroscopy (43.6%) as compared to the original Baveno-VI criteria (18.8%) without missing more HRV (1 with both criteria). The overall SS, SP, PPV and NPV of the expanded Baveno-VI criteria in predicting HRV were 94.1%, 48.0%, 17.2% and 98.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Application of the expanded Baveno-VI criteria can safely avoid screening gastroscopy in 43.6% of cACLD patients with an excellent ability to exclude HRV.

Value of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for gastric cancer surveillance in patients with Lynch syndrome.

In our study, we evaluated the effectiveness of upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy as an instrument for early gastric cancer (GC) detection in Lynch syndrome (LS) patients by analyzing data from the registry of the German Consortium for Familial Intestinal Cancer. In a prospective, multicenter cohort study, 1128 out of 2009 registered individuals with confirmed LS underwent 5176 upper GI endoscopies. Compliance was good since 77.6% of upper GI endoscopies were completed within the recommended interval of 1 to 3 years. Forty-nine GC events were observed in 47 patients. MLH1 (n = 21) and MSH2 (n = 24) mutations were the most prevalent. GCs in patients undergoing regular surveillance were diagnosed significantly more often in an early-stage disease (UICC I) than GCs detected through symptoms (83% vs 25%; P = .0231). Thirty-two (68%) patients had a negative family history of GC. The median age at diagnosis was 51 years (range 28-66). Of all GC patients, 13 were diagnosed at an age younger than 45. Our study supports the recommendation of regular upper GI endoscopy surveillance for LS patients beginning no later than at the age of 30.

Evaluation of endoscopy requests in the resumption of activity during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: denial of nonindicated requests and prioritization of accepted requests.

INTRODUCTION: the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic forced the closure of endoscopy units. Before resuming endoscopic activity, we designed a protocol to evaluate gastroscopies and colonoscopies cancelled during the pandemic, denying inappropriate requests and prioritizing appropriate ones. METHODS: two types of inappropriate request were established: a) COVID-19 context, people aged ≤ 50 years without alarm symptoms and a low probability of relevant endoscopic findings; and b) inappropriate context, requests not in line with clinical guidelines or protocols. Denials were filed in the medical record. Appropriate requests were classified into priority, conventional and follow-up. Requests denied by specialty were compared and the findings of priority requests were evaluated. RESULTS: between March 16th and June 30th 2020, 1,658 requests (44 % gastroscopies and 56 % colonoscopies) were evaluated, of which 1,164 (70 %) were considered as appropriate (priority 8.5 %, conventional 48 %, follow-up 43 % and non-evaluable 0.5 %) and 494 (30 %) as inappropriate (20 % COVID-19 context, 80 % inappropriate context). The reasons for denial of gastroscopy were follow-up of lesions (33 %), insufficiently studied symptoms (20 %) and relapsing symptoms after a previous gastroscopy (18 %). The reasons for denial of colonoscopies were post-polypectomy surveillance (25 %), colorectal cancer after surgery (21 %) and a family history of cancer (13 %). There were significant differences in denied requests according to specialty: General Surgery (52 %), Hematology (37 %) and Primary Care (29 %); 31 % of priority cases showed relevant findings. CONCLUSIONS: according to our study, 24 % of endoscopies were discordant with scientific recommendations. Therefore, their denial and the prioritization of appropriate ones optimize the use of resources.

Protocol for expanded indications of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in China: a multicenter, ambispective, observational, open-cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The main treatment methods for early gastric cancer (EGC) include endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and radical gastrectomy. However, appropriate treatment for patients who exceed the absolute indications for ESD remains unestablished. In China, evidence-based medicine for the expanding indications of ESD and accurate diagnostic staging for EGC patients are lacking. Thus, clinical studies involving Chinese patients with EGC are necessary to select appropriate treatment options and promote China's expanded indications for ESD and diagnostic staging scheme. METHODS: This is a multicenter, ambispective, observational, open-cohort study that is expected to enroll 554 patients with EGC. The study was launched in May 2018 and is scheduled to end in March 2022. All enrolled patients should meet the inclusion criteria. Case report forms and electronic data capture systems are used to obtain clinical data, which includes demographic information, results of perioperative blood- and auxiliary examinations, surgical information, results of postoperative pathology, and the outcomes of postoperative recovery and follow-up. Patients are followed up every 6 months after surgery for a minimum of 5 years. The primary endpoint is the rate of lymph node metastasis (LNM), whereas the secondary endpoints include the following: consistency, sensitivity, and specificity of the results of preoperative examinations and postoperative pathology; cut-off values for LNM; logistic regression model of expanded indications for ESD; and incidence of postoperative complications within the 30-day and 5-year relapse-free survival rates. DISCUSSION: This study will explore and evaluate expanded indications for ESD that match the characteristics of the Chinese population in patients with EGC and will introduce a related staging procedure and examination scheme that is appropriate for China. Ethical approval was obtained from all participating centers. The findings are expected to be disseminated through publications or presentations and will facilitate clinical decision-making in EGC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The name of the registry is ChiCTR. It was registered on May 9, 2018, with the registration number ( ChiCTR1800016084 ). The clinical trial was launched in May 2018 and will end in March 2022, with enrollment to be completed by December 2021. Trial status: Ongoing.

Evaluation of long-term adherence to oesophagogastroduodenoscopy quality indicators. / Evaluación del cumplimiento a largo plazo de los indicadores de calidad en la esofagogastroduodenoscopia.

INTRODUCTION: In a previous study we demonstrated that a simple training programme improved quality indicators of Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) achieving the recommended benchmarks. However, the long-term effect of this intervention is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of OGDs performed 3 years after of having completed a training programme. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative study of 2 cohorts was designed as follows: Group A included OGDs performed in 2016 promptly after a training programme and Group B with OGDs performed from January to March 2019, this group was also divided into 2 subgroups: subgroup B1 of Endoscopists who had participated in the previous training programme and subgroup B2 of Endoscopists who had not. The intra-procedure quality indicators proposed by ASGE-ACG were used. RESULTS: A total of 1236 OGDs were analysed, 600 from Group A and 636 from Group B (439 subgroup B1 and 197 subgroup B2). The number of complete examinations was lower in Group B (566 [94.3%] vs. 551 [86.6%]; p<0.001). A significant decrease was observed in nearly all quality indicators and they did not reach the recommended benchmarks: retroflexion in the stomach (96% vs. 81%; p<0.001); Seattle biopsy protocol (86% vs. 50%; p=0.03), description of the upper GI bleeding lesion (100% vs. 62%; p<0.01), sufficient intestinal biopsy specimens (at least 4) in suspected coeliac disease (92.5% vs. 18%; p<0.001), photo documentation of the lesion (94% vs. 90%; p<0.05). Regarding the overall assessment of the procedure (including correct performance and adequate photo documentation), a significant decrease was also observed (90.5% vs. 62%; p<0.001). There were no differences between subgroups B1 and B2. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement observed in 2016 after a training programme did not prevail after 3 years. In order to keep the quality of OGDs above the recommended benchmarks, it is necessary to implement continuous training programmes.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy - Too often? Too late? Who are the right patients for gastrostomy?

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is an established method to provide nutrition to patients with restricted oral uptake of fluids and calories. Here, we review the methods, indications and complications of this procedure. While gastrostomy can be safely and easily performed during gastroscopy, the right patients and timing for this intervention are not always chosen. Especially in patients with dementia, the indication for and timing of gastrostomies are often improper. In this patient group, clear data for enteral nutrition are lacking; however, some evidence suggests that patients with advanced dementia do not benefit, whereas patients with mild to moderate dementia might benefit from early enteral nutrition. Additionally, other patient groups with temporary or permanent restriction of oral uptake might be a useful target population for early enteral nutrition to maintain mobilization and muscle strength. We plead for a coordinated study program for these patient groups to identify suitable patients and the best timing for tube implantation.

Endoscopic Kyoto classification of Helicobacter pylori infection and gastric cancer risk diagnosis.

Recent advances in endoscopic technology allow detailed observation of the gastric mucosa. Today, endoscopy is used in the diagnosis of gastritis to determine the presence/absence of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection and evaluate gastric cancer risk. In 2013, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society advocated the Kyoto classification, a new grading system for endoscopic gastritis. The Kyoto classification organized endoscopic findings related to H. pylori infection. The Kyoto classification score is the sum of scores for five endoscopic findings (atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, enlarged folds, nodularity, and diffuse redness with or without regular arrangement of collecting venules) and ranges from 0 to 8. Atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, enlarged folds, and nodularity contribute to gastric cancer risk. Diffuse redness and regular arrangement of collecting venules are related to H. pylori infection status. In subjects without a history of H. pylori eradication, the infection rates in those with Kyoto scores of 0, 1, and ≥ 2 were 1.5%, 45%, and 82%, respectively. A Kyoto classification score of 0 indicates no H. pylori infection. A Kyoto classification score of 2 or more indicates H. pylori infection. Kyoto classification scores of patients with and without gastric cancer were 4.8 and 3.8, respectively. A Kyoto classification score of 4 or more might indicate gastric cancer risk.

The Mexican consensus on the detection and treatment of early gastric cancer. / Consenso mexicano sobre detección y tratamiento del cáncer gástrico incipiente.

Gastric cancer is one of the most frequent neoplasias in the digestive tract and is the result of premalignant lesion progression in the majority of cases. Opportune detection of those lesions is relevant, given that timely treatment offers the possibility of cure. There is no consensus in Mexico on the early detection of gastric cancer, and therefore, the Asociación Mexicana de Gastroenterología brought together a group of experts and produced the "Mexican consensus on the detection and treatment of early gastric cancer" to establish useful recommendations for the medical community. The Delphi methodology was employed, and 38 recommendations related to early gastric cancer were formulated. The consensus defines early gastric cancer as that which at diagnosis is limited to the mucosa and submucosa, irrespective of lymph node metástasis. In Mexico, as in other parts of the world, factors associated with early gastric cancer include Helicobacter pylori infection, a family history of the disease, smoking, and diet. Chromoendoscopy, magnification endoscopy, and equipment-based image-enhanced endoscopy are recommended for making the diagnosis, and accurate histopathologic diagnosis is invaluable for making therapeutic decisions. The endoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer, whether dissection or resection of the mucosa, should be preferred to surgical management, when similar oncologic cure results can be obtained. Endoscopic surveillance should be individualized.

Biopsy strategies for endoscopic screening of pre-malignant gastric lesions.

Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment (OLGA) and Operative Link on Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Assessment (OLGIM) were adopted to evaluate gastric risk stratification in five biopsy samples. This study aimed to evaluate the degree of gastric atrophy (GA) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) in five locations to detect a more representative biopsy sample in gastric cancer (GC) screening. Our study enrolled 368 patients and 5 biopsy pieces were acquired from them. Gastric risk stratification was calculated by OLGA and OLGIM staging system. The results revealed that the IM score in the incisura angularis was higher than that in the larger and lesser curvature of corpus mucosa (p = 0.037 and p = 0.030, respectively) and the IM score in the lesser curvature of antrum mucosa was higher than that in the incisura angularis mucosa (p = 0.018). IM is more frequently observed in the angulus region than in the lesser curvature of corpus in the mild degree (p = 0.004) and mild IM lesions in the lesser curvature of antrum were more frequently observed than in the incisura angularis mucosa (p = 0.004), Four biopsy pieces protocol (larger curvature and lesser curvature of the antrum, lesser curvature of the corpus and angulus) demonstrated accurate consistency (97.83% and 98.37%, respectively) with a Kendall's tau-b of higher than 0.990, along with low misdiagnosis rates of OLGA and OLGIM (III + IV) (9.76% and 5.00%, respectively). Three biopsy pieces protocol (lesser curvature of the antrum and corpus, angulus biopsy) in OLGA and OLGIM staging system was close to the standard protocol (five biopsy specimens) with a consistency of 94.84% and 94.29% and has a Kendall's tau-b higher than 0.950 and diagnostic omission rates of 9.76% and 5.00%, respectively, which was exactly the same with the four biopsy pieces protocol. Furthermore, it had the second-highest Youden index (0.902 and 0.950, respectively) and area under the ROC curve (0.992 and 0.996, respectively) for the screening of high-risk GC by OLGA and OLGIM stages. Thus, we recommended the angulus and the lesser curvature of antrum as a conventional biopsy and three biopsy pieces for further GC risk screening.

Feasibility of endoscopic treatment and predictors of lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been routinely performed in applicable early gastric cancer (EGC) patients as an alternative to conventional surgical operations that involve lymph node dissection. The indications for ESD have been recently expanded to include larger, ulcerated, and undifferentiated mucosal lesions, and differentiated lesions with slight submucosal invasion. The risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) is the most important consideration when deciding on a treatment strategy for EGC. Despite the advantages over surgical procedures, lymph nodes cannot be removed by ESD. In addition, whether patients who meet the expanded indications for ESD can be managed safely remains controversial. AIM: To determine whether the ESD indications are applicable to Chinese patients and to investigate the predictors of LNM in EGC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 12552 patients who underwent surgery for gastric cancer between June 2007 and December 2018 at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University. A total of 1262 (10.1%) EGC patients were eligible for inclusion in this study. Data on the patients' clinical, endoscopic, and histopathological characteristics were collected. The absolute and expanded indications for ESD were validated by regrouping the enrolled patients and determining the positive LNM results in each subgroup. Predictors of LNM in patients were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: LNM was observed in 182 (14.4%) patients. No LNM was detected in the patients who met the absolute indications (0/90). LNM occurred in 4/311 (1.3%) patients who met the expanded indications. According to univariate analysis, LNM was significantly associated with positive tumor marker status, medium (20-30 mm) and large (>30 mm) lesion sizes, excavated macroscopic-type tumors, ulcer presence, submucosal invasion (SM1 and SM2), poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and diffuse and mixed Lauren's types. Multivariate analysis demonstrated SM1 invasion (odds ration [OR] = 2.285, P = 0.03), SM2 invasion (OR = 3.230, P < 0.001), LVI (OR = 15.702, P < 0.001), mucinous adenocarcinoma (OR = 2.823, P = 0.015), and large lesion size (OR = 1.900, P = 0.006) to be independent risk factors. CONCLUSION: The absolute indications for ESD are reasonable, and the feasibility of expanding the indications for ESD requires further investigation. The predictors of LNM include invasion depth, LVI, mucinous adenocarcinoma, and lesion size.

The role of endoscopy in the management of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome.

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) syndrome is an inherited cancer risk syndrome associated with pathogenic germline CDH1 variants. Given the high risk for developing diffuse gastric cancer, CDH1 carriers are recommended to undergo prophylactic total gastrectomy for cancer risk reduction. Current guidelines recommend upper endoscopy in CDH1 carriers prior to surgery and then annually for individuals deferring prophylactic total gastrectomy. Management of individuals from HDGC families without CDH1 pathogenic variants remains less clear, and management of families with CDH1 pathogenic variants in the absence of a family history of gastric cancer is particularly problematic at present. Despite adherence to surveillance protocols, endoscopic detection of cancer foci in HDGC is suboptimal and imperfect for facilitating decision-making. Alternative endoscopic modalities, such as chromoendoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, and other non-white light methods have been utilized, but are of limited utility to further improve cancer detection and risk stratification in HDGC. Herein, we review what is known and what remains unclear about endoscopic surveillance for HDGC, among individuals with and without germline CDH1 pathogenic variants. Ultimately, the use of endoscopy in the management of HDGC remains a challenging arena, but one in which further research to improve surveillance is crucial.

Quality indicators in gastroscopy. Gastroscopy procedure.

Within the project "Quality indicators in digestive endoscopy", pioneered by the Spanish Society for Digestive Diseases (SEPD), the objective of this research is to suggest the structure, process, and results procedures and indicators necessary to implement and assess quality in the gastroscopy setting. First, a chart was designed with the steps to be followed during a gastroscopy procedure. Secondly, a team of experts in care quality and/or endoscopy performed a qualitative review of the literature searching for quality indicators for endoscopic procedures, including gastroscopies. Finally, using a paired analysis approach, a selection of the literature obtained was undertaken. For gastroscopy, a total of nine process indicators were identified (one preprocedure, eight intraprocedure). Evidence quality was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification scale.

Endoscopist biopsy rate as a quality indicator for outpatient gastroscopy: a multicenter cohort study with validation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnosis of gastric premalignant conditions (GPCs) relies on endoscopy with mucosal sampling. We hypothesized that the endoscopist biopsy rate (EBR) might constitute a quality indicator for EGD, and we have analyzed its association with GPC detection and the rate of missed gastric cancers (GCs). METHODS: We analyzed EGD databases from 2 high-volume outpatient units. EBR values, defined as the proportion of EGDs with ≥1 biopsy to all examinations were calculated for each endoscopist in Unit A (derivation cohort) and divided by the quartile values into 4 groups. Detection of GPC was calculated for each group and compared using multivariate clustered logistic regression models. Unit B database was used for validation. All patients were followed in the Cancer Registry for missed GCs diagnosed between 1 month and 3 years after EGDs with negative results. RESULTS: Sixteen endoscopists in Unit A performed 17,490 EGDs of which 15,340 (87.7%) were analyzed. EBR quartile values were 22.4% to 36.7% (low EBR), 36.8% to 43.7% (moderate), 43.8% to 51.6% (high), and 51.7% and 65.8% (very-high); median value 43.8%. The odds ratios for the moderate, high, and very-high EBR groups of detecting GPC were 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.9), 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7-2.4), and 2.5 (95% CI, 2.1-2.9), respectively, compared with the low EBR group (P < .001). This association was confirmed with the same thresholds in the validation cohort. Endoscopists with higher EBR (≥43.8%) had a lower risk of missed cancer compared with those in the lower EBR group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The EBR parameter is highly variable among endoscopists and is associated with efficacy in GPC detection and the rate of missed GCs.

Changes in scoring of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms and the impact on competence assessment.

BACKGROUND: Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) is an established competence assessment tool in endoscopy. In July 2016, the DOPS scoring format changed from a performance-based scale to a supervision-based scale. We aimed to evaluate the impact of changes to the DOPS scale format on the distribution of scores in novice trainees and on competence assessment. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter (n = 276), observational study of formative DOPS assessments in endoscopy trainees with ≤ 100 lifetime procedures. DOPS were submitted in the 6-months before July 2016 (old scale) and after (new scale) for gastroscopy (n = 2998), sigmoidoscopy (n = 1310), colonoscopy (n = 3280), and polypectomy (n = 631). Scores for old and new DOPS were aligned to a 4-point scale and compared. RESULTS: 8219 DOPS (43 % new and 57 % old) submitted for 1300 trainees were analyzed. Compared with old DOPS, the use of the new DOPS was associated with greater utilization of the lowest score (2.4 % vs. 0.9 %; P < 0.001), broader range of scores, and a reduction in competent scores (60.8 % vs. 86.9 %; P < 0.001). The reduction in competent scores was evident on subgroup analysis across all procedure types (P < 0.001) and for each quartile of endoscopy experience. The new DOPS was superior in characterizing the endoscopy learning curve by demonstrating progression of competent scores across quartiles of procedural experience. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy assessors applied a greater range of scores using the new DOPS scale based on degree of supervision in two cohorts of trainees matched for experience. Our study provides construct validity evidence in support of the new scale format.

[Comparison of safety insertion techniques of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in nurses and physicians - a non-randomized interventional pilot study on a simulation model]. / Vergleich der Sicherheit der perkutan gastralen Punktion im Rahmen der PEG-Anlage zwischen Ärzten und spezialisierten Pflegenden ­ eine nicht randomisierte, interventionelle Pilotstudie an Simulatoren.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion represents a standardized procedure for enteral nutrition in patients with long-term eating difficulties for various reasons. In a clinical setting, delegation of stomach puncture and placement of a PEG tube, within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy amongst nurses, occurs. In Germany, there are no studies yet showing the differences between physicians and nurses regarding the safety of percutaneous stomach puncture.In a non-randomized quasi-experimental interventional study on a simulation model, the safety of stomach puncture within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy between physicians and nurses with special training was compared. Technical skills were recorded with video cameras and provided the basis for the following analysis. The study contained: (1) a theoretical preparation phase, (2) training on simulation model and a repeated practice of the skills, and (3) stomach puncture on the simulation model. The actions were recorded with a multichannel video technique. As part of the concept, nurses and physicians were trained together in theory and practice. The analysis was conducted with the newly designed Assessment Instrument Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (AS-PEG). Seven physicians and 17 nurses took part in the pilot study. On average, the physicians reached a score of 36.4 ±â€Š2.2 (33 - 39) and nurses 37.4 ±â€Š2 (32 - 40), while the maximum score was 42. The evaluation of technical skills on the recorded videos by means of Assessment Instrument Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (AS-PEG) showed no tendency to significant differences between physicians and nurses after theoretical and practical training. The study contributes a first objective evaluation of technical skills on stomach puncture within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with the newly designed AS-PEG.

Current research and treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and have gained considerable research and treatment interest, especially in the last two decades. GISTs are driven by mutations commonly found in the KIT gene and less commonly in the platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha gene, BRAF gene and succinate dehydrogenase gene. GISTs behave in a spectrum of malignant potential, and both the tumor size and mitotic index are the most commonly used prognostic criteria. Whilst surgical resection can offer the best cure, targeted therapy in the form of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has revolutionized the management options. As the first-line TKI, imatinib offers treatment for advanced and metastatic GISTs, adjuvant therapy in high-risk GISTs and as a neoadjuvant agent to downsize large tumors prior to resection. The emergence of drug resistance has altered some treatment options, including prolonging the first-line TKI from 1 to 3 years, increasing the dose of TKI or switching to second-line TKI. Other newer TKIs, such as sunitinib and regorafenib, may offer some treatment options for imatinib-resistant GISTs. New molecular targeted therapies are being evaluated, such as inhibitors of BRAF, heat shock protein 90, glutamine and mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling, as well as inhibitors of apoptosis proteins antagonist and even immunotherapy. This editorial review summarizes the recent research trials and potential treatment targets that may influence our future patient-specific management of GISTs. The current guidelines in GIST management from Europe, North America and Asia are highlighted.

[Standardization of the endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancer].

With the increasing incidence of early gastric cancer, endoscopic treatment has been widely used. It has also played an important role in the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer. Therefore, it is very important to carry out standardized treatment with endoscopy. In theory, endoscopic resection can be performed in early gastric cancers which have no lymph node metastasis and also can be resected completely. Endoscopic therapy is absolutely indicated in macroscopically intramucosal differentiated carcinomas (pT1a) without ulcer or ulcer scar and with diameter ≤2 cm. The expanded indications are: (1) macroscopically intramucosal differentiated carcinomas (pT1a) without ulcer and with diameter >2 cm; (2) macroscopically intramucosal differentiated carcinomas (pT1a) with ulcer and with diameter ≤2 cm; (3) macroscopically intramucosal undifferentiated carcinomas (pT1a) without ulcer and with diameter ≤2 cm. Methods of preoperative evaluation include endoscopy, CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). For tumor size greater than 3 cm and undifferentiated lesions, evaluation should be carried out carefully in order to avoid the underestimation of T staging. During endoscopic surgery, the extent, nature, and depth of the lesion should be clearly defined again, if necessary, assisted by staining endoscopy. In order to avoid complications such as bleeding and perforation, stanch bleeding and aspiration of gas should be performed promptly during the operation. After endoscopic resection, when pathology reveals positive margin of resected specimen, lesions invading deep submucosa, vascular involvement or peri-gastric lymph node metastasis, additional surgery should be recommended. Even if the patients have been evaluated as radical treatment, close follow-up is still necessary. Only when surgeons strictly obey the indications of endoscopic treatment, make the accurate evaluations for the patients before operation, undergo endoscopic operation carefully, and perform the follow up closely, the patients can be benefit from endoscopic therapy really.