Elective home replacement of gastrostomy feeding tubes is safe and cost-effective. Has hospital referral become obsolete?

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the technique of choice for providing enteral nutrition in patients with functioning gastrointestinal tract. Available guidelines cover indications and procedural management for PEG placement, while there is no consensus about subsequent replacement with gastrostomy feeding tubes (GFT) and their management. We hypothesized that GFT replacement, according to a standardized protocol supervised by a trained gastroenterologist could be integrated into the home health care system.

AIMS

To evaluate the safety and cost-efficacy of home GFT replacement.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent elective home GFT replacements from July 2016 to December 2019 were prospectively enrolled; all procedural details and outcomes have been recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 235 GFT replacements in 84 patients [40.5% male, 79.5 (74-94) years] were included. Among these, 230 (97.8%) were completed at patients' home while in five cases (2.2%) patients were referred to the hospital to confirm appropriate GFT placement. No adverse event occurred. An overall cost reduction of 46.8% was obtained, leading to €124 savings per procedure and up to €29,000 savings for the entire study period.

CONCLUSIONS

When performed electively according to a standardized protocol, home GFT replacement is safe and effective, and leads to relevant cost reduction.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic laterally spreading tumors using a dedicated viscous solution for submucosal injection (ORISE gel): a short case series (with video)

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (>20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) was usually rescheduled to guarantee experienced operator and enough endoscopic schedule time. The use of viscous solutions allows a reduction in repeated injections, snare resections and procedural time. The aim was to describe the outcome of EMR of large LSTs performed at the time of index colonoscopy, using ORISE gel (Boston Scientific).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed retrieving patients who underwent EMR of large colonic LSTs at the time of index colonoscopy. EMR was performed after dynamic injection of ORISE gel to create a submucosal cushion. Procedural parameters, together with pathological and endoscopic outcomes, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five patients [three males, median age 65 (45-70) years] were included. Median LST size was 35 mm (25-40). Median procedure time was 8 min (range 3-13). En bloc resection was achieved in one out of five cases; four out of five were planned as piecemeal resections. A median of 10 mL (10-20) of viscous solution was injected. R0 resection was achieved in the single case who underwent en bloc EMR, whereas it was not assessable in the case of piecemeal resections. One self-limiting bleeding was observed.

CONCLUSION

The use of ORISE gel allows a well-tolerated and rapid performance of EMR of large colonic LSTs even at the time of index colonoscopy. In our opinion, in these specific situations, the use of viscous solutions is advisable and also affordable.

Treatment of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients. Systematic review of the literature according to the levels of evidence

Acute cholecystitis (AC) is the most common biliary stone disease complication. While there is consensus regarding cholecystectomy for AC, gallbladder drainage is indicated in elderly or high-risk surgical patients. We systematically reviewed available evidence in the field of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) for AC in high-risk surgical patients. The studies were classified according to their level of evidence (LE) according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine classification. Literature search retrieved 175 manuscripts; most of them were expert opinions (LE V, no. 53) or caseseries (LE IV, no. 29). There was no meta-analysis of RCT (LE Ia), while two randomized controlled trials (LE Ib) demonstrated that EUS-GBD was superior to percutaneous trans-hepatic-GBD (PT-GBD) regarding longterm outcomes (adverse events, recurrent cholecystitis, and reintervention). Several meta-analyses of cohort studies (LE IIa, no. 11) were designed to compare the three available drainage strategies (endoscopic, echoendoscopic and percutaneous) and to assess the pooled risk of adverse events. Comparison between surgery and EUS-GBD was done in a single retrospective study with a propensity score analysis (LE III). The outcomes of conversion from PT-GBD to EUS-GBD were covered by few retrospective studies (LE III). Several manuscripts (no. 69) were published on EUS-GBD as a rescue strategy in case of malignant biliary obstruction. The levels of evidence of EUS-GBD in the literature have evolved from initial descriptive studies to recent randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis of cohort studies. While several articles addressed the comparison among different techniques for GBD, in our opinion some topics and questions have not been adequately investigated. are still debated.

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis-procedure outcomes and evaluation of mortality predictors

Background

Recent evidences suggest that gallbladder drainage is the treatment of choice in elderly or high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis (AC). Despite better outcomes compared to other approaches, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is burdened by high mortality. The aim of the study was to evaluate predictive factors for mortality in high-risk surgical patients who underwent EUS-GBD for AC.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents were used; all recorded variables were evaluated as potential predictive factors for mortality.

Results

Thirty-four patients underwent EUS for suspected AC and 25 (44% male, age 78) were finally included. Technical, clinical success rate and adverse events rate were 92%, 88%, and 16%, respectively. 30-day and 1-year mortality were 12% and 32%. On univariate analysis, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (OR 20.8[4–68.2]), acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR 21.4[2.6–52.1]) and clinical success (OR 8.9[1.2–11.6]) were related to 30-day mortality. On multivariate analysis, CCI and AKI were independently related to long-term mortality. Kaplan–Meier curves showed an increased long-term mortality in patients with CCI > 6 (hazard ratio 7.6[1.7–34.6]) and AKI (hazard ratio 11.3[1.4–91.5]).

Conclusions

Severe comorbidities and AKI were independent predictive factors confirming of long-term mortality after EUS-GBD. Outcomes of EUS-GBD appear more influenced by patients’ conditions rather than by procedure success.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-021-08318-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

General principles of image optimization in EUS

With the development of modern EUS, multiple imaging functions, transducer settings, and examination modes have become available for clinical settings. While the major determinants of the ultrasound beam are still comprised of the signal wavelength, its frequency range, and its amplitude, other modifications and calculations have gained more interest for advanced users, such as tissue harmonic imaging (THI), spatial and frequency compounding, certain versions of speckle reduction, and various Doppler/duplex settings. The goal of such techniques is a better, perhaps more realistic image, with reduced artifacts (such as speckle), better image contrast, and an improved signal-to-noise ratio. In addition, “add-ons” such as THI, which is based on the phenomenon of nonlinear distortion of acoustic signals as they travel through tissues, provide greater contrast and an enhanced spatial resolution than conventional EUS. Finally, optimization of spectral and color Doppler imaging in EUS requires experience and knowledge about the basic principles of Doppler/duplex phenomena. For these purposes, factors such as adjustment of Doppler controls, Doppler angle, color gain, spectral wall filters, and others require special attention during EUS examinations. Incorporating these advanced techniques in EUS examinations may be time-consuming and cumbersome. Hence, practical guidelines enabling endosonographers to steer safely through the large quantity of technological properties and settings (knobology) are appreciated. This review provides an overview of the role of important imaging features to be adjusted before, during, and after EUS procedures.

Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?

This is the fifth in a series of papers entitled "Controversies in EUS." In the current paper, we deal with high-resolution catheter probes, otherwise known as EUS miniprobes (EUS-MPs). The application of miniprobes for early carcinomas in the entire intestinal tract, for subepithelial lesions, and for findings in the bile duct and pancreatic duct as well as endobronchial use is critically discussed. Submucous lesions, especially in the colon, but also early carcinomas in special cases are considered the most important indications. The argument is illustrated by numerous examples.

Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions after inconclusive percutaneous ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition

INTRODUCTION

After a failed percutaneous ultrasound (US)-guided sampling, it is recommended that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) be performed for non-resectable solid pancreatic lesions according to the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. However, the diagnostic performance of EUS-guided TA in this setting is unknown.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the performance and safety of EUS-guided TA in patients with a previous failed percutaneous biopsy. We also evaluated the diagnostic delays between the percutaneous approach and EUS diagnosis.

RESULTS

Over a period of 2 years, 49 patients were identified (29 males, mean age 65 years). The reasons for failure of percutaneous sampling were inadequate samples in 25 (52.1%) cases and lesions that were not visible or targetable in 24 (47.9%) cases. In one case, EUS-guided TA was not performed because of the interposition of a metallic biliary stent. No adverse events were recorded for both the percutaneous and EUS approaches. The median diagnostic delay was 12 days. Overall, the sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-guided TA were 92.7 and 93.7%, respectively. A subgroup analysis examined cases with inadequate samples obtained with the percutaneous approach, and the sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-guided TA were 85.7 and 88%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided TA is safe and accurate for the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions after a previous inconclusive percutaneous approach.

Effectiveness and safety of underwater techniques in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a comprehensive review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Conventional endoscopic resection techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), represent the standard of care for treatment of superficial gastrointestinal lesions. In 2012 a novel technique called underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) was described by Binmoeller and colleagues. This substantial variation from the standard procedure was afterwards applied at endoscopic submucosal dissection (U-ESD) and recently proposed also for peroral endoscopic myotomy (U-POEM) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (U-EFTR).

METHODS

This paper aims to perform a comprehensive review of the current literature related to supporting the underwater resection techniques with the aim to evaluate their safety and efficacy.

RESULTS

Based on the current literature U-EMR appears to be feasible and safe. Comparison studies showed that U-EMR is associated with higher "en-bloc" and R0 resection rates for colonic lesions, but lower "en-bloc" and R0 resection rates for duodenal non-ampullary lesions, compared to standard EMR. In contrast to U-EMR, little evidence supporting U-ESD are currently available. A single comparison study on gastric lesions showed that U-ESD had shorter procedural times and allowed a similar "en-bloc" resection rates compared to standard ESD. No comparison studies between U-ESD and ESD are available for colonic lesions. Finally, only some anecdotal experiences have been reported for U-POEM or U-EFTR, and the feasibility and effectiveness of these techniques need to be further investigated.

CONCLUSIONS

Further prospective studies are necessary to better explore the advantages of underwater techniques compared to the respective standards of care, especially in the setting of U-ESD where consistent data are lacking and where standardization of the technique is needed.

Repeat EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses after nondiagnostic or inconclusive results: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) is the criterion standard for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Several studies assessed the role of repeat EUS-FNA (rEUS-FNA) after an inconclusive examination. Our aim was to evaluate the pooled diagnostic accuracy of rEUS-FNA after a nondiagnostic result.

METHODS

We conducted systematic research on electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, EMBASE) and a meta-analysis to obtain pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve was used to calculate area under the curve. Subgroup analysis was used to assess the role of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE).

RESULTS

Twelve studies (505 patients) were included. Sensitivity was 77% (66%-86%), specificity 98% (78%-100%), and positive and negative predictive values 99% (98%-100%) and 61 (60%-63%), respectively. At 73% of disease prevalence (pretest probability), positive rEUS-FNA increased the disease probability to 99%, whereas a negative result decreased the disease probability to 39%. The sensitivity was 83% (64%-93%) and specificity 98% (80%-100%) when ROSE was available and 65% (57%-73%) and 94% (31%-100%) when not available. The number needed to diagnose was 1.2 (1.1-2.3) and 1.7 (1.4-8.3) in ROSE-positive and ROSE-negative cases, respectively. The number of correctly diagnosed cases increased from 6 (1-7) to 8 (4-9) of 10 patients without and with ROSE, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study objectively substantiated the added value of rEUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses in cases of a previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive result. Moreover, our data suggested that ROSE may be beneficial in this setting, because it increased the proportion of definitive diagnoses.

EUS-guided transrectal drainage of pelvic fluid collections using electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents: a case series

Background and Aims

Pelvic fluid collections (PFCs) are frequent adverse events of abdominal surgery or inflammatory conditions. A percutaneous approach to deep PFCs could be challenging and result in a longer, painful recovery. The transvaginal approach has been considered easy but is limited by the difficulty of leaving a stent in place. The transrectal approach has been described, but issues related to fecal contamination were hypothesized. Data on EUS-guided transrectal drainage (EUS-TRD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are few and suggest unsatisfactory outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-TRD with LAMSs in patients with PFCs.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on therapeutic EUS was conducted. All EUS-TRD procedures were included.

Results

Five patients (2 male, age 44-89 years) were included. Four patients had postoperative PFCs, and 1 presented with a pelvic abscess complicating acute diverticulitis. Two of 5 had fecal diversion; the remaining 3 had unaltered large-bowel anatomy. One case had a concomitant abdominal collection, treated with percutaneous drainage in the same session. An electrocautery-enhanced LAMS delivery system (15 × 10 mm) was used in all cases. EUS-TRD was performed with the direct-puncture technique and lasted less than 10 minutes in 4 cases; in the remaining case, needle puncture and LAMS placement over a guidewire was required, and the procedure length was 14 minutes. The clinical success rate was 100%. LAMSs were removed after a median of 14 (range, 12-24) days. One patient reported partial proximal LAMS migration after 24 days (mild adverse event). No PFC recurrence was observed.

Conclusion

EUS-TRD with LAMSs is a safe and effective technique for treatment of PFCs. The use of 15- × 10-mm LAMSs allows rapid PFC resolution. EUS-TRD could be performed not only in patients with fecal diversion but also in cases of unaltered anatomy.

An international, multi-institution survey on performing EUS-FNA and fine needle biopsy

Background and Objectives

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) are effective techniques that are widely used for tissue acquisition. However, it remains unclear how to obtain high-quality specimens. Therefore, we conducted a survey of EUS-FNA and FNB techniques to determine practice patterns worldwide and to develop strong recommendations based on the experience of experts in the field.

Methods

This was a worldwide multi-institutional survey among members of the International Society of EUS Task Force (ISEUS-TF). The survey was administered by E-mail through the SurveyMonkey website. In some cases, percentage agreement with some statements was calculated; in others, the options with the greatest numbers of responses were summarized. Another questionnaire about the level of recommendation was designed to assess the respondents' answers.

Results

ISEUS-TF members developed a questionnaire containing 17 questions that was sent to 53 experts. Thirty-five experts completed the survey within the specified period. Among them, 40% and 54.3% performed 50-200 and more than 200 EUS sampling procedures annually, respectively. Some practice patterns regarding FNA/FNB were recommended.

Conclusion

This is the first worldwide survey of EUS-FNA and FNB practice patterns. The results showed wide variations in practice patterns. Randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for optimizing the FNA/FNB procedures.

Do we need elastography for EUS?

We recently introduced a series of papers “What should be known prior to performing EUS exams.” In Part I, the authors discussed which clinical information and whether other imaging modalities are needed before embarking EUS examinations. In Part II, technical controversies on how EUS is performed were discussed from different points of view. In this article, important practical issues regarding EUS elastography will be raised and controversially discussed from very different points of view.

How to perform EUS-guided tattooing?

Recently, we introduced a series of papers describing on how to perform certain techniques and controversies in EUS. In the first paper, "What should be known before performing EUS examinations, Part I," the authors discussed clinical information and whether other imaging modalities should be needed before embarking in EUS examination. In Part II, some technical controversies on how EUS is performed are discussed from different points of view by providing the relevant available evidence. Herewith, we describe on how to perform EUS-guided fine needle tattooing (FNT) in daily practice. The aim of this paper is to discuss pros and cons for several issues including historical remarks, injecting material, technical approach, and how to perform EUS-FNT including argues in favor and against.

The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Elastography in Non-Hepatic Applications: Update 2018

This manuscript describes the use of ultrasound elastography, with the exception of liver applications, and represents an update of the 2013 EFSUMB (European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology) Guidelines and Recommendations on the clinical use of elastography.