Pediatric endoscopy: how can we improve patient outcomes and ensure best practices?

INTRODUCTION: Strategies to promote high-quality endoscopy in children require consensus around pediatric-specific quality standards and indicators. Using a rigorous guideline development process, the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) was developed to support continuous quality improvement efforts within and across pediatric endoscopy services. AREAS COVERED: This review presents a framework, informed by the PEnQuIN guidelines, for assessing endoscopist competence, granting procedural privileges, audit and feedback, and for skill remediation, when required. As is critical for promoting quality, PEnQuIN indicators can be benchmarked at the individual endoscopist, endoscopy facility, and endoscopy community levels. Furthermore, efforts to incorporate technologies, including electronic medical records and artificial intelligence, into endoscopic quality improvement processes can aid in creation of large-scale networks to facilitate comparison and standardization of quality indicator reporting across sites. EXPERT OPINION: PEnQuIN quality standards and indicators provide a framework for continuous quality improvement in pediatric endoscopy, benefiting individual endoscopists, endoscopy facilities, and the broader endoscopy community. Routine and reliable measurement of data, facilitated by technology, is required to identify and drive improvements in care. Engaging all stakeholders in endoscopy quality improvement processes is crucial to enhancing patient outcomes and establishing best practices for safe, efficient, and effective pediatric endoscopic care.

Promoting Research that Supports High-Quality Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Children.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Defining and measuring the quality of endoscopic care is a key component of performing gastrointestinal endoscopy in children. The purpose of this review is to discuss quality metrics for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy and identify where additional research is needed. RECENT FINDINGS: Pediatric-specific standards and indicators were recently defined by the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) working group through a rigorous guideline consensus process. Although the aim of these guidelines is to facilitate best practices for safe and high-quality gastrointestinal endoscopy in children, they highlight the pressing need to expand upon the body of evidence supporting these standards and indicators as predictors of clinically relevant outcomes. In this review, we propose and discuss ideas for several high-yield research topics to engage pediatric endoscopists and promote best practices in pediatric endoscopy.

The Evolution of Sedation for Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Sedation for pediatric endoscopy has evolved from an endoscopist-administered component of procedures to an almost entirely anesthesiologist-supported endeavor. Nevertheless, there are no ideal endoscopist or anesthesiologist-administered sedation protocols, and wide practice variation exists in both models. Furthermore, sedation for pediatric endoscopy, whether administered by endoscopists or anesthesiologists, remains the highest risk to patient safety. This underscores the importance of both specialties identifying best sedation practices together that can safeguard patients while maximizing procedural efficiency and minimizing costs. In this review, the authors discuss specific levels of sedation for endoscopy and the risks and benefits of various regimens.

Metabolomic profiling of extraesophageal reflux disease in children.

Although respiratory symptoms in children are often attributed to gastroesophageal reflux disease, establishing a clear diagnosis of extraesophageal reflux disease (EERD) can be challenging, as there are no sensitive or specific EERD biomarkers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the metabolite profile in bronchoalveolar (BAL) fluid from children with suspected EERD and assess the impact of reflux treatment on these metabolites. In this prospective pilot study, we performed nontargeted global metabolomic profiling on BAL fluid from 43 children undergoing testing with bronchoscopy, upper endoscopy, and multichannel intraluminal impedance with pH (pH-MII) for evaluation of chronic respiratory symptoms. Twenty-three (54%) patients had an abnormal pH-MII study. Seventeen (40%) patients were on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for testing. Levels of histamine, malate, adenosine 5'-monophosphate, and ascorbate were significantly lower in subjects with abnormal pH-MII studies compared to those normal studies. Furthermore, in children off PPI therapy, those with abnormal pH-MII studies had robust increases in a number of glycerophospholipids within phospholipid metabolic pathways, including derivatives of glycerophosphorylcholine, glycerophosphoglycerol, and glycerophosphoinositol, compared to those with normal pH-MII studies. These findings offer insight into the impact of reflux and PPIs on the lungs and provide a foundation for future studies using targeted metabolomic analysis to identify potential biomarkers of EERD.

Abnormal 24-hour pH-impedance Testing Does Not Predict Reduced Quality of Life in Children With Reflux Symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: Symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux (GER) have been associated with reduced health-related quality of life (QOL) in children, though it is unclear whether reflux burden on objective diagnostic testing, such as 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance with pH (pH-MII) is associated with impaired QOL in children. Our aim was to identify predictors of QOL impairment based on the results of esophageal reflux testing. METHODS: In this prospective, cross-sectional study of children undergoing pH-MII and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for evaluation of suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease, we collected validated questionnaires (Pediatric Gastroesophageal Symptom and Quality of Life Questionnaire [PGSQ], Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 [PedsQL] and PedsQL Gastrointestinal Symptoms Module [GI PedsQL]) to determine the relationship between objective measures of GER, patient-reported symptoms and QOL outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 82 subjects, 38% of children had an abnormal pH-MII study. There were no significant differences in QOL scores on any questionnaire between patients with normal and abnormal pH-MII studies (P > 0.11). There was no correlation between individual pH-MII parameters and QOL scores. Subjects with gross esophagitis on EGD reported significantly worse QOL with lower total PedsQL (P = 0.002) and GI PedsQL (P = 0.03) scores. Microscopic esophagitis was not associated with differences in QOL scores (P > 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: There was no relationship between abnormalities on pH-MII testing and reduced QOL in children. These findings highlight the importance of considering other diagnoses beyond GERD as they may be significant drivers for QOL impairment.

Continuous Feedings Are Not Associated With Lower Rates of Gastroesophageal Reflux When Compared With Bolus Feedings.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is common in children with gastrostomy tubes. Clinicians often transition to continuous feedings in an attempt to reduce reflux burden, though there is limited data to support this practice. In this retrospective study, we analyzed 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance with pH studies in 18 children with gastrostomy tubes receiving exclusive enteral nutrition with a combination of daytime bolus and overnight continuous feedings. There were no significant differences in the rate of reflux (reflux events per hour) between no feeding, bolus feeding, and continuous feeding periods overall or stratified by prior fundoplications (P > 0.40). After adjusting for age, BMI, feeding rate, and feeding volume in multivariate analysis, there were no significant differences in the risk of reflux between different feeding periods. These results suggest that continuous feedings may not offer a significant advantage in reducing reflux burden.

The Spectrum of Reflux Phenotypes.

The focus on a symptom-based definition for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in adults and children has contributed to widespread use of acid suppression medications in patients with so-called typical reflux symptoms to treat the possibility of acid-mediated disease. Diagnostic testing with upper endoscopy, esophageal biopsies, ambulatory reflux monitoring, and/or esophageal manometry is often pursued when patients do not respond optimally to these medications. By using information from this diagnostic testing, GERD has shifted from a single diagnosis to a phenotypic spectrum, and each phenotype has unique pathophysiologic mechanisms driving symptom perception. Understanding these mechanisms is important to tailor individualized treatment plans and guide therapeutic interventions. The aim of this article is to discuss the different reflux phenotypes, the utility of esophageal reflux testing, the mechanisms underlying symptoms, and the management strategies for each phenotype.

The Prevalence of Rome IV Nonerosive Esophageal Phenotypes in Children.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of Rome IV nonerosive esophageal phenotypes in children using multichannel intraluminal impedance testing and to describe the rates of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) responsiveness and the frequency of microscopic esophagitis in these patients. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective review of all children ≥5 years of age who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and multichannel intraluminal impedance testing off PPI therapy for evaluation of typical gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Only children with symptoms during the multichannel intraluminal impedance testing were included. Children were categorized into the following nonerosive esophageal phenotypes using Rome IV criteria: nonerosive reflux disease, reflux hypersensitivity, and functional heartburn. Rates of esophagitis and responsiveness to acid suppression therapy were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-five children were included: 27% were categorized as having nonerosive reflux disease, 29% with reflux hypersensitivity (27% acid and 2% nonacid), and 44% with functional heartburn. Older children reported significantly more heartburn (P < .001) than younger children, whereas younger children were more likely to report nonspecific pain (P = .047). There were no differences between groups in other reflux symptoms, rates of responsiveness to PPIs, or the presence of microscopic esophagitis on biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Functional heartburn is the most common Rome IV nonerosive esophageal phenotype in children. Neither microscopic esophagitis nor PPI responsiveness can predict phenotype in pediatric patients.

A Pilot Study of Ketamine versus Midazolam/Fentanyl Sedation in Children Undergoing GI Endoscopy.

Background. Ketamine sedation has been found superior by physician report to traditional sedation regimens for pediatric endoscopy. Goal. To objectively compare sedation with ketamine versus midazolam/fentanyl for children undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Study. Patients received one of two regimens and were independently monitored using a standardized rating scale. Results. There were 2 episodes of laryngospasm during ketamine sedation. Univariate analyses showed patients sedated with ketamine (n = 17) moved more (median 25% of procedure time versus 8%, P = .03) and required similar low levels of restraint (0.83% versus 0.25%, P = .4) as patients sedated with midazolam/fentanyl (n = 20). Age-adjusted analyses suggested that patients sedated with ketamine were comparably more quiet (P = .002). Conclusions. A pilot trial of ketamine at our institution was associated with episodes of laryngospasm. In addition, children sedated with ketamine moved and required restraint similarly to patients sedated with midazolam/fentanyl. Physician perceptions may be affected by the fact that children who received ketamine were less likely to vocalize distress.

Fellow perceptions of training using computer-based endoscopy simulators.

BACKGROUND: Integrating procedural training by using computer-based endoscopic simulators (CBES) into gastroenterology fellowships may facilitate technical skill development, while posing no additional risk to patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to survey pediatric gastroenterology fellows about their experiences with and perceptions of CBES as compared with actual procedures, prior to and after exposure to both types of endoscopic learning. DESIGN AND SETTING: All first-year trainees at Children's Hospital Boston (2003-2008) were invited to complete a written, pretraining questionnaire and then perform at least 10 each of CBES endoscopies and colonoscopies prior to performing actual procedures. Fellows completed a written, posttraining questionnaire after 4 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Survey responses. RESULTS: All 25 first-year fellows (12 male, median age 30 years) over the 5-year period participated. Four months into their fellowships, fellows reported simulation to be helpful in increasing procedural skill and confidence. The number of sessions on the simulator was associated with reported increased colonoscopic skill and confidence (P = .032 and P = .007, respectively). All fellows reported it difficult to incorporate CBES into their work schedules. Only 28% of fellows reported performing 20 total CBES procedures, with most simulation sessions reportedly lasting less than 30 minutes. All participants rated faculty instruction with CBES as very helpful. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-site study of pediatric trainees and may be limited in generalizability. CONCLUSION: A few short sessions with CBES may be perceived as useful for endoscopic skill acquisition by pediatric gastroenterology trainees. Further exploration into how to assimilate CBES into busy gastroenterology training programs may be warranted.

Agitation during procedural sedation and analgesia in children.

BACKGROUND: Agitation that occurs in children receiving standard procedural sedation regimens may indicate inadequate patient comfort and compromise procedural success. Although agitation in uninterrupted pediatric procedures is recognized to occur, it is not generally tracked as an adverse event, and there have been no formal studies to determine its rate of incidence. METHODS: We identified intraprocedural agitation in a large cohort of children undergoing standardized sedation regimens in a tertiary care pediatric hospital over a calendar year and compared it with rates of well-accepted quality measures of sedation using odds ratio analysis, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All analyses excluded those patients who were documented to fail to sedate or to wake before the procedure was over-2 tracked adverse events that involve agitation and aborted, interrupted, or incomplete procedures. RESULTS: Agitation occurred in 433 of 5045 (8.6%) procedures during the study period, including 306 (6.1%) who had an uninterrupted, complete procedure. In contrast, severe adverse events during sedation, including cardiovascular resuscitation and allergic reactions, were exceedingly rare (0.9 %). When excluding patients who woke during the procedure or who failed to sedate, we found that the odds ratio for the association between agitation and tracked adverse events was 2.9 (95% CI = 1.7-4.8; P < .001). DISCUSSION: A clinically significant number of children appear agitated during standard procedural sedation and analgesia. In addition, agitation in children undergoing uninterrupted procedures was associated with other adverse events. Identifying risk factors for agitation is fundamental to improving the quality of procedural sedation in children.

Nurse reports of adverse events during sedation procedures at a pediatric hospital.

The purpose of our study was to examine the reliability of nurse reports of adverse events related to procedural sedation in children. A descriptive, correlational design was used to analyze for inter-rater agreement between prospective adverse event reporting and that identified on independent review of the medical record. All sedation documentation at a pediatric hospital over one calendar year was reviewed, and inter-rater reliability of reporting was analyzed using K statistics. Five thousand forty-five sedation documentation records were reviewed. An adverse event rate of 6.52% was identified: 1.92% of adverse events were serious, and 4.60% were minor. Although overall agreement between nurse reports and independent review was greater than 99%, subanalysis suggested greater agreement for serious events than for minor ones (K values: 0.85 vs 0.49, P < .01). The results of our study revealed that minor adverse events associated with procedural sedation were under-reported, despite clear perianesthesia documentation in the medical record that an event had occurred. Improved education for perianesthesia nurses regarding the importance of monitoring both for serious and minor adverse events will help to identify opportunities to improve sedation protocols.

Efficiency of propofol versus midazolam and fentanyl sedation at a pediatric teaching hospital: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Many pediatric endoscopists are adopting propofol in their practices, with the expectation that propofol will increase their overall efficiency. OBJECTIVE AND SETTING: To compare the efficiency of propofol versus midazolam and fentanyl by measuring elapsed times between initial intravenous administration and patient discharge at a pediatric teaching hospital. DESIGN: Endoscopy times were prospectively collected for consecutive patients who were undergoing either anesthesiologist-administered propofol or endoscopist-administered midazolam and fentanyl. The effect of the type of sedation on these times was assessed by using multiple linear regression by adjusting for other candidate predictors, including concomitant use of other sedatives, endotracheal intubation by anesthesiologists, and the presence of fellow trainees. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Time to onset of sedation (time sedation started to scope in), procedure time (endoscope in to endoscope out), discharge time (endoscope out to hospital discharge), and total time (sedation started to hospital discharge). RESULTS: The times for 134 children (mean age 12 +/- 5 years) to receive propofol sedation were compared with those of 195 children (13 +/- 5 years) who received midazolam and fentanyl. Midazolam and fentanyl cases disproportionately included EGDs (P < .001) and patients who were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists I (P < .03). Patients who received propofol had shorter times until sedated, similar procedure times, longer discharge times, and comparable total times. Multivariate analyses confirmed that fellow participation prolonged the procedure times (P < .0001), and endotracheal intubation prolonged propofol times (P <. 01), but adjusting for these did not change the comparison results. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation in a pediatric teaching endoscopy unit may not lead to faster hospital times when compared with endoscopist-administered midazolam and fentanyl. These results are not explained by controlling for patient characteristics, the presence of a trainee, the sedative doses, or endotracheal intubation for airway management.

Methods of sedation in pediatric endoscopy: a survey of NASPGHAN members.

The performance of endoscopy in children generally requires the concomitant administration of sedation to ensure the patient's safety, comfort, and cooperation throughout the procedures. New pharmacological agents, increased procedural volume, variable access to anesthesia support, and improvement in endoscopic technique have contributed to vast differences in sedation regimens for gastrointestinal procedures in patients of all ages. To better understand variation in practice patterns among pediatric gastroenterologists, the NASPGHAN Endoscopy and Procedures Committee surveyed 103 NASPGHAN members during a recent NASPGHAN national meeting. The results of this survey confirm that sedation practices vary widely and reflect continued uncertainty regarding optimal sedation regimens for pediatric endoscopy.

Sedation of the pediatric and adolescent patient for GI procedures.

There remains no ideal sedative for pediatric and adolescent patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures. Instead, pediatric gastroenterologists must consider many factors, including patient age, medical history, clinical status, anxiety level, as well as targeted sedation level, to select the appropriate methods and agents to achieve optimal sedation for endoscopy. The two primary types of sedation are endoscopist-administered intravenous (IV) sedation and anesthesiologist-administered general anesthesia. If IV sedation is used, pediatric endoscopists must be prepared for children to become agitated, adding to stress for both patients and clinical staff. General anesthesia provides the advantage of complete patient immobility but also entails increased costs and utilization of hospital resources. Technical advances in electronic monitoring, both in the pediatric endoscopy suite and operating room settings, are contributing to increased patient safety. Nevertheless, sedation-related events, independent of type of sedation or regimen, represent the most common complications of pediatric endoscopy.

Percutaneous liver biopsy practice patterns among pediatric gastroenterologists in North America.

OBJECTIVES: To document current percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) practices among pediatric gastroenterologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 699 practicing pediatric gastroenterologists received an e-mail invitation to participate in a Web-based survey. Our primary outcome was whether or not pediatric gastroenterologists reported currently performing PLB. We queried a number of practice preferences and potential factors that affect preferences among all of the participants. RESULTS: Of 474 participants who opened the e-mail, 317 (67%) completed the survey. Of those, 35% said that they performed no PLBs in an average month, instead referring patients who require the procedure to interventional radiologists. Patient safety and desire for ultrasound guidance were rated the most important reasons for referral. Adjusted analysis showed that pediatric gastroenterologists in academic settings were twice as likely to report performing PLB as those practicing elsewhere (P = .003). The interval since fellowship training was not associated with PLB performance in crude or adjusted analyses. Among those participants who did report performing PLB, substantial variation was found in preferred biopsy device, use of ultrasound assistance, and routine hospital admission post-PLB. No practice preferences were found to be associated with routine admission. CONCLUSIONS: Many pediatric gastroenterologists report systematically and rationally referring children to interventional radiologists for PLB, rather than performing the procedure themselves. Crude numbers suggest that many who do not perform PLB are in academic practice settings, where fellowship training is presumably affected. Those pediatric gastroenterologists who do report performing PLB vary greatly in their preprocedure, patient disposition, and postprocedure routines.

Caloric restriction in C57BL/6J mice mimics therapeutic fasting in humans.

BACKGROUND: Caloric restriction (CR) has long been recognized as a dietary therapy that improves health and increases longevity. Little is known about the persistent effects of CR on plasma biomarkers (glucose, ketone bodies, and lipids) following re-feeding in mice. It is also unclear how these biomarker changes in calorically restricted mice relate to those observed previously in calorically restricted humans. RESULTS: Three groups of individually housed adult female C57BL/6J (B6) mice (n = 4/group) were fed a standard rodent chow diet either: (1) unrestricted (UR); (2) restricted for three weeks to reduce body weight by approximately 15-20% (R); or (3) restricted for three weeks and then re-fed unrestricted (ad libitum) for an additional three weeks (R-RF). Body weight and food intake were measured throughout the study, while plasma lipids and levels of glucose and ketone bodies (beta-hydroxybutyrate) were measured at the termination of the study. Plasma glucose, phosphatidylcholine, cholesterol, and triglycerides were significantly lower in the R mice than in the UR mice. In contrast, plasma fatty acids and beta-hydroxybutyrate were significantly higher in the R mice than in the UR mice. CR had no effect on plasma phosphatidylinositol levels. While body weight and plasma lipids of the R-RF mice returned to unrestricted levels upon re-feeding, food intake and glucose levels remained significantly lower than those prior to the initiation of CR. CONCLUSION: CR establishes a new homeostatic state in B6 mice that persists for at least three weeks following ad libitum re-feeding. Moreover, the plasma biomarker changes observed in B6 mice during CR mimic those reported in humans on very low calorie diets or during therapeutic fasting.